3 ms·

Devil's Advocate position here. I don't know much about carpentry, and if I look at a website selling saws, I will struggle to understand the difference betwee

Devil's Advocate position here. I don't know much about carpentry, and if I look at a website selling saws, I will struggle to understand the difference between different models. Dumbing down to an extent that I understand (when I probably won't buy the product anyway) risks alienating the target market that will. Due to customer demands, end-user requirements, and device fragmentation, front-end development has genuinely become _that_ demanding. So as a non-specialist in the field, you can't look at relatively specialist tools like Vite and Nuxt and expect to understand them straight away. Sure, many of us long for the halcyon days of "front end" meaning at most pulling in jQuery and embedding something in the page. But then I sound like my Grandad longing for the days when there was no internet at all.

LtWorf 4y ago
Developer here. I think I can speak for everyone when I say that even when we work with the thing, we can't understand the homepage of the thing. For example at my $DAYJOB I know what we do but if I didn't the website wouldn't help me to understand.
- gmassman 4y ago
  I'm also a developer and this is a terrible overstatement. My company sells a product that isn't particularly hard to understand, and our www site makes it pretty clear what we're selling.
- cercatrova 4y ago
  You might work at a sales-oriented company then, rather than a consumer or prosumer (self-service) oriented company. Sales-oriented company websites are purposefully opaque so as to not make a potential customer be able to easily compare and contrast tools without going through an in-depth demo for each one, led by salespeople and perhaps engineers.
azemetre 4y ago
This is a good point if we were selling physical goods and limited by the amount of information we can convey on a screen but we aren't. I'd honestly include things like the what and why as critical to documentation. Most libraries, tools, and tech in general are bad at documentation. It's an active choice to omit discussing these things when they should obviously be included but writing good copy is hard. IDK seems like a good thing to invest in especially if you want your tool to become a dominate player instead of an encroaching tangent. While there are separate pages for the why and comparisons for vite (but it's only comparing itself to other bleeding edge tools rather than popular ones like webpack, browserify, gulp, grunt) they should be snippets of these sections on the front page. Right now there are 6 title cards of with wasted space with very little information. Compare this with playwright's home page you and immediately know why you want to use the tool: https://playwright.dev/ https://playwright.dev/ For a personal taste thing, I'm not really a fan of these open source tools creating homepages similar to as you would see for various startups/products. My mind immediately goes "oh paid tool, oh well." They do say it's free in a lovely medium size text that doesn't standout much and is beyond the fold.
- blowski 4y ago
  Different way of thinking about this - maybe the devs aren't even the target user of the homepage. If the first time a front end dev hears of Vite is via the homepage, their marketing has a problem. (I first heard of Vite maybe 18 months ago in a discussion on the upcoming Nuxt v3.) Instead, this homepage is trying to convince some CxO this is a serious tool worth adopting. Either way, I'd assume there's a good reason you find the homepages of so many popular projects homepages rather vacuous. I doubt it's incompetence.
somenewaccount1 4y ago
I am a developer and still took a while to realize what it does. Also, that snowpack is probably just as sufficient. It's a shite landing page that communicates little, and as a front end framework, well....shouldn't we expect more?
- frankwallis 4y ago
  Snowpack is no longer maintained and they recommend switching to Vite.
sam0x17 4y ago
Sticking with your analogy, in the early 2000s we built cabinents and intricate mantelpieces and things ike that, and there were essentially no tools. In the early 2022s we still build cabinents and intricate mantelpieces, but there are a million tools. Meanwhile browser support has become way more consistent across the board and CSS has become easier, yet we think we need super complex tools to do the same tasks we did back in the day.
- blowski 4y ago
  when I started building websites in the late 90s, I needed to support Internet Explorer and Netscape running 15" CRT monitors. Few cared much about accessibility, performance, security, SEO, experimental releases. Clients wanted a 3 page website with few design requirements. I sliced up some PSDs into HTML pages with tables on it, and uploaded it via FTP to a single server. If I tried to run a web-based business offering that today, I'd get very litle business.
  - brunno 4y ago
    Interestingly, there's a very high chance that those HTML pages with tables crafted in the 90s still render perfectly fine today (if they're still around).
ipaddr 4y ago
It feels like this big struggle and effort to end up with another jquery in a few years because in the end that's what works and feels right
mrwnmonm 4y ago
But he is a developer.
- blowski 4y ago
  They are not a specialist front-end dev. To use an analogy closer to home, if the average front-end dev were to look at a page talking about some new C++ compiler, they'd say "wat?".
KronisLV 4y ago
> Due to customer demands, end-user requirements, and device fragmentation, front-end development has genuinely become _that_ demanding. So as a non-specialist in the field, you can't look at relatively specialist tools like Vite and Nuxt and expect to understand them straight away. Vite is a set of front end tooling - it provides a local dev server, allows you to work with JSX, CSS and TypeScript, as well as lets you build your app, amongst other things. It handles most things that go between editing your source files and having distribution bundles. Nuxt is a framework for Vue, that attempts to provide a lot of defaults for your Vue apps and also supports server side rendering or static site generation. It has functionality for handling views, routing, state, configuration, as well as middleware, fetching data and validations. You can probably describe anything in a way that people would get the gist of it straight away. It doesn't have to be all encompassing, it doesn't even have to be 100% correct, just easy to understand, maybe even with a comparison in there (e.g. npm + webpack). Many such descriptions might just fit into a single paragraph of text, or even a tooltip.
avgcorrection 4y ago
Nothing like a carpentry analogy to obliterate all nuance. The OP said: > Well, that it's… next gen, and it apparently can catch up with me, which is not much, since I'm not really catching up with what's going on anyway. Also, that it's "tooling". Like IDE, or framework, or maybe a chainsaw. Can't tell. We know that it is “tooling”. But what is “next gen” and “catch up with you”? Are those terms that the appropriate audience is just supposed to get?

