benharrison

For a few years now I have been using PHP as a thin-client UI layer on top of C# Web API (dotnet core) projects running on Ubuntu/Docker. In my experience this has worked out very well, and has been easy to separate the areas of responsibility between Software Engineers and Designers.

All of our sophistication and unit tests live inside the C# back-end projects. While the PHP in the UI layer is limited to very simple code like for loops and templating; otherwise they're mostly design projects centered around HTML/CSS/UI/UX. Keeping it so simple makes it rather easy for designers to pick up on and work with.

I started a small website to document this pattern:

http://rapstack.io

I have advocated for its use on most of my projects, but obviously the mere mention of PHP stirs up a lot of knee-jerk reactions.

Location: Bristol, VA

Remote: Yes

Willing to relocate: No

Technologies: Python, C#, Java, Angular, jQuery, Bootstrap, Docker, Vagrant, Ansible, et al

Resume: https://stackoverflow.com/cv/benharrison

Homepage: http://benharrison.cc

Email: bharrison912@gmail.com

Portfolio: http://benharrison.cc/portfolio

Good point. I've never actually worked with gtk+, but I have worked with windows forms development for desktop apps. I thought it was a really good approach for building a windows desktop applications, but I create all web-based UIs in a code editor.

I suppose if there was only one browser to target, then we might actually see more use of a GUI editor. Kind of how FrontPage was for IE a long time ago.

I completely agree with the learning curve. I often think it's just as hard, if not harder, to learn a new tool than it is to learn a new programming concept. You have to re-train your brain to think the way the creators of the tool approach problem solving (assuming their approach is actually good). If you're not already like-minded, then this is incredibly counterproductive.

There's so much flexibility that allows for creativity when you just understand the code. In fact, I've been doing what I consider to be "designing in the browser" for years. Which is using Photoshop to get started, pick colors, etc, then utilizing developer tools for much of the refinement during the implementation phase. This is the closest thing I've ever found to a good "GUI editor".

I get what you're saying; that these characteristics are not mutually necessary. And I agree with you.

As for the other question, I suppose you could separate those characteristics as well. For a moment, let's ignore the Bible and focus on an abstract concept of "God". It is possible to be good, and not be God. It is also possible to be God, and not be good. And in that case, we don't have to redefine the word "good" to mean (a bad) God, just because he is "God". So yes, ultimately these are independent concepts that are not mutually necessary.

"Are people saying he's a great person because he's god"?

Jesus is described in the Bible as being a man that lived a sinless life. That's where the "good person" description comes from. He was tempted just the same as any of us are, and he could have given into any of those temptations. According to the Bible that didn't happen, but if it did, it leads right back to your original point: he could have theoretically been God and simultaneously not have been good. The problem with that (not the problem with your logic, but the problem with him being an impure God) is he would no longer be an innocent sacrifice and his whole mission falls apart.

You're logic is correct, but it's not the great teacher part that is in question. The part that is always in question is about whether or not he is really God.

Take that same analogy and replace "great teacher" with "great person". If Jesus told people that he is God, and convinced them to put their trust in him, but he happens to be wrong about being God (regardless of whether that's an intentional lie or an honest delusion), then it really isn't fair to say that he's a "great person". It would be more accurate to characterize his morality in leading people astray similar to the likes of Hitler and L. Ron Hubbard.

This.

Here are a couple of my favorites:

http://okaysamurai.com/portfolio/okaydave2006.html - It was built in Flash over 10 years ago, but the skill and creativity behind it is a force that is absolutely still relevant today.

http://shauninman.com/pendium/

You're right, the logos really aren't good. But to give him credit he did say "I have a bit of a designer inside me. Not a lot. Just a bit."

I appreciate a developer who knows enough about design, even if their own design talent isn't very strong, to recognize quality and the efforts put in by other designers.

I really like this. I think it would be neat to see a discrete help button or toggle switch, that allows novice users to go into a help mode overlayed on top of a live web app.

I love this idea, but I was thinking the same thing about the arrows. They feel backwards to me.

I couldn't agree more with the statement that "UX is not UI". I consider myself to be pretty skilled at UI design, but I often find that other developers (with no graphic design talent) are just as good, if not better, at UX than I am. I don't see why these always have to go hand-in-hand. The 'Photoshop guy' always seems to be assumed to be the resident UX expert.

In my personal experience the Internet and technology changed way more from 92-02 than it did from 02-12. In '02 I had already had broadband for the past 3 years, and so did many of my non-technical friends. I even remember some of them having multiple computers in their home; a family computer, computers in the bedrooms, etc. Everybody used Internet Explorer 5 or 6, and those who were more technically savvy also used ad-aware (or something similar).

The biggest differences in my opinion (aside from smart phones) is the impact of social media and the abundance of streaming video/music that's available today. In '02 it seemed everyone used AIM or Hotmail with an obscure screen name. Now people are open with their real identities, and it's easy to find acquaintances through friend's "friends lists". Also we have Netflix, Pandora, Spotify, WatchESPN, etc, that just wasn't available 10 years ago.

I think a great feature for this would be a map to visualize the results in your area.

I disagree. The layout seems really tight, and hard to separate content from navigation and advertisements.

In my opinion the ads and donate button make this site feel insincere and possibly even spammy. What is the author's motivation? To make a positive influence and educate, or to gain traffic and make a profit?

There are already trust issues that many people have with w3schools. If I wanted to use this site as a reference or recommend it to others I'd like to have the confidence that quality, accuracy, and reputation are the highest priority. If the author is going to try to monetize this site, great! I just think it would be a lot more effective to tastefully tweak the layout to make a cleaner distinction between content, advertisements, and navigation.

It seems that the fees have changed. In the article she says shopify keeps 20%. On their site it says:

"You will receive 50% of the profits. You will receive 70% (an additional 20%) of each sale if you agree to provide full support for your theme."

What I have always found a little awkward is the use of 'a' or 'an' when written in a sentence. For example "..run a SQL query.." versus "..run an SQL query..". The spelling is the same, but the author's pronunciation can differ.

My Dad purchased his first computer when I was 10. I learned a tremendous amount from my experiences with it, and for that I've always considered myself fortunate. My parents didn't have a lot of money, but they were able to afford a computer and they loved me enough to encourage my interests in it. So in that regard I definitely feel privileged.

Growing up I knew of a few kids who were just as interested in computers but weren't as lucky. They had all the potential in the world, but lacked the same opportunities I had. I was always aware of my "privilege", so I've felt it important over the years to help out in community computer labs and to help deserving kids by giving them older computers when I would get my hands on them.

But that said, I've also known plenty of 'privileged' kids with access to technology at their disposal but had no interest, or took no initiative to learn advanced concepts. For instance, my brothers didn't have the same interest in computers as I did. They were into other things, even though they had just as much access to our parent's computers as me.

I believe the most important factors for developing strong skills in computers (or anything else for that matter) is desire, effort, and dedication. These things don't have a price tag, and are not limited to certain groups of individuals.

I'm a fan of Jesse BC (http://31three.com/portfolio). His designs are always top-notch IMO.

Some examples are: http://www.campaignmonitor.com http://expressionengine.com