3 ms·

So you’ll come up with hypothetical reasons you don’t like it, instead of just trying something which is loved by many people, and seeing if you actually like i

So you’ll come up with hypothetical reasons you don’t like it, instead of just trying something which is loved by many people, and seeing if you actually like it. I do not like it in a boat, I do not like it with my coat, I do not like green eggs and ham.

chatmasta 4y ago
Well, I've had to stop people from introducing it into our projects before, so it is something I have to deal with. I won't passionately advocate against it, but I did enough research and have enough experience to recognize when something will not be worth it to me. And I don't know why you would classify these legitimate points against it as "hypothetical," because as far as I can tell they're solidly grounded in reality. The central argument of its value seems to be "you need to try it to understand it," and I just don't find that to be a compelling argument. It doesn't claim to solve any problems that I recognize in my current workflow of writing well-scoped styled components.
- stocknoob 4y ago
  If you’re not going to try it, that’s ok, but I think it would be fruitful to try it for 20 mins, they have an online playground. A huge advantage of tailwind is you can copy/paste another tailwind example from anywhere and it will just work on your site. (It’s like copying text from one site to another!) I remember the arguments in 2008 from people who insisted they needed a physical phone keyboard, like a blackberry. They need to actually try a good touchscreen, vs provide untested arguments why physical keys are better. (Better in some ways? Sure. Overall? No.) At some point it becomes an ego thing, people don’t want to admit their initial impressions were shortsighted. And it’s ok. The better experience wins out.
  - chatmasta 4y ago
    The problem with that argument is that once you've sufficiently "tried it," you've put so much effort in that you're stuck with it, and since there's no way to eject, you're more willing to justify it to yourself as worth it. This is stockholm syndrome. You're right I should try it, and maybe I will try it on some throwaway project eventually, but it's not a priority and I have no interest in adding it to ongoing production projects. I was very open about the fact I haven't tried it from my first sentence, which was "here are the reasons I have no interest in trying tailwind." I would have more interest if someone could explain a compelling problem that I recognize and that Tailwind solves. But nobody can do that, it's all just "you have to try it [and learn our initiation rituals] and then you'll understand!"
    - stocknoob 4y ago
      Learning tailwind is 30 mins in their online playground. (It’s one traffic jam on your commute.) There are countless blog posts and threads listing the advantages, but it’s better to spend that time using it and you won’t have to take someone’s word for it! From the creator of styled components himself: https://mxstbr.com/thoughts/tailwind/ https://mxstbr.com/thoughts/tailwind/
      - chatmasta 4y ago
        Thanks for the link. The twin.macro is actually a compelling argument against my favoring of CSS-in-JS, because it "combines the best of both worlds," but for the same reason, it also increases complexity by adding yet another interlinked dependency downstream of Tailwind. So, how's this: I promise I'll try the playground for 30 minutes sometime soon. :) But I don't believe that's enough to learn it, because you'll still need to be constantly referencing the documentation to remember all the weird little utility classes. That's why I didn't like Bootstrap - it required memorizing some esoteric language that is totally useless ten years later. Whereas the CSS I learned in 2004 is still (mostly) just as useful today as it was then. The reason I'm conservative in the technologies I adopt is because I've been doing web development for nearly 20 years now, and I've seen five or six cycles of fads begin and end. Very few technologies stand the test of time, and it sucks if you end up stuck with one of them on the tail end (heh) of its hype cycle. Or sometimes it's not even the end of the hype cycle, but just a major upgrade to a new version that requires you to change hundreds of files in your codebase (this is the main reason for my dislike of MUI). I don't know if Tailwind has that issue with upgrades, but I know CSS certainly does not.
        pcthrowaway 4y ago
        I had the same feeling about bootstrap (and I also never really bought into it when I used it back in the day; I figured something better would come along) Tailwind is not that. Tailwind might disappear over time, but only because future improvements to CSS might borrow ideas from Tailwind
        stocknoob 4y ago

chatmasta 4y ago

Well, I've had to stop people from introducing it into our projects before, so it is something I have to deal with. I won't passionately advocate against it, but I did enough research and have enough experience to recognize when something will not be worth it to me. And I don't know why you would classify these legitimate points against it as "hypothetical," because as far as I can tell they're solidly grounded in reality. The central argument of its value seems to be "you need to try it to understand it," and I just don't find that to be a compelling argument. It doesn't claim to solve any problems that I recognize in my current workflow of writing well-scoped styled components.

stocknoob 4y ago
If you’re not going to try it, that’s ok, but I think it would be fruitful to try it for 20 mins, they have an online playground. A huge advantage of tailwind is you can copy/paste another tailwind example from anywhere and it will just work on your site. (It’s like copying text from one site to another!) I remember the arguments in 2008 from people who insisted they needed a physical phone keyboard, like a blackberry. They need to actually try a good touchscreen, vs provide untested arguments why physical keys are better. (Better in some ways? Sure. Overall? No.) At some point it becomes an ego thing, people don’t want to admit their initial impressions were shortsighted. And it’s ok. The better experience wins out.
- chatmasta 4y ago
  The problem with that argument is that once you've sufficiently "tried it," you've put so much effort in that you're stuck with it, and since there's no way to eject, you're more willing to justify it to yourself as worth it. This is stockholm syndrome. You're right I should try it, and maybe I will try it on some throwaway project eventually, but it's not a priority and I have no interest in adding it to ongoing production projects. I was very open about the fact I haven't tried it from my first sentence, which was "here are the reasons I have no interest in trying tailwind." I would have more interest if someone could explain a compelling problem that I recognize and that Tailwind solves. But nobody can do that, it's all just "you have to try it [and learn our initiation rituals] and then you'll understand!"
  - stocknoob 4y ago
    Learning tailwind is 30 mins in their online playground. (It’s one traffic jam on your commute.) There are countless blog posts and threads listing the advantages, but it’s better to spend that time using it and you won’t have to take someone’s word for it! From the creator of styled components himself: https://mxstbr.com/thoughts/tailwind/ https://mxstbr.com/thoughts/tailwind/
    - chatmasta 4y ago
      Thanks for the link. The twin.macro is actually a compelling argument against my favoring of CSS-in-JS, because it "combines the best of both worlds," but for the same reason, it also increases complexity by adding yet another interlinked dependency downstream of Tailwind. So, how's this: I promise I'll try the playground for 30 minutes sometime soon. :) But I don't believe that's enough to learn it, because you'll still need to be constantly referencing the documentation to remember all the weird little utility classes. That's why I didn't like Bootstrap - it required memorizing some esoteric language that is totally useless ten years later. Whereas the CSS I learned in 2004 is still (mostly) just as useful today as it was then. The reason I'm conservative in the technologies I adopt is because I've been doing web development for nearly 20 years now, and I've seen five or six cycles of fads begin and end. Very few technologies stand the test of time, and it sucks if you end up stuck with one of them on the tail end (heh) of its hype cycle. Or sometimes it's not even the end of the hype cycle, but just a major upgrade to a new version that requires you to change hundreds of files in your codebase (this is the main reason for my dislike of MUI). I don't know if Tailwind has that issue with upgrades, but I know CSS certainly does not.
      - pcthrowaway 4y ago
        I had the same feeling about bootstrap (and I also never really bought into it when I used it back in the day; I figured something better would come along) Tailwind is not that. Tailwind might disappear over time, but only because future improvements to CSS might borrow ideas from Tailwind
      - stocknoob 4y ago