- cross-posted to:
- permacomputing@slrpnk.net
- hackernews@derp.foo
- cross-posted to:
- permacomputing@slrpnk.net
- hackernews@derp.foo
cheap ≠ free Making nice things is difficult and time-consuming.
If we want people to make nice things for us, we have to pay for their rent and grocery bills and raw materials.
If you are spending less than $1 per hour on your entertainment (podcasts, videos, articles, games, books, etc.), consider finding ways to support creators and the infrastructure that supports them.
I disagree that it costs more to make things better.
In that page in particular, they had to put in effort to use a specific background, specific fonts, specific graphics, to make a page less readable, than if they’d just used some standard, basic page formatting.
But a clean, neat doc doesn’t make their point.
All that garbage at the top that looks like a jumbled mess, would’ve taken no effort whatsoever to not put in there. So they spent time and effort making the page worse.
It can cost more to make it more readable, more useful, or cost less. It all depends.
Sounds like the typical excuse making - blaming the tools instead of how they’re used. All websites don’t look the same, but many/most do look like shit and perform no better than a page in 1999 over dialup. That’s becuase the developers build garbage, not because the tools suck (not saying the tools don’t suck, or don’t have issues, but these are the tools you get when they grow organically as new ideas produce new capabilities).
There are good, even great pages out there. How then are those built if the tools don’t permit it?
I know that JS, CSS, and HTML aren’t perfect, but it feels like this person is throwing out the baby with the bathwater.
Yea,its a juvenile take. Something I thought when I was a teen. “Why didn’t they make it work like this?”, and then Dad would look at me and say something like “you have no idea what they were dealing with at the time”.
Mind, this was about electro-mechanical stuff, not programming.
He had so many tools that were modified conventional tools to make certain tasks easier, to compensate for change in devices that occurred faster than tools were developed.
Not any different than what developers and programmers (and anyone in IT) do.
It’s impossible to develop a set of tools today that perfectly fit every task people will think of tomorrow, using the tools they currently have. I’m impressed how oblivious OP is of this.