Yes deliverability is always going to be an issue. Sending mail from your own domain is really hard. For example, after jumping through all the required hoops to establish trust for my domain I still was going straight to spam for any hotmail address :|
I overcame this by routing all mail through google servers. They have a limit of about 2000 messages per day which may be enough to get you going.
I think OP mean that }); doesn't on its own affect program logic, and, realistically if you're reading JS all day your brain is filtering those characters out for you.
The other argument is that }); is line noise and therefore unnecessary, which I think boils down to preference.
Its a great game engine which will allow you to create all manner of high-performance games on iphone4+ hardware (i've never tested on <iphone4, so performance may be ok there too)
CSS3 is just a standard. Do you have any full CSS3 implementations embeddable in programs?
I'd rather invent something new layout engine than using the lame CSS way. For example I want place an box A next the box B on its right at the distance of 50% of the height of the box C on the left.
> Would you prefer a proprietary black box to do your layout for you?
How many times have you look into webkit or gecko source code to fix layout problems?
If you think a layout engine is complex enough that need to be open sourced, you are doing it wrong.
Layouts should be simple and intuitive. Not a cluster fuck of div's and hacks.
> You can embed webkit and gecko in a desktop app.
Which is basically an html5 app right?
> I'm guessing you've never actually written a layout engine before. They're notoriously hard to get right.
Yes I have never written anything like that, but I can tell you native app development (Visual Studio, XCode) layouts are much simpler and more powerful. The problem with HTML and CSS is that they are eigher document flow based or absolute position. It's hard to do relative or responsive layouts right. It's easier to do it right in native ways. There are much richer containers, control groups and docking options.
> a pre-processor (such as LESS) for the placement of Box A, or if its position is a dynamic property then you can set it using JS.
How many times have you look into webkit or gecko
source code to fix layout problems?
That's not really the point. Let's use the Adobe Flex Framework as an example. If you bought into Flex 5 years ago then you're probably starting to feel a bit nervous. The reasons being:
1. Adobe are themselves signaling that
HTML is the future by releasing HTML5 tools (Edge)
2. Adobe have abandoned mobile Flash development
3. Developer mind-share is firmly in the HTML camp.
Now, if the full adobe/flash stack were open source and there were multiple companies working on it, it would be less of an issue as the technology you invested into would continue to be supported. The fact that you, personally are not working on the flash/flex core would be irrelevant, as is the case with HTML5 and the open web.
If you think a layout engine is complex enough that
need to be open sourced, you are doing it wrong.
I'm at a loss trying to respond to this. If you think writing a layout engine from scratch is easy then you simply don't understand the problem very well. Even writing a good text layout engine is very hard to get right, and text layout is only a subset of the whole problem. Not only that, but layout is an orthogonal problem to the one you're trying to solve (unless you're writing a browser or word processor), so the time you sink into it is wasted.
native app development (Visual Studio, XCode) layouts are much
simpler and more powerful
It's simpler because the complexity is abstracted away from you by the IDE/tools. The actual (hidden) application logic driving the layouts is just as complex if not more so.
The problem with HTML and CSS is that they are either
document flow based or absolute position.
Absolutely agree with you here. The document paradigm has been abused horribly to allow for complex layout on the web, and its roots are painfully evident - it certainly wasn't meant for this type of work.
It's easier to do it right in native ways. There are much richer containers,
control groups and docking options.
Agree here too. Having said that though there are great advances being made, the flexible box model being one of them.
Oh wow, Javascript for layout, right.
That's sarcasm not a rebuttal :)
Going back to the original point, I think that CSS for native layout may be an OK idea, CSS certainly has it share of strengths and weaknesses. One thing this approach has in its favor is a low barrier to entry for web developers which may help bridge the designer/developer divide.
The new CSS3 flexible box layout changes all that. It's incredibly rich and designed to obviate the need for clumsy CSS layout hacks. Check it out if you haven't already... it is the missing piece for app-like layouts for the web. The incredibly complex layouts that can be achieved with minimal CSS and no JS is astounding. Pair this with text-overflow and with ~ 50 lines of CSS and some very basic html you can achieve wonders.
Not only that but it's usable today. Both webkit and gecko have very close implementations with only minor edge cases, none of which are insurmountable.
Not sure about iOS support for the new layout modes.
The marketing site looks great and I like the sound of the idea, however I was surprised to see this as a paid-for service.
This is not because it is data not worth paying for but rather because I usually start thinking about new tech at the start of a new project, and I only start a new project once every year or two. An ongoing fee for this type of aggregator seems hard to justify.
A possible alternative would be to open up the data for free and supply affiliate links to related books, tools etc.
Opening up the tool for free is actually one of the options that I consider. Of course, only if there's a good reason to believe that this is the right way to go.
I know of some free alternatives, like http://www.ohloh.net/ but on the other hand there are also pricey reports on technology trends, such as: http://w3techs.com/
This shows that there are companies willing to pay a lot of money for technology insights.
BTW, is there any specific kind of data/insights you would be particularly interested in?
One idea might be to charge per usage rather than on a monthly basis. So let's say I'm starting a project I pay a one-time fee to use the application for a certain amount of queries, days or weeks. Like skyhook_mockups said it's not something I'd use everyday but rather a couple of times a year when I start a new project or pivot.
I'd have to agree here. It's a cool concept, but I just couldn't justify paying for it. It's possible that if there was a free limited version that I could play with, I'd get hooked and then be willing to pay the monthly rate. But then, I am a Senior Developer... maybe this is meant more for Project Managers. The project managers that I work with though, wouldn't be nearly technical enough to understand most of what comes through on Stack Overflow: "MVC what?" :)
- IT industry analysts (What are the industry trends? What will be popular next year?)
And from the discussions with those groups, I know they would be willing to pay for this kind of tool.
Obviously, my goal is to build a critical mass of users and customers. And the dilemma is whether leave it a SaaS tool and earn from subscription or open it up for everyone and make profit in some other way...
He's already written why that'll never happen, but I'm on his mailing list and I suspect him of building up the steam to leverage that financially. It'll likely be repeat-sales oriented and have a greater-than-$10 customer lifetime value. I can't wait to be fleeced, because at least we know he'll be focused on providing me with value.
I overcame this by routing all mail through google servers. They have a limit of about 2000 messages per day which may be enough to get you going.