I think HTML is bad. I think DOM based development is bad. I really feel that Desktop UI development is much more mature and has much less legacy to compete with when developing a web UI.
I think the very near future will be web assembly code that paints a canvas. Mature desktop methods with GUI design tools will be ported to web assembler and retrofit for the web. QT5, imgui, are just the beginning.
I think a good exercise would be to open the Full Stack React book again and port the first few running examples to a Qt Quick Controls application and then target webassembler. I am willing to wager that anyone who gives it a real shot will be impressed at the productivity gains -- which generally stem from QML's expressiveness and not having to deal with React's over-complicated design. Not to mention, you'll not waste time because some component you made behaves differently across browsers. You'll also notice a complete lack of the dogma that tends accompany modern JS frameworks and libraries.
It also feels good to know that your UI may be a bit more performant that DOM based UI's.
> I think HTML is bad. I think DOM based development is bad. I really feel that Desktop UI development is much more mature and has much less legacy to compete with when developing a web UI.
I secretly hope this becomes true. I always think back to how nearly everything done on the frontend are essentially hacks to really sex-up a document description language for scientists.
I think it would be really neat if we did end up building UI's in a responsive way like you describe. It would feel more like the right tool for the right job. But that seems so far away when I start to think about what it would take to get there.
Yep! Which is why I'm dismayed at seeing this trend among designers where they feel the need to learn to code. There exists, however implicitly, an interface between design and development. That interface needs to be preserved, and it gets weaker each time a designer decides they should learn to code UI's themselves.
Technologies for building UI's will forever be changing, so designers should be able to work while being agnostic to the UI's implementation details.
With QT5 and it's qt quick controls 2, I put together the demos of the first few chapters of "Full Stack React" within minutes. The QT creator helped me with this. I compiled to desktop (which is quicker) and then when I was done I compiled to WASM and loaded it up in the browser.
With React and other DOM based tools, it takes very long to develop even simple GUI's. There are tools like React Studio, but nothing as mature as QT. Also QML and Signal/Slots are much better than React's model IMHO. In addition, Virtual-DOM is a hack that only DOM based models suffer from and adds overhead to the development model.
I think the article is right -- Out with the new, in with the old!
Both jumping ship for raises and other things are also true according to multiple sources. Job satisfaction is another leading cause. The tech industry has to fix the issue of turnover, its costing too much money and careers are being diluted.
The first problem with agile is that false dichotomy - "It's either agile or waterfall". Sorry but that dichotomy doesn't exist. Waterfall vs Agile is just a good-bad binary. Surely you want to iterate quickly and stay in constant contact with customers, if that is all agile is then I am all in. However, I can't subscribe to robbing developers of ownership of a domain. I would even do microservice arch if it meant dividing things up into domains and assigning developers microservices that they own. I want to keep developers and giving them responsibility and ownership is a good way to do it.
Its funny because, in Agile you hear "You don't want one developer leaving with all the knowledge" now instead we have all the developers leaving with all the knowledge.
Nothing in the Agile Manifesto says anything about robbing developers of ownership of a domain. The first line of the manifesto is "Individuals and interactions over processes and tools", which suggested to me that individual work satisfaction is right there at the top.
I wouldn't hang on every word of the agile manifesto. For example you don't have to google too much before you find people having debates over unit testing vs acceptance testing in the name of being "Agile" not giving to much attention to the "over processes and tools" part of the manifesto.
If we are going to critique Agile I think we should first agree what Agile is. Agile is the manifesto, not what some random dudes on the internet say it is.
1) Humans are stupid. If we were not were not we would have long ago colonized the solar system. The technology is there but we rather not. We would rather fight, discriminate, and withhold knowledge which would, quite literally, save all of our lives.
2) Programming principles can be understood because they are based on concepts that are largely built upon a physical machine. Math can't really be understood, you just have to become accustom to it. Mathematics is simply too abstract to relate to things you already know like programming is. So when learning maths don't try too hard, just memorize, and familiarize. Once you start thinking you are smart you stop working and you stop learning.
Well, its time to move on from Hacker news. This will be my last post, I will try to get them to remove my account. Suppressing conversation about topics very relevant to technology is where I draw the line. There is nothing political about facts. If the moderators of hacker news can't handle that (because they too are a white male dominated company) then that is just something they are going to have to deal with - even if reality is something they can't deal with.
I guess political nature of the article take precedence over any form of science or tech found in the article. Moving on from hacker news waste of time.
Why not just flag the comments. Why shut down the whole discussion? Seems like a heavy handed approach. I mean of course talking about the rampant racism in tech will make many white males uncomfortable, that the reason we post and talk about it. So that people become more comfortable talking about it. The mods aren't helping the problem they are exacerbating it by coddling.
If it is just a case of one or two people being uncivil, they will just delete the comments. If an article/post gets a bunch of flags they are responding to the community, which is signallng that the post should not be part of the community and the whole thread will be locked.
While I support something like this, I can't shake the feeling that everything that can be done here can already be done using the features of my desktop or editor (which is Emacs for programming and MS Word other stuff).
I agree with you but just one point - I didn't know African hair is thicker. Do you mean that African's tend to have more hair follicles on their head, or do you mean that the hairs themselves are thicker? I'm not sure if either is true. Do you have a reference.
I think the very near future will be web assembly code that paints a canvas. Mature desktop methods with GUI design tools will be ported to web assembler and retrofit for the web. QT5, imgui, are just the beginning.
I think a good exercise would be to open the Full Stack React book again and port the first few running examples to a Qt Quick Controls application and then target webassembler. I am willing to wager that anyone who gives it a real shot will be impressed at the productivity gains -- which generally stem from QML's expressiveness and not having to deal with React's over-complicated design. Not to mention, you'll not waste time because some component you made behaves differently across browsers. You'll also notice a complete lack of the dogma that tends accompany modern JS frameworks and libraries.
It also feels good to know that your UI may be a bit more performant that DOM based UI's.