3 ms·
The title of the blog post mentions Tailwind Plus so I’m assuming it’s a paid feature. The ambiguity is probably intentional.
by bikeshaving 1y ago
The title of the blog post mentions Tailwind Plus so I’m assuming it’s a paid feature. The ambiguity is probably intentional.
- Alupis 1y agoIt's not very expensive, all things considered. $299 for a single-user perpetual license (includes all future updates too) or about $1k for a team license[1]. If it saves you a bunch of time writing and maintaining the sort of components they are showing off, probably worth it? [1] https://tailwindcss.com/plus#pricing https://tailwindcss.com/plus#pricing
- bikeshaving 1y agoListen, I’m not against the Tailwind team getting their bag – they worked hard and created an amazing open source library. I just don’t think it’s in the interest of either users or maintainers to put vanilla JavaScript support behind a paywall. Edit: apparently all framework integrations and the whole library and functionality is behind the same paywall? And regular tailwind is just the css classes/build process that I used to know? Do people not understand how casual readers might be confused about all this?
- monkey_monkey 1y agoThe entire component library is behind a paywall...are you saying they should be giving away the vanilla JS version?
- yieldcrv 1y agoYou can use vanilla tailwind with vanilla JavaScript
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- whatever1 1y agoChatGPT can just steal it for me!
- cschmatzler 1y agoYeah I strongly emphasise with them getting their money - the only problem with headless components being behind a paid license is that you cannot build a design system on top of them and open source it.