LtWorf 4y ago

Developer here. I think I can speak for everyone when I say that even when we work with the thing, we can't understand the homepage of the thing. For example at my $DAYJOB I know what we do but if I didn't the website wouldn't help me to understand.

gmassman 4y ago
I'm also a developer and this is a terrible overstatement. My company sells a product that isn't particularly hard to understand, and our www site makes it pretty clear what we're selling.
cercatrova 4y ago
You might work at a sales-oriented company then, rather than a consumer or prosumer (self-service) oriented company. Sales-oriented company websites are purposefully opaque so as to not make a potential customer be able to easily compare and contrast tools without going through an in-depth demo for each one, led by salespeople and perhaps engineers.

azemetre 4y ago

This is a good point if we were selling physical goods and limited by the amount of information we can convey on a screen but we aren't. I'd honestly include things like the what and why as critical to documentation. Most libraries, tools, and tech in general are bad at documentation. It's an active choice to omit discussing these things when they should obviously be included but writing good copy is hard. IDK seems like a good thing to invest in especially if you want your tool to become a dominate player instead of an encroaching tangent. While there are separate pages for the why and comparisons for vite (but it's only comparing itself to other bleeding edge tools rather than popular ones like webpack, browserify, gulp, grunt) they should be snippets of these sections on the front page. Right now there are 6 title cards of with wasted space with very little information. Compare this with playwright's home page you and immediately know why you want to use the tool: https://playwright.dev/ https://playwright.dev/ For a personal taste thing, I'm not really a fan of these open source tools creating homepages similar to as you would see for various startups/products. My mind immediately goes "oh paid tool, oh well." They do say it's free in a lovely medium size text that doesn't standout much and is beyond the fold.

blowski 4y ago
Different way of thinking about this - maybe the devs aren't even the target user of the homepage. If the first time a front end dev hears of Vite is via the homepage, their marketing has a problem. (I first heard of Vite maybe 18 months ago in a discussion on the upcoming Nuxt v3.) Instead, this homepage is trying to convince some CxO this is a serious tool worth adopting. Either way, I'd assume there's a good reason you find the homepages of so many popular projects homepages rather vacuous. I doubt it's incompetence.

somenewaccount1 4y ago

I am a developer and still took a while to realize what it does. Also, that snowpack is probably just as sufficient. It's a shite landing page that communicates little, and as a front end framework, well....shouldn't we expect more?

frankwallis 4y ago
Snowpack is no longer maintained and they recommend switching to Vite.

sam0x17 4y ago

Sticking with your analogy, in the early 2000s we built cabinents and intricate mantelpieces and things ike that, and there were essentially no tools. In the early 2022s we still build cabinents and intricate mantelpieces, but there are a million tools. Meanwhile browser support has become way more consistent across the board and CSS has become easier, yet we think we need super complex tools to do the same tasks we did back in the day.

blowski 4y ago
when I started building websites in the late 90s, I needed to support Internet Explorer and Netscape running 15" CRT monitors. Few cared much about accessibility, performance, security, SEO, experimental releases. Clients wanted a 3 page website with few design requirements. I sliced up some PSDs into HTML pages with tables on it, and uploaded it via FTP to a single server. If I tried to run a web-based business offering that today, I'd get very litle business.
- brunno 4y ago
  Interestingly, there's a very high chance that those HTML pages with tables crafted in the 90s still render perfectly fine today (if they're still around).

ipaddr 4y ago

It feels like this big struggle and effort to end up with another jquery in a few years because in the end that's what works and feels right

mrwnmonm 4y ago

But he is a developer.

blowski 4y ago
They are not a specialist front-end dev. To use an analogy closer to home, if the average front-end dev were to look at a page talking about some new C++ compiler, they'd say "wat?".

KronisLV 4y ago

> Due to customer demands, end-user requirements, and device fragmentation, front-end development has genuinely become _that_ demanding. So as a non-specialist in the field, you can't look at relatively specialist tools like Vite and Nuxt and expect to understand them straight away. Vite is a set of front end tooling - it provides a local dev server, allows you to work with JSX, CSS and TypeScript, as well as lets you build your app, amongst other things. It handles most things that go between editing your source files and having distribution bundles. Nuxt is a framework for Vue, that attempts to provide a lot of defaults for your Vue apps and also supports server side rendering or static site generation. It has functionality for handling views, routing, state, configuration, as well as middleware, fetching data and validations. You can probably describe anything in a way that people would get the gist of it straight away. It doesn't have to be all encompassing, it doesn't even have to be 100% correct, just easy to understand, maybe even with a comparison in there (e.g. npm + webpack). Many such descriptions might just fit into a single paragraph of text, or even a tooltip.

avgcorrection 4y ago

Nothing like a carpentry analogy to obliterate all nuance. The OP said: > Well, that it's… next gen, and it apparently can catch up with me, which is not much, since I'm not really catching up with what's going on anyway. Also, that it's "tooling". Like IDE, or framework, or maybe a chainsaw. Can't tell. We know that it is “tooling”. But what is “next gen” and “catch up with you”? Are those terms that the appropriate audience is just supposed to get?