5 ms·

I feel a bit churlish, but this kind of thing always leaves me nonplussed. jQuery and Javascript have excellent references, and I have a hard time understandin

by shubber 15y ago

I feel a bit churlish, but this kind of thing always leaves me nonplussed. jQuery and Javascript have excellent references, and I have a hard time understanding how anyone really learns any technical topic without working with the technology and exploring the reference. I know this is my own auto-didactic prejudice, but I see a lot of this screencast stuff and am set back by how much people seem to want to be spoon-fed skills, and by my own disbelief that skill can be acquired that way.

RedWolves 15y ago
I think it more in line with the enterprise developer that is thrown into a development world they don't fully understand and need to get up to speed quickly.
mikehostetler 15y ago
The target for content like this is the developer who prefers to be walked through the content. They need to visualize the content, be talked through the examples and "spoon fed" the information. One of the main features is the ability to track their progress on a public transcript page which people can link to to prove that they've gone through the material.
kenjackson 15y ago
I have a hard time understanding how anyone really learns any technical topic without working with the technology and exploring the reference I think you'd be surprised. I learned C and C++ and never looked at the reference (standard) for either until far after I was proficient (with C I learned it a fair bit before a standard existed). I learned by reading Stroustrup, K&R, Lippman, etc... I learned JS by reading Crockford -- and while I've spent a fair bit of time looking at the jQuery reference docs, I don't think I've ever looked at the JS reference docs. I think a lot of people learn languages/frameworks/tools from reading blogs/books/webpages/videos and not the actual reference docs.
- thomasgerbe 15y ago
  You'd be right. I didn't understand reference docs on Actionscript until well after I had consumed a couple excellent introductory tutorials and browsed tons of forum threads.
Encosia 15y ago
I've always been the same way - most screencasts move too slowly for my tastes and don't hold my attention (that's why I was impressed with the navigation system in these videos). When I was approached to record a series of jQuery screencasts for TekPub, I almost passed because I didn't personally see the value of video tutorials. However, having done it and received voluminous amounts of positive feedback from people who finally groked concepts that had been eluding them, I've come to realize that different people simply learn best in different ways. The success of Kahn is another good example of this. I don't think that makes a video-learner somehow inferior for having approached the topic in a different way. It just means that they best absorb content in a different way than you and me. Often, when I hear from people who watched my videos, they're asking for pointers to more advanced content on the same topic, so they can continue building on that foundation. I think it's inaccurate to cast them as being "spoon-fed" and assume they don't pursue deeper knowledge.
- RedWolves 15y ago
  I enjoyed the TekPub series on jQuery.
- shubber 15y ago
  Honestly, I think my initial reaction was severely overstated. I know from personal experience that skilled engineers do learn differently than I do. It just continues to surprise me that they do :) The other edge of the sword, though, is that I do see an ultimate limit to how much you can learn from tuorials, and I know several people who never acquired the skill of finding and learning from first sources, which saddens me.
DevX101 15y ago
Completely offtoic from your central point, but I really dislike the word "nonplussed". It's a meaningless word without context as it can mean one thing or the complete opposite.
- pbreit 15y ago
  The other meaning that you are thinking of really is just a mistake and not a correct usage.
true_religion 15y ago
Out of curiosity, what is the excellent reference for Javascript. When I was first learning it (4 years ago), I ran into a lot of trouble. Python has Python.org and documentation in reams. C++ has cplusplus.com, C# has MSDN, PHP has php.net, and so on. In comparison, W3 schools seems very poorly laid out and not very structured.
- murz 15y ago
  > Out of curiosity, what is the excellent reference for Javascript. I've always liked: http://eloquentjavascript.net/ http://eloquentjavascript.net/ and https://developer.mozilla.org/en/JavaScript/Reference https://developer.mozilla.org/en/JavaScript/Reference
- jacobr 15y ago
  It is indeed difficult to find good JavaScript references via Google. There's even a campaign to remedy this: http://promotejs.com http://promotejs.com Don't trust W3 Schools. Despite its name, it is in no way affiliated with the W3C. Take a look at http://w3fools.com http://w3fools.com
- shubber 15y ago
  http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-262.htm http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecm... Big PDF. It's a bit dense, but unambiguous. Nota most bene, though: not every browser implements everything you'll read in the standard. But, if a higher percentage of JS coders would read and grasp the standard, we'd have less confusion about how to use the langauge, IMO.
pbreit 15y ago
I hear what you're saying but I would give a "pass" to this particular try since it's reasonably well-done and the screencast approach probably works for a certain segment of the population. What I don't care for is when a company puts out something like this and it's obviously just a weak marketing tactic with very little value.

by shubber 15y ago

RedWolves 15y ago

I think it more in line with the enterprise developer that is thrown into a development world they don't fully understand and need to get up to speed quickly.

mikehostetler 15y ago

The target for content like this is the developer who prefers to be walked through the content. They need to visualize the content, be talked through the examples and "spoon fed" the information. One of the main features is the ability to track their progress on a public transcript page which people can link to to prove that they've gone through the material.

kenjackson 15y ago

I have a hard time understanding how anyone really learns any technical topic without working with the technology and exploring the reference I think you'd be surprised. I learned C and C++ and never looked at the reference (standard) for either until far after I was proficient (with C I learned it a fair bit before a standard existed). I learned by reading Stroustrup, K&R, Lippman, etc... I learned JS by reading Crockford -- and while I've spent a fair bit of time looking at the jQuery reference docs, I don't think I've ever looked at the JS reference docs. I think a lot of people learn languages/frameworks/tools from reading blogs/books/webpages/videos and not the actual reference docs.

thomasgerbe 15y ago
You'd be right. I didn't understand reference docs on Actionscript until well after I had consumed a couple excellent introductory tutorials and browsed tons of forum threads.

Encosia 15y ago

I've always been the same way - most screencasts move too slowly for my tastes and don't hold my attention (that's why I was impressed with the navigation system in these videos). When I was approached to record a series of jQuery screencasts for TekPub, I almost passed because I didn't personally see the value of video tutorials. However, having done it and received voluminous amounts of positive feedback from people who finally groked concepts that had been eluding them, I've come to realize that different people simply learn best in different ways. The success of Kahn is another good example of this. I don't think that makes a video-learner somehow inferior for having approached the topic in a different way. It just means that they best absorb content in a different way than you and me. Often, when I hear from people who watched my videos, they're asking for pointers to more advanced content on the same topic, so they can continue building on that foundation. I think it's inaccurate to cast them as being "spoon-fed" and assume they don't pursue deeper knowledge.

RedWolves 15y ago
I enjoyed the TekPub series on jQuery.
shubber 15y ago
Honestly, I think my initial reaction was severely overstated. I know from personal experience that skilled engineers do learn differently than I do. It just continues to surprise me that they do :) The other edge of the sword, though, is that I do see an ultimate limit to how much you can learn from tuorials, and I know several people who never acquired the skill of finding and learning from first sources, which saddens me.

DevX101 15y ago

Completely offtoic from your central point, but I really dislike the word "nonplussed". It's a meaningless word without context as it can mean one thing or the complete opposite.

pbreit 15y ago
The other meaning that you are thinking of really is just a mistake and not a correct usage.

true_religion 15y ago

Out of curiosity, what is the excellent reference for Javascript. When I was first learning it (4 years ago), I ran into a lot of trouble. Python has Python.org and documentation in reams. C++ has cplusplus.com, C# has MSDN, PHP has php.net, and so on. In comparison, W3 schools seems very poorly laid out and not very structured.

murz 15y ago
> Out of curiosity, what is the excellent reference for Javascript. I've always liked: http://eloquentjavascript.net/ http://eloquentjavascript.net/ and https://developer.mozilla.org/en/JavaScript/Reference https://developer.mozilla.org/en/JavaScript/Reference
jacobr 15y ago
It is indeed difficult to find good JavaScript references via Google. There's even a campaign to remedy this: http://promotejs.com http://promotejs.com Don't trust W3 Schools. Despite its name, it is in no way affiliated with the W3C. Take a look at http://w3fools.com http://w3fools.com
shubber 15y ago
http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecma-262.htm http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/standards/Ecm... Big PDF. It's a bit dense, but unambiguous. Nota most bene, though: not every browser implements everything you'll read in the standard. But, if a higher percentage of JS coders would read and grasp the standard, we'd have less confusion about how to use the langauge, IMO.

pbreit 15y ago

I hear what you're saying but I would give a "pass" to this particular try since it's reasonably well-done and the screencast approach probably works for a certain segment of the population. What I don't care for is when a company puts out something like this and it's obviously just a weak marketing tactic with very little value.