Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | troupo's commentslogin

From "Safari 15 on Mac OS, a user interface mess" https://morrick.me/archives/9368 from 5 years ago:

--- start quote ---

The utter user-interface butchery happening to Safari on the Mac is once again the work of people who put iOS first. People who by now think in iOS terms. People who view the venerable Mac OS user interface as an older person whose traits must be experimented upon, plastic surgery after plastic surgery, until this person looks younger. Unfortunately the effect is more like this person ends up looking… weird.

These people look at the Mac’s UI and (that’s the impression, at least) don’t really understand it. Its foundations come from a past that almost seems inscrutable to them. Usability cues and features are all wrinkles to them. iOS and iPadOS don’t have these strange wrinkles, they muse. We must hide them. We’ll make this spectacular facelift and we’ll hide them, one by one. Mac OS will look as young (and foolish, cough) as iOS!

--- end quote ---

At the time it was only Safari that they wanted to "modernize". Now it's the full OS.


I've yet to have a day when CachyOS can come out of sleep: hangs at various steps and requires a hard reboot that somehow relaunches apps on login that I explicitly closed hours ago.

I had the same problem with Fedora which is part of what prompted me to switch. It works great for me in Cachy. I assume either way it was an Nvidia problem.

Yup, I have Nvidia :)

Interestingly enough, I didn't have the same issue with Omarchy/Hyprland. Hyprland doesn't have even the most rudimentary ability to restore windows but it was almost rock solid when it came to coming out of sleep.

Still searching for that one true Linux distribution :) Will stay on Cachy for now because gaming is so much better.


erm, no? React has painted itself into a usability and optimisation nightmare corner by insisting that components are the most granular level of resctivity.

That's why they need 20 different hooks to do anything.

You want signals in the browser for granular reactivity, and they are making their way there: https://github.com/tc39/proposal-signals


You're probably confusing something with something?

CSS Modules are a JS-only third party solution re-invented/re-implemented in a dozen different ways for various JS frontend frameworks. Requires setting up, requires learning an additional library.

If you mean these CSS modules: https://github.com/css-modules/css-modules?tab=readme-ov-fil... then they need to be supported by whatever build chain you use. And you literally need to use them slightly different than normal CSS. E.g. for Vite yuo need to have `.module.css` extension. And they often rely on additional libraries to learn. E.g. you can enable Lightning CSS with aforementioned Vite which comes with its own CSS flavour: https://lightningcss.dev/css-modules.html

If you mean CSS import attributes, they only appeared in 2024 in Chrome and Firefox, early 2025 in mobile Android etc. and they don't provide magical local scoping out of the box: https://caniuse.com/wf-css-modules


I meant the CSS modules that are implemented by a build tool. And yes, mea culpa, they are probably a js-only solution, requiring a build tool to correctly interpret a css import (.module.css in the file name is a common convention; but it is tweakable), and the author to use the imported object instead of plain strings, when referring to the class names. But I don't know if having to write `class="styles.foo"` as opposed to `class="foo"` counts as learning. And apart from that, there isn't anything else to learn.

But, given that one would need build tools for tailwind as well, the requirement for build tools couldn't have played a role in the choice between the two.


The problem is having to look in a different file for styling a component, and having to come up with a name for (at least one) CSS class per component. In traditional CSS, classes are intended to be reusable. You write a class definition once, and then use it in a bunch of different elements.

When working with a component-based UI (like in React), the components are typically the unit of reuse. Those CSS classes are used in one place: the component they're defined for. It's annoying to have to come up with a name for them, and to have to work in a separate file, especially if I just want `padding-inline: 4px` or `display: flex`.

Some argue separation of concerns, but CSS is inherently tightly coupled to the structure of your HTML: there's no getting around that. `.foo > ul` breaks if you replace that `ul` child with an `ol`.

I do agree that more intricate styling is harder to read with Tailwind, and I have some other gripes, too, but in general it's a good trade-off for component-based UIs.


Well no, none of them ?

This is what OP was talking about:

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/CSS/Guides/Nest...



Ignore it then, CSS nesting and layers are the real deal

Nesting is the bee's knees.

I still don't understand what layering is, and why you would use it.


> CSS Modules are a JS-only third party solution re-invented/re-implemented in a dozen different ways for various JS frontend frameworks. Requires setting up, requires learning an additional library.

I mean, Tailwind is not that different here - you must use a build tool to tree shake the styles, etc.


If your book reproduces something 95% verbatim, you won't even be able to publish it.

Exactly. We assess plagiarism by checking the output (the book), not the input (how many book I’ve read before). It’s not an issue to train LLM on copyrighted resources if their output is randomized enough.

> You'll find that there are some upsides to all the regulation, but also many downsides.

And those are?

> Many things you take for granted - don't even think about - either don't work at all, or don't work well.

And those are?


Time is finite.

I could spend that time tinkering with the internals of an ad-hoc informal system cobbled together in the 1970s and held together by spit and glue.

Or I could just not do that.

Also, the implication that fiddling with shell scripts is somehow a better engineering/programming practice than web programming is laughable at best.


> non-Europeans to deal with all the anti-business regulations.

These are not "anti-business regulations".


100k per month per person is over 1 million a year.

So 2 million per year barely gets you two people.


100k per year.

At 100k per person per month it's 400k per month (the actual cost is higher. 100k in salary is easily 150k with all the taxes included).

Times that by 12...


100k/mo is off by an order of magnitude.

I’m sure some lucky people are raking in 1.2M p.a., but doubt the tailwind devs were.


Kudos to them afaik they were trying to pay their people well. I think they were paying more than 100k/year. I remember they had open position for double that.

Sure, but even 200k/year is an order of magnitude less than 1.2mil/year (which is what the great-grandparent comment claimed, given their 100k/mo estimate).

100k a month?? Well there's yer problem lmao

My brain farted :)

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: