The first thing I did was start making the word 'FUCK' with the pieces. As soon as others cottoned on and joined in, it was a very heart warming experience.
Its another saas product charging per seat per month, doesnt even begin to replace an actual competent developer, it’s glorified autocomplete. If it goes any higher than 20-30 bucks, I’ll have my company drop it.
20-30 bucks doesn't even begin to replace an actual competent developer's salary either, even in a super low wage country. Especially factoring in overhead.
In fact I imagine that in most places this would pay for 1 hour of their time. Which you pay per month for copilot.
So the question is not how many developers you save. But if you save more than one hour per month per developer.
There are a lot of non US people in HN. I’m European and it’s not just unavailable, you can’t even access the App Store page so no screenshots, no description, no teasing.
However, I’m not an app developer and because you are far from alone, I always wondered why it is useful to limit your audience to US only?
I limited to US & Canada only because the text in the app is only in English. I have to setup localization in order to get it properly translated for countries where English is not a primary language. I do plan to add support this in the future, but can't give an exact estimate right now.
You’re on HN. Everyone here understands English to a degree. It is very common for people in countries where English is not the primary language to be able to speak it fluently.
You just presented your app to a bunch of people who can’t see it and who will never bother to give it a second look. In other words, you’re losing a significant number of potential customers for no gain. Those people will in turn not upvote this submission, further restricting your reach even to those who can use it.
Waiting for doing localisation before launching to other countries is the first big mistake. The second is, as long as you’re restricting the audience, not having a website where other people can see the app to give them a reason to check back later.
Plenty of apps are available in English outside the anglosphere. Seems like a US-centric oversight not releasing it to “the rest of the world” as usual.
Matthew 23 applies: "Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, 'The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Mose's seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice.'"
It gets better from there on, the whole chapter is hilarious.
He's saying you're an extreme edge case that's <0.01% of the population and shouldn't expect gargantuan corps to cater for your edge case as it doesn't make financial sense.
I am sick of this "extreme edge case" bullshit when there is 20+ years of historical precedent. We did not go away and this shit did not come out of nowhere. The tech is already there and its maintenance is minimal. Just because some young shits running the numbers in the bay area are obsessed with and surrounded by the latest and greatest doesn't mean the rest of the world marches to their bullshit drumbeat. Especially when we keep seeing the things we used to own turn into rentals.
Stop shitting on the long tail!
And fuckin stand up for your rights and privacy as a consumer!
No, but people not satisfied with what Spotify has are like a tiny percentage of non-mainstream music listeners (whether one can point to X major artist not being on Spotify does not really change that. Even if it still didn't have the Beatles most users could not care less).
It isn't about "major artists". Fuck them, their music universally sucks. It's about underground artists, unsigned, or anyone locked out the bullshit distribution model that is shoved down artists' and the public's throats. It is a very large community.
While I don’t use iTunes anymore and don’t plug my phone in to transfer, I’ve uploaded 400+ GB of Phish to Apple, and I’m able to download and stream it just as well as the latest Taylor Swift album. If I wanted to load my phone up with the whole catalog (still thinking about doing it), I’d probably plug my phone in. But I’m also more than happy to stream those shows and download my favorites. It really is my favorite service/product Apple offers full stop!
The plus side is that Google can develop Dart alongside the framework. This allows some nice things like excellent hot loading support, fast AOT compilation for release builds, a GC tuned for UI work, etc that would be harder or even impossible in a general purpose language with different goals.
It's also a pretty easy language to learn if you're already familiar with any other modern mainstream language.
Think of it the other way around: Dart was created for the sake of Flutter.
You seem to think that the framework designers at Google just decided to pick a niche language called Dart to write Flutter in when they could have picked Javascript to write Flutter in. No. They decided to make the design of Flutter as a framework so clean and pure that they would have to work backwards to figure out what language it would need to be written in and then they created Dart.
Dart pre-dates Flutter by a few years and had failed (a couple of times) as a web development language before Flutter chose to employ it. Would Dart be around today, outside of Google if not for Flutter? Seems unlikely.
Flutter indeed did decide to pick a niche language, albeit one that was used internally at Google. Tim Sneath discusses it on Software Engineering Radio:
As far as I know, Dart was created beforehand in order to "replace" Javascript. That did never work out, it never got any real traction, so Dart eventually stumbled around without any real purpose. Then Flutter came, used Dart (because they needed some language like JS, but not JS, and Dart was "there" and could be used because it was a Google product) and then Flutter started to gain traction, and so did Dart, but only as a side effect of Flutter now being the only real "user" of the language.
Heck, even the operating system could reproduce in some sense. If the operating system on one machine is set up to regard itself as DHCP server, it would begin responding to DHCP requests in the local network. And in the DHCP response it can provide network boot instructions telling other computers to network boot a copy of the OS image of itself that it is serving. Any other computer that is configured to net boot could then boot the OS. Of course most computers are not set up to net boot out of the box. But on a network where they use net boot already you might be able to race their own DHCP server and get some of the clients to boot your OS image instead.
Thanks! Actually, it looks like both spellings are acceptable, but "sycophant" is more common. Maybe using the less common spelling was a Freudian slip on my part...?
