4 ms·

yogsototh thank you for submitting this. We are seeing 150 or so concurrent users on the site due to this at the moment. I'm retweeting some of the other online

by olegp 16y ago

yogsototh thank you for submitting this. We are seeing 150 or so concurrent users on the site due to this at the moment. I'm retweeting some of the other online reactions we're getting at https://twitter.com/akshell_com https://twitter.com/akshell_com

drtse4 16y ago
150? It's only the beginning :)
- olegp 16y ago
  You were right ;) I'll write a blog post about it once things calm down a bit.
biot 16y ago
Interesting tweet: "... someone made the old @heroku for node.js" -- did Heroku start out as a browser-based app builder?
- olegp 16y ago
  Yes they did, they were in the same batch as AppJet as well.
  - tlrobinson 16y ago
    Actually AppJet was summer 2007, Heroku was winter 2008.
    - olegp 16y ago
      Oh, then I've had it wrong for a while now. Thanks for pointing it out.
- timinman 16y ago
  Yes, Heroku was the first. I tried it out. It was fun, but I think they realised that though it was a novel idea, it was not the _Big Idea_, and they replaced it with what they now have. That's pretty inspiring when you consider how much work they threw away and how that decision has been rewarded.
  - olegp 16y ago
    Maybe the timing was just wrong? The browsers are fast enough now and users, including developers, are much more comfortable with web apps.
    - bdotdub 16y ago
      I think it was less about speed and more about trying to replace peoples' editor / workflow. People are very particular about the tools they use and putting the editor and deployment in the browser doesn't do much in terms of productivity (and probably more counterproductive than anything else) Screenshot: http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2008/2/7/write-rails-apps-in-your-browser http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2008/2/7/write-rails-apps-in-y...
    - timinman 16y ago
      Yes, I remember speed being an issue, and I wasn't trying to subtract from the usefulness of this creation.
  - biot 16y ago
    I would say what they threw away was essentially a gimmick. Assuming the functionality of Heroku was the same before and after, publishing from github rather than publishing based on editing files online doesn't change their offering.

by olegp 16y ago

drtse4 16y ago

150? It's only the beginning :)

olegp 16y ago
You were right ;) I'll write a blog post about it once things calm down a bit.

biot 16y ago

Interesting tweet: "... someone made the old @heroku for node.js" -- did Heroku start out as a browser-based app builder?

olegp 16y ago
Yes they did, they were in the same batch as AppJet as well.
- tlrobinson 16y ago
  Actually AppJet was summer 2007, Heroku was winter 2008.
  - olegp 16y ago
    Oh, then I've had it wrong for a while now. Thanks for pointing it out.
timinman 16y ago
Yes, Heroku was the first. I tried it out. It was fun, but I think they realised that though it was a novel idea, it was not the _Big Idea_, and they replaced it with what they now have. That's pretty inspiring when you consider how much work they threw away and how that decision has been rewarded.
- olegp 16y ago
  Maybe the timing was just wrong? The browsers are fast enough now and users, including developers, are much more comfortable with web apps.
  - bdotdub 16y ago
    I think it was less about speed and more about trying to replace peoples' editor / workflow. People are very particular about the tools they use and putting the editor and deployment in the browser doesn't do much in terms of productivity (and probably more counterproductive than anything else) Screenshot: http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2008/2/7/write-rails-apps-in-your-browser http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2008/2/7/write-rails-apps-in-y...
  - timinman 16y ago
    Yes, I remember speed being an issue, and I wasn't trying to subtract from the usefulness of this creation.
- biot 16y ago
  I would say what they threw away was essentially a gimmick. Assuming the functionality of Heroku was the same before and after, publishing from github rather than publishing based on editing files online doesn't change their offering.