dhh

16 ms·

121.
by dhh 15y ago
The whole point of this is that there need be no race. If all you need to compete is to do the core set of 10 apps better than the other guy, it's completely doable. If you need a 200K app ecosystem, it's not. OS X is a great example of thi
122.
by dhh 15y ago
I've heard that mentioned before, but that's not what I'm seeing. I don't use 10 random apps from the App Store. I use the 10 default apps that come with the phone. Except for Twitter, I consider the 3rd party apps to be completely expendab
123.
by dhh 15y ago
I actually think Pandora is going to turn out to be a nice, profitable business. But the valuation they're getting in the market is not that of a "nice, profitable business". It's one of a MASSIVELY profitable business throwing off hundreds
124.
by dhh 15y ago
Hahaha. That's your argument? "They're in many places and you wouldn't understand why they're so valuable if you have a <scoff> 'lifestyle' business". How about dishing concrete examples of all these places they're in that's going t
125.
by dhh 15y ago
Pandora is still massively overpriced at $16/share. I reckon a price at $2/share would still be a significant gamble: http://shortlogic.tumblr.com/post/6586713689/pandora-should-...
126.
by dhh 15y ago
This is indeed correct.
127.
by dhh 15y ago
This has already been solved. Just add ?debug_assets=1 to any url and it'll be rendered with individual include lines instead of concatenation. We're building client heavy apps, though, and haven't felt a need for it. But now it's there if
128.
by dhh 15y ago
Because that's always been the mission. Have a solution for most people, most of the time. With the target being building full-fledged apps ala Basecamp (that touches on all parts of web tech). So we've been pursuing this mission for 7+ yea
129.
by dhh 15y ago
Staying on Rails 2.3.x is certainly fine for existing apps, but starting a new app on 2.3 is a very bad idea. You're setting yourself up for a lot of headache for the inevitable migration. Let alone depriving yourself of all the wonders of
130.
by dhh 15y ago
rake assets:precompile will automatically copy images from app/assets/images to public/assets. The asset pipeline can be a development concern only, if you want it to.
131.
by dhh 15y ago
Rails 3.1 is by very far the best version of Rails there's ever been. Nothing makes it in or stays in the framework if I have true opposition to it being there. Believe you me. Also, please back up your core theory with something else than
132.
by dhh 15y ago
This is a modern day wanted poster. I think it's completely fine. He hasn't been convicted to any material degree: He's still free, unhurt, and in possession of the item.
133.
by dhh 15y ago
tenderlove is going to follow up on this. The issue is for metal-like responders, not for full-fledged apps. We've lost a couple of ms on the low-end due to the stack issue.
134.
by dhh 16y ago
Have you actually looked at SCSS? This is a good start: http://sass-lang.com/ . It's a superset of CSS. Very easy to learn. Also, this "huge problem" you talk about is the same that people used to argue against Ruby/Rails with. Hey, everyo
135.
by dhh 16y ago
Unrealistic implies that it's not going to actually take place. It is taking place. We've been running like this for years. We've had very little turn-over and remain good friends with people who left. So it seems to be working out excellen
136.
by dhh 16y ago
I'll tell you when we get there, if ever. Although, as mentioned elsewhere in the thread, there are some good examples of enormous companies running counter-intuative-for-thier-size organizational models and doing great.
137.
by dhh 16y ago
Yes, huge fan of Semler. Big inspiration.
138.
by dhh 16y ago
You have it backwards. You don't design your company structure in the hopes or anticipation of becoming Groupon or Zynga. You deal with that growth when it happens. You optimize for that scenario when it occurs. You can't "want" your compan
139.
by dhh 16y ago
If anyone ever faces this thought-experiment problem when they leave 37signals, I'll be happy to bestow them a non-managerial fancy title of their choice. If someone leaving 37signals thinks they need to have a "Master Programmer" title, th
140.
by dhh 16y ago
You should never say never, but I don't think we'll ever be 150 people. I think there's a good chance we'll never even be 50 people. Although, as many others have pointed out, there are some great examples of huge companies running similar
141.
by dhh 16y ago
People branch out all the time. Part of being flat is that there's very little division. If you are a programmer who has a good idea for a new workflow process (i.e. management design), you propose it, and we usually try it. If you're a des
142.
by dhh 16y ago
Why does it have to scale? 37signals took 11 years to get to 26 people. It might take us another 11 to get to 50. We can optimize for that future when and if it arrives. But making your environment worse today because you worry about some p
143.
by dhh 16y ago
We're optimizing for having the best work environment today. Prioritizing what some employer somewhere else might think a decade from now over improving working conditions today seems like a bad trade.
144.
by dhh 16y ago
Is "unrealistic" a version of "that wouldn't work in the real world"? Of course it's realistic. Jason is describing how things actually work at 37signals, not how he'd wish them to be. So we have an entire staff of programmers, many who has
145.
by dhh 16y ago
We solved this in part by using "cocktail titles". So anyone who works here can call themselves senior. So we have "senior designer", "senior programmer". At least that has some ring of fancy.
146.
by dhh 16y ago
Unfortunately I found it to be, well, shit compared to the iPad. I bought one for the lure of speed and returned it the next day when I realized that speed was very low on the list of properties that actually mattered. The total user experi
147.
by dhh 16y ago
Ha. That would make sense. And this would qualify as a terrible fucking headline as it can be read as (20 million-dollar) businesses, (20) million-dollar businesses, and (20 million) dollar businesses. Forbes is terrible.
148.
by dhh 16y ago
Where's the justification for most of these businesses actually being worth 20 million dollars? I mean they're awesome stories, but when you have $1-2 million in revenue and have to deal with physical products, you won't exactly have millio
149.
by dhh 16y ago
That was just the latest in a long string of issues with OpenID. Hardly the sole reason.
150.
by dhh 16y ago
I wish I could brand that as a fancy marketing scheme, but I think the answer is much simpler. It's simply transparent discovery and thinking. If it happens to work as advertising, that's a positive side-effect, but the main dish is coming

More ›