Don't be so sure. I think he has a good chance, but there is still inflation worries, the housing market in a double dip, and an unusually high unemployment rate. I'd say it'll take some work to survive even a weak republican candidate. 1.5 trillion dollar deficit does not help things either.
Looks great. I try just about every one of these new options. Kodapp was my last one, but it didnt last (back on textmate). I'll give this a try as well. It looks like it has even greater potential.
TextMate is a joke. Nothing worse than missed opportunity. Such a huge community behind it and MacroMates seems completely incapable of providing a new release.
After several years of TextMate, I recently switched to Sublime Text (http://www.sublimetext.com/). It's more or less TextMate 2: same philosophy and aesthetic, same bundles, much better performance, split panes, lots of nice features. Sublime makes we want to write and code more.
MacroMates totally dropped the ball. What a shame. Everybody was suing TextMate, everyone was talking about it a few years ago, and they didn't capitalise on that.
"Intangibles are the most honest merchandise anyone can sell. They are always worth whatever you are willing to pay for them and they never wear out." -- Heinlein, "The Man Who Sold the Moon"
Think so? It's not a word and doesn't mean anything to me. I can't imagine having to tell it to someone in person. Anytime you have to specifically spell out your startup url, I think it's a problem.
Interesting. Seems lots of similar companies doing this. Appcelerator / Sencha come to mind as I work with their products. Sencha seems to have the same arrangement as 10gen license wise (I think), yet they get massive amounts of shit since they started with BSD and then switched later to GPL (with commercial license for commercial apps).
I don't think there's really enough examples to prove this to be a viable business model just yet. These companies seem to be mainly living off VC funding, hoping to get a MySQL style exit at some point.
Hopefully I'm wrong though and they are able to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a company can build a lucrative business off an open source platform. Maybe there's enough examples out there (WordPress / others?) that it's already been proven.
CoffeeScript "fixes" javascript in many very essential ways. The most important fix is the lack of global variables. It's all too easy to accidentally forget a var on an assignment and all of a sudden you get a global variable that can cause havok. CoffeeScript handles variable scoping extremely well, and if you need a global, you can use the more explicit: window.var = ....
Also it's class system and function binding (=>) is something I feel I can no longer live without.
I don't know any thing about CoffeeScript, but static analysis tools like the Google Closure Compiler can help you take care of global variable problems and a whole lot more. Using Closure Compiler, you are forced to document your code with their enhanced version of jsDocs, so CC will make sure that if your method returns null or a list of strings, that anywhere that method is used, you don't try to treat the returned value as a string or object, for instance.
How does coffee script play with existing object oriented JS libraries? Is there compile-time type checking?
I always thought it would be cool if CoffeeScript's generated JS code added Closure Compiler annotations, such as @const and @param types. Let the user minify/optimize the generated JS using their favorite tools.
Thanks! I hadn't seen this "UberScript" before, though I was kinda hoping the Closure annotations could be inferred "for free" without changes to the CoffeeScript language. <:)
The golden rule of CoffeeScript is: "It's just JavaScript". The code compiles one-to-one into the equivalent JS, and there is no interpretation at runtime.http://coffeescript.org
I agree with your assertion to not use your framework. Believe it or not, having an open and active user base of your framework will help you and all members. Doesn't seem like you are attempting to start things off on a very good note.
I think you got him wrong. We've been at this for some time now and did some heavy development on this. Sometimes a person comes in and comments with a single line like "I WANT MORE NAMESPACES" and seems to assume that we picked our current setup without giving it a second thought. When someone comes around and all they can say is something as unmotivated and useless as that we won't have a lot of time for the assumption we didn't think of it.
If you completely disagree that's fine, move on to something else then - no hard feelings either way I hope. Just don't assume we just created this at random. Dan's remark was spot on, we chose the way we handle namespaces and autoloading very deliberately and we'll take the time to explain our motivations if you ask. But if you come in telling us that our setup sucks because we should be all-something because product X has that as well: don't expect we'll spend any time on you. There are lots of others with a more open-minded approach whom our time is far better spent on, and of course especially those actively helping out being the community you refer to.
