5 ms·

It's disheartening to realize that the frontend space is no better now than when I began my career in 1990. And it's also disheartening that even though compute

It's disheartening to realize that the frontend space is no better now than when I began my career in 1990. And it's also disheartening that even though computers are like 5000 times faster now, that they feel slower to me as a developer and as an end user.

nvahalik 3y ago
Wholeheartedly disagree. Advancements to CSS have made front-end way more reasonably than they were in the 90s. Stuff that took weeks to figure out with tables can now be done so quickly with `display: flex` and the whole grid system. It's beautiful. If we had `display: flex back` in 1998 I probably wouldn't have stuck with FE rather than dive into the backend.
- mablopoule 3y ago
  Agree. I did CSS before flexbox was available, and I have no ideas how I did before. There is tons of very good stuff coming our way in CSS (such as container queries), better ergonomics for Javascript, excellent tooling in the browser, stuff to be optimistic for, not just all this madness about the framework du jour.
- wongarsu 3y ago
  Web dev (as in: HTML and CSS) improved a lot in the last 20-30 years. But if I had to quickly make a fully functioning interface and had the choice between today's web and 2002's Delphi 7 I'd choose Delphi 7 in a heartbeat. And just look at what non-technial people were able to do with Macromedia Flash in the early 2000s. You need experienced frontend devs to recreate what designers did as a hobby back then. Of course those solutions don't solve the transition between desktop and mobile layout (since that wasn't a thing back then), but more some modern frameworks solve that well (like whatever MS calls UWP right now) without forcing everyone to reinvent a way to do infinite scrolling without running out of memory
  - phist_mcgee 3y ago
    This reads as if written by someone with rose tinted glasses.
    - text0404 3y ago
      +1. would love to see an example of something created in Flash by a single designer that takes a team of frontend devs to create today. fyi folks, Flash is also based on ECMAScript! just because the mid-90s tooling built by Macromedia triggers your nostalgia doesn't mean it was better!
- freeopinion 3y ago
  I think this is what they meant by rediscovering or reinventing new things over and over. Yes, display:flex is newer than XUL and different in some ways. But 20 years on it seems disappointing that display:flex is perceived as such an advancement by those who have forgotten or never knew the past.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- nvm0n2 3y ago
  If he is comparing things to 1990 then that means he's using "frontend" to included non-web UI tech as well, in which case flex vs tables isn't really the main point of comparison.
- jinushaun 3y ago
  Nah. Tables were easy. All the craziness came with people using <div> as <table>. That was only recently fixed by flex box.
- jtwebman 3y ago
  It was all backend in 1998.
  - baq 3y ago
    PHP running as lambda functions^W^WCGI. Those were the times.
- ttfkam 3y ago
  What's wrong with this? float: left; Oh wait… that was 2002 at least. "Tables ought to be enough for everyone." There we go! Nailed 1998!
  - tacker2000 3y ago
    Dont forget clear:both; !
  - ttfkam 3y ago
    Wow, I guess I really needed the sarcasm tag there. It appears some folks didn't get that this wasn't aspirational.
- prmph 3y ago
  What? A few days ago I gave up trying to write a moderately complex component based on flex-grid. The number of options, and all the quirks of them, was overwhelming, and in the end I couldn't even get the basic behavior I wanted. Maybe i will try again some other. I think display: flex is very useful, display:grid is too complicated with the way they designed it.
szundi 3y ago
I was writing software when I was 12 in Clipper. The industry became riciculously slower since then.
- roflyear 3y ago
  The industry, sure - but the tools exist today to get things done faster than ever before. It is the people that are the problem, as always!
jjoonathan 3y ago
Nah, you're just focusing on the opportunities to improve rather than counting the victories. Here's my top 3 big steps forward of the last 20 years: * Webapps don't need to be installed * Webapps work on all platforms without vendor lock-in * Webapps aren't trusted and get sandboxed by default and a bunch of minor victories along the way (you can right click -> inspect every webapp, APIs generally exist and have entered the cultural lexicon, cross-site SSO exists and works).
- actionfromafar 3y ago
  Telemetry, ads, SAAS, terms of service, data breaches, platform effects.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- pavlov 3y ago
  These are good points. At the same time, a lot of the UI tooling and APIs feel like we went back 30+ years. Everybody is still reinventing the pop-up menu button (aka “select”). I really thought this was a solved problem in NeXT by the early nineties.
- intrasight 3y ago
  > Webapps don't need to be installed Was true of what I was doing in 1988 too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Project
  - text0404 3y ago
    vrml was also invented 30+ years ago but we're not lamenting that webgl is solving an already-solved problem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VRML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VRML
geysersam 3y ago
What are you smoking? The web has developed immensely since the 90s. If some UI you use is slow it's certainly not because of the excellent frontend/web technologies we have today. There are certainly many things to complain about regarding the state of the web but the frontend technologies are not to blame.
hnben 3y ago
> It's disheartening to realize that the frontend space is no better now than when I began my career in 1990. I disagree. Since I started programming some 20 years ago, I relearned web (and especially JS) every 5 years or so. And each time I was pleasantly surprised at how much simpler / elegant / clean things have become. > that they feel slower to me as a developer and as an end user. that's true though. It possible (and even simple!) to make web-apps that are almost just as fast, but no one does that (at least not in the main stream).
gilbetron 3y ago
Alternative history! I began my career around the same time, and I remember applications taking minutes to start up, Word/Excel crashing and corrupting your file with regularity, and all kinds of horrible anti-patterns. Applications always are as slow as users can tolerate, which roughly end up being about the same over time, but tolerance is typically lower these days.

