stylejam

6 ms·

31.
by stylejam 16y ago
I'm apparently the only one from Seattle.
32.
by stylejam 16y ago
I understand what you say, but unfortunately it's not correct. We believe that our decisions are 100% analytical and conscious, the result of a thinking process, but reality is that our old and middle brains are almost always in charge and
33.
by stylejam 16y ago
Well, if you're choosing a suboptimal solution (a new page) over an optimal solution (the ajax call) there's definitely something wrong ... FWIW, I strongly believe that a worst UX will bring less conversions, but I don't have any data to b
34.
by stylejam 16y ago
I would try S3 as for now
35.
by stylejam 16y ago
It's a guess, but if you're part of the community (and I am) it's at least an educated guess :) I'm developing in Ruby 1.9 as well.
36.
by stylejam 16y ago
Especially because if the main argument is that "it works" you're not discussing the merits of the language, you're simply stating that it's turing complete (yes, you can do "everything" with it) and that it works (HINT: whitespace works to
37.
by stylejam 16y ago
Where do you see process buzzwords ?
38.
by stylejam 16y ago
Very nice article. I would also like to add that writing features definitely helps in providing a sound MVP. I'm quite surprised that nobody thinks that one of the reasons a MVP fails can be the quality of such MVP, where quality != numbe
39.
by stylejam 16y ago
I agree 100%.
40.
by stylejam 16y ago
I don't think I'm doing anything illegal here, by posting the coupon that Manning sent out for free yesterday to the subscribers to the "Deal of the day" list. This coupon will permit to buy this book (paper and pdf) for 25$: dotd1205ccb I
41.
by stylejam 16y ago
Honestly I think this is my personal funniest post of 2010. And no, it's not making fun of Haskell.