If you try to make your software perfect for everyone, then all you will create is a muddled mess. It's a good thing to acknowledge that some people are your audience and other people aren't.
I mean, if you were developing a new social network site, would you try to seed it with the Amish?
These guys produce an entire awesome startup's worth of development every couple months. Definitely need to be paying more attention to the how of what they do. Luckily Tom's quite the excellent speaker and writer. When he talks, I listen.
I agree. As soon as I can afford to, I am doing the same. This is definitely a service, that I don't necessarily use a lot now, but if they went away I think the industry would suffer for it.
Everything they do inspires me to continue pressing on.
I don't totally agree with the "almost nothing". I was already using them for all my project and it was just enough for me. The second you have labels, you can mostly do any arbitrary complex structures.. But yeah, for medium to big project, that would not have been enough. Now with the new issues system, it might work.
Scott Chacon is also excellent in this area. He was a Codemash keynote presenter in January of this year. He talked specifically on how GitHub is organized, how they decide what to build next and how they get those things done.
Pretty awesome. It took a restart to get it to work, but it's great now.
As a minor aside, is there a way to get Chrome to treat .dev domain the same as .com? Whenever I type in my .dev app name, it tries to google search for it.
In the meantime, you can access a new app the first time by entering http://myapp.dev (including the http://). Looks like after that, Chrome treats myapp.dev as desired.
Having fought LinkedIn's APIs and dealt with their crappy developer support, I'd like to give a very big warning to anyone who might be thinking about using their platform.
1) Their terms of use is unbelievably narrow. They own everything, and it's up to their discretion whether they think you are a competitor and can shut of your data access
2) Took them forever to get SSL support for their widgets. Despite tons of dev requests for it, they seemed to actively fight against it. Really friggin bizarre.
1) The goal is to enable great apps that don't damage our ecosystem. This creates a healthy environment where everyone is happy and wants to continue investment.
If we didn't want people to build apps, we never would have launched a platform. If we're shutting people off for no good reason, it is a waste of our time and yours. But we would be foolish not let us protect ourselves from people actively causing harm.
2) There was a reason the platform was labeled as "Early Access" before today: there were key pieces missing, such as SSL support.
We always wanted to have SSL, but it was later on the roadmap than shipping code that worked over HTTP. SSL isn't trivial when using a CDN. It's not an unsolved problem, but we wanted to do it in a solid fashion, and that took time when balanced with other features we were building.
I have also built for the LinkedIn API. The TOS is very unnerving and I personally wouldn't build any kind of business on it. LinkedIn has a lot of good data but they own it, and developers have to come to terms with that. I think LinkedIn rests on a gold mine of business intelligence data that they are using much too lightly.
This is probably exactly why they act the way they do: they know the data is a goldmine and they want to protect that resource. Create a very narrow TOS and await ideas from the developer community such that they get a good idea of what to build on that data in the future.
1) It is funny you say this, because that is how most platforms are. Look at Apple, Twitter or Microsoft. Not to say your warning isn't justified, but it is part of the game that is played when dealing with 3rd party platforms. They introduce them to bolster their own networks, and if they don't like what you are doing, or feel that you are competition, they will force you out one way or another.
To be fair, some of these APIs expose data sets and user bases that we couldn't have dreamed of accessing ten years ago. It sucks when we get locked out by the API provider, but the availability of these APIs has transformed what a single developer or small team can create.
I can empathize with the frustration, but it definitely makes sense for LinkedIn. Unlike Facebook (which also has difficulties for development), LinkedIn has many monetization strategies besides advertising. They must be strategically very careful not to let anyone else monetize their professional network graph.
They are only opening up in response to Facebook and to attract more people to the site.
I'm actually surprised anyone wants the job.