3 ms·

The author's assessment of the "no-code" and "hybrid tools" landscape is either lazy or a joke. Here are a few more: No-code tools for apps & websites: - W

The author's assessment of the "no-code" and "hybrid tools" landscape is either lazy or a joke. Here are a few more: No-code tools for apps & websites: - Webflow - Glide - SquareSpace - Dreamweaver [1] - Visly Hybrid "designer/developer connectors" - Hadron - Modulz [2] - Interplay [3] - Haiku [4] - Zeplin - Zeroheight [5] - InVision DSM [5] Sad to see this blog post on the front page of HN since it's such a poor representation of this landscape. Hopefully this comment helps in a small way :) -- [1] yeah it still exists, and yeah it's pretty much still Webflow as a 90's-vintage desktop app. [2] Modulz' product doesn't exist yet, but they've built hype. Caveat emptor. [3] Just like Modulz, but from what I've seen there's more execution and less hype. [4] My company: we pivoted our original "designer/developer connector" into an animation tool — we're launching our new collaboration tool soon. [5] Sort-of; designer-focus

brudgers 7y ago
The remarks about the author detract from Hacker News more than the information in the comment adds to it. Removing those remarks would improve the comment. Adding links to the resources might improve it further but won't make it good Hacker News comment if the remarks remain.
- zackbrown 7y ago
  Thanks for the feedback! "Lazy work" does not mean "lazy person." And "joke" would be better stated as "this article reads suspiciously as astroturfing." But I see how the blunt call-out of lazy work and tip-toeing around the astroturfing vibes—i.e. the way I worded my comment—could read as a personal attack, and I agree that's not a productive way to approach discourse. I missed the edit window, but I would amend the first line: s/author/article and s/a joke/intentionally misleading.
  - brudgers 7y ago
    The proposed edits don’t assume good faith and don’t contribute to understanding the topic. Instead here we are in the weeds.
    - zackbrown 7y ago
      The article is misleading. That's either unintentional or intentional. Per Hanlon's razor, my first hypothesis is the former but we shouldn't rule out the latter. Proactively question good faith but don't proactively doubt it. Calling out the article as misleading mitigates the damage it causes and thus exactly "contributes to understanding the topic."
- rawTruthHurts 7y ago
  Policing remarks detract much more the conversation that a bunch of unlinked resources, which you can google anyway.
  - brudgers 7y ago
    The comment only started this conversation about it’s negativity. It created an attractive nuisance. Obviously.

brudgers 7y ago

The remarks about the author detract from Hacker News more than the information in the comment adds to it. Removing those remarks would improve the comment. Adding links to the resources might improve it further but won't make it good Hacker News comment if the remarks remain.

zackbrown 7y ago
Thanks for the feedback! "Lazy work" does not mean "lazy person." And "joke" would be better stated as "this article reads suspiciously as astroturfing." But I see how the blunt call-out of lazy work and tip-toeing around the astroturfing vibes—i.e. the way I worded my comment—could read as a personal attack, and I agree that's not a productive way to approach discourse. I missed the edit window, but I would amend the first line: s/author/article and s/a joke/intentionally misleading.
- brudgers 7y ago
  The proposed edits don’t assume good faith and don’t contribute to understanding the topic. Instead here we are in the weeds.
  - zackbrown 7y ago
    The article is misleading. That's either unintentional or intentional. Per Hanlon's razor, my first hypothesis is the former but we shouldn't rule out the latter. Proactively question good faith but don't proactively doubt it. Calling out the article as misleading mitigates the damage it causes and thus exactly "contributes to understanding the topic."
rawTruthHurts 7y ago
Policing remarks detract much more the conversation that a bunch of unlinked resources, which you can google anyway.
- brudgers 7y ago
  The comment only started this conversation about it’s negativity. It created an attractive nuisance. Obviously.