Got shut down at the highest level. Like, definitively. As in, please don't ask again.

I don't think you'll ever see it as long as Tobi is CEO.

Maybe by the time I'm 70 I'll be talking to my computers, but still: why wreck my wrists?

Made me watch it twice. I'll be checking Antetype out for that alone.

He's presenting in the style of You Suck at Photoshop, a series of Photoshop videos in the same style.

Also, did you see the event? Not the same phone at all.

Wide color, awesome new camera and dropping it in the toilet might be enough.

It was a tough adjustment.

In my heart and mind, I _know_ I can do it, but then the doubts and fears rush in. I totally understand the feeling you're going through.

I just finished _Art & Fear_ by David Bayles and Ted Orland which is a fantastic book about creating stuff. Nearly all the advice applies to software developers.

Don't give up.

Success isn't binary either.

Release your project (Some success!). Make some sales (More success!). Market your project to get more sales (Success!).

You probably won't get fuck you money on the first day, but with enough marketing, maybe you'll be able to quit your job within the first year.

So I get how you might feel that way if you're in similar straits as the show.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11788525

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

A lot of comments in the thread are commenting that the developer should be able to slice up PSDs, but why not go further and be responsible for the design and interaction. It requires empathy for the user and, let's say 100 hours spent on understanding fonts, colour and layout.

The constraints of the platform should absolutely guide the design. Fight those constraints and the app will feel weird on the platform.

Most designers won't know the constraints of the platform, or won't care; they want to make a design that's unique and beautiful and all that. The client (or any human being) will look at the pretty pictures and love it. The eventual user of the software _won't care at all_.

Designers make pretty stuff that demos well. Those designs are usually a lot more work to pull off in code, though. In the middle of implementing those designs, all I'm thinking is, "What a waste of money. No user is going to care about this [animation|screen transition|custom look|beautiful settings screen]."

This applies to web and mobile and desktop apps.

Look at the apps you use everyday. They're probably boring to look at.

At the least, if you're in the client position, get a designer and developer together at the same time to hash out the app. You can probably get something that looks decent, works well and costs less.

Amen. And I'm a client developer. Clients aren't for data validation, etc. That's the server's job because the server has to store it, use it, ship it off to other things.

Clients are for displaying all that data in a way a human can understand. It has people skills, damn it!

Oh man, this.

Even richer is confusing usable with pretty. I guess nowadays people say "user experience" instead of usability, or the extremely unfortunate: UX.

Simple usually covers the very first prototype version, but then there are always requests for complicating the feature set so you can't have a simple interface anymore.

Joel Spolsky had a conference talk about this once (can't remember where I saw it). There is a tension between simplicity and power: some need simplicity; others, power. It's a spectrum. What developers and designers should strive for is elegance so that one can move along the spectrum without noticing it.

In Ottawa. We got audited for FY 2013. It was brutal. Took the entire FY 2014 to get our claim. We got it in full because of me explaining everything several times in front of the auditor. It's hard to do because you have to put everything into those specific terms that SR&ED qualifies: experimental development, systems uncertainty, blah blah blah

The man hours spent were not worth it. Nearly killed the company with the cash flow problems as OP mentioned.

Applied again for FY 2014, betting on not getting audited.

CEO asked around, found this runaround/hard audit was common for recent claims. We think it's one of those Harper government, we're-not-saying-there-is-cutback-but-there-is-a-cutback type things.

The use-it-all yearly price is cheaper, plus I can try their other IDEs. (Looking at you AppCode!)

Seems like a win to me. I heard about the change through the OP, which filled me with dread. Then I went to their website, which filled me with relief.

I've always found their IDEs worth the price.

I've had a similar idea, but for my kids. Arranging xmas with the grandparents is an administrative burden. It would be great to say, "Go here." Some possible things to add to the site: clothing sizes, so getting a present can be a COMPLETE surprise and it'll fit.

Found typo on the Unlock More Wishlist Spots prompt. "Firend"

Looks like you can make money off the companies entering products, too.

EDIT: You should tell people you're going to post something to their Facebook wall, though. I didn't appreciate that.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4229160

Points: 2

# Comments: 0