nvahalik 3y ago

Wholeheartedly disagree. Advancements to CSS have made front-end way more reasonably than they were in the 90s. Stuff that took weeks to figure out with tables can now be done so quickly with `display: flex` and the whole grid system. It's beautiful. If we had `display: flex back` in 1998 I probably wouldn't have stuck with FE rather than dive into the backend.

mablopoule 3y ago
Agree. I did CSS before flexbox was available, and I have no ideas how I did before. There is tons of very good stuff coming our way in CSS (such as container queries), better ergonomics for Javascript, excellent tooling in the browser, stuff to be optimistic for, not just all this madness about the framework du jour.
wongarsu 3y ago
Web dev (as in: HTML and CSS) improved a lot in the last 20-30 years. But if I had to quickly make a fully functioning interface and had the choice between today's web and 2002's Delphi 7 I'd choose Delphi 7 in a heartbeat. And just look at what non-technial people were able to do with Macromedia Flash in the early 2000s. You need experienced frontend devs to recreate what designers did as a hobby back then. Of course those solutions don't solve the transition between desktop and mobile layout (since that wasn't a thing back then), but more some modern frameworks solve that well (like whatever MS calls UWP right now) without forcing everyone to reinvent a way to do infinite scrolling without running out of memory
- phist_mcgee 3y ago
  This reads as if written by someone with rose tinted glasses.
  - text0404 3y ago
    +1. would love to see an example of something created in Flash by a single designer that takes a team of frontend devs to create today. fyi folks, Flash is also based on ECMAScript! just because the mid-90s tooling built by Macromedia triggers your nostalgia doesn't mean it was better!
freeopinion 3y ago
I think this is what they meant by rediscovering or reinventing new things over and over. Yes, display:flex is newer than XUL and different in some ways. But 20 years on it seems disappointing that display:flex is perceived as such an advancement by those who have forgotten or never knew the past.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
nvm0n2 3y ago
If he is comparing things to 1990 then that means he's using "frontend" to included non-web UI tech as well, in which case flex vs tables isn't really the main point of comparison.
jinushaun 3y ago
Nah. Tables were easy. All the craziness came with people using <div> as <table>. That was only recently fixed by flex box.
jtwebman 3y ago
It was all backend in 1998.
- baq 3y ago
  PHP running as lambda functions^W^WCGI. Those were the times.
ttfkam 3y ago
What's wrong with this? float: left; Oh wait… that was 2002 at least. "Tables ought to be enough for everyone." There we go! Nailed 1998!
- tacker2000 3y ago
  Dont forget clear:both; !
- ttfkam 3y ago
  Wow, I guess I really needed the sarcasm tag there. It appears some folks didn't get that this wasn't aspirational.
prmph 3y ago
What? A few days ago I gave up trying to write a moderately complex component based on flex-grid. The number of options, and all the quirks of them, was overwhelming, and in the end I couldn't even get the basic behavior I wanted. Maybe i will try again some other. I think display: flex is very useful, display:grid is too complicated with the way they designed it.

szundi 3y ago

I was writing software when I was 12 in Clipper. The industry became riciculously slower since then.

roflyear 3y ago
The industry, sure - but the tools exist today to get things done faster than ever before. It is the people that are the problem, as always!

jjoonathan 3y ago

Nah, you're just focusing on the opportunities to improve rather than counting the victories. Here's my top 3 big steps forward of the last 20 years: * Webapps don't need to be installed * Webapps work on all platforms without vendor lock-in * Webapps aren't trusted and get sandboxed by default and a bunch of minor victories along the way (you can right click -> inspect every webapp, APIs generally exist and have entered the cultural lexicon, cross-site SSO exists and works).

actionfromafar 3y ago
Telemetry, ads, SAAS, terms of service, data breaches, platform effects.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
pavlov 3y ago
These are good points. At the same time, a lot of the UI tooling and APIs feel like we went back 30+ years. Everybody is still reinventing the pop-up menu button (aka “select”). I really thought this was a solved problem in NeXT by the early nineties.
intrasight 3y ago
> Webapps don't need to be installed Was true of what I was doing in 1988 too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Project https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Project
- text0404 3y ago
  vrml was also invented 30+ years ago but we're not lamenting that webgl is solving an already-solved problem. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VRML https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VRML

geysersam 3y ago

What are you smoking? The web has developed immensely since the 90s. If some UI you use is slow it's certainly not because of the excellent frontend/web technologies we have today. There are certainly many things to complain about regarding the state of the web but the frontend technologies are not to blame.

hnben 3y ago

> It's disheartening to realize that the frontend space is no better now than when I began my career in 1990. I disagree. Since I started programming some 20 years ago, I relearned web (and especially JS) every 5 years or so. And each time I was pleasantly surprised at how much simpler / elegant / clean things have become. > that they feel slower to me as a developer and as an end user. that's true though. It possible (and even simple!) to make web-apps that are almost just as fast, but no one does that (at least not in the main stream).

gilbetron 3y ago

Alternative history! I began my career around the same time, and I remember applications taking minutes to start up, Word/Excel crashing and corrupting your file with regularity, and all kinds of horrible anti-patterns. Applications always are as slow as users can tolerate, which roughly end up being about the same over time, but tolerance is typically lower these days.