search

unhosted / website

Website of the Unhosted project
unhosted.org
67 stars 27 forks source link

return an 'overview' summary landing page like the previous version had. #27

Closed silverbucket closed 11 years ago

silverbucket commented 11 years ago

We used to have a very nice summary landing page. A brief description of the unhosted concept, as well as links to the core projects, etc. It was very effective as a starting point, and introduction, for people who were new to the idea. Right now we have no information at all, just a picture and some links. I imagine this is extremely unhelpful for someone wanting to know what all this "unhosted stuff" is about.

Can we get the landing page updated to something similar to what we had before?

nilclass commented 11 years ago

+1

silverbucket commented 11 years ago

tagging @michielbdejong just to make sure he gets this.

michielbdejong commented 11 years ago

hm, my idea for doing it the way it is now, was that unhosted.org = "all this unhosted stuff" = remotestorage [+ sockethub] + apps + adventures + unconference. the first episode of adventures explains what an unhosted web app is, what a personal server is, and why you should develop unhosted web apps that use remotestorage and sockethub. but i agree that this is a lot of text to read on a first visit, so we need a shorter intro before that.

i also agree that the first click is now in a way "wasted" because you always have to click twice before you get somewhere. so yeah, i'll move it around a bit to optimize for the "first hit" experience. i also asked Nick to set up the sockethub.org website so we can add the link to that on there, so i'll probably do a sort of 'episode 0' which has:

and then already show the sidebar on the left so you can jump straight to more in-depth episodes about specific topics.

i'll add a comment on this issue when i stage this, so you guys can check it out and give feedback before i update it

jancborchardt commented 11 years ago

The main problem is that previously it had a nice appealing design and very little text, concise points of what everything is about. Now it looks very bare and technical and contains walls of texts which are likely only read by previously interested people but will probably not spark interest – because the gist isn’t quickly visible.

As talked about before, it would be cool if unhosted.org can be changed back to Javi’s dark design as it previously was. You can go nuts on unhosted.org/blog and link that from the frontpage (just like remotestorage, sockethub, opentabs etc), but the entry page should be short and inviting.

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 3:56 PM, Michiel@unhosted notifications@github.comwrote:

hm, my idea for doing it the way it is now, was that unhosted.org = "all this unhosted stuff" = remotestorage [+ sockethub] + apps + adventures + unconference. the first episode of adventures explains what an unhosted web app is, what a personal server is, and why you should develop unhosted web apps that use remotestorage and sockethub. but i agree that this is a lot of text to read on a first visit, so we need a shorter intro before that.

i also agree that the first click is now in a way "wasted" because you always have to click twice before you get somewhere. so yeah, i'll move it around a bit to optimize for the "first hit" experience. i also asked Nick to set up the sockethub.org website so we can add the link to that on there, so i'll probably do a sort of 'episode 0' which has:

and then already show the sidebar on the left so you can jump straight to more in-depth episodes about specific topics.

i'll add a comment on this issue when i stage this, so you guys can check it out and give feedback before i update it

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/unhosted/website/issues/27#issuecomment-12785181.

michielbdejong commented 11 years ago

i have no way to use the 'dark design' css for the current content. for starters, we now want the header to say 'unhosted web apps' instead of 'unhosted', so that doesn't fit into that design. also the twitter box at the bottom doesn't really work for the current stage of the project, and the advantages box is now basically what is the front page of remotestorage.io (because they are mainly advantages of remotestorage). so if you take those 3 things out of the dark design, then there is so little left that it doesn't make sense anymore.

i also discussed this with @skddc a few weeks ago, and he suggested to first write the copy without worrying too much about css, and then see how we can make the design more appealing. @edokoa is very busy these days with other projects i think, but we can try to build something ourselves. i'll give it a first start today or tomorrow.

edokoa commented 11 years ago

Yep, I'm really busy.

If you want I can give you directions on style / usability when you have something figured out. I'd not say that I can help further as I'm already 120% of capacity.

Javi

On Jan 28, 2013, at 4:15 PM, "Michiel@unhosted" notifications@github.com wrote:

i also discussed this with @skddc a few weeks ago, and he suggested to first write the copy without worrying too much about css, and then see how we can make the design more appealing. @edokoa is very busy these days with other projects i think, but

raucao commented 11 years ago

Yes, I'd still suggest thinking about and defining the what first, and the how later, because a prettier layout doesn't make "let's just link people to a bunch of stuff" a more convincing argument by itself. Also, I agree with @michielbdejong that when you take away both redundant and outdated content, there isn't much left that makes it better than just the plain page there is now.

Maybe let's start an Etherpad and just throw in all our ideas?

michielbdejong commented 11 years ago

@skddc sure! my idea is what i pasted above, you can use that as a starting point for the etherpad

silverbucket commented 11 years ago

I don't think that just because something describes a project that we shouldn't use it to help people understand what the basic concept of unhosted is. So what if later on the info is redundant. The purpose of the landing page is to convey a concept, not avoid duplicating text.

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Michiel@unhosted notifications@github.comwrote:

@skddc https://github.com/skddc sure! my idea is what i pasted above, you can use that as a starting point for the etherpad

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/unhosted/website/issues/27#issuecomment-12788777.

edokoa commented 11 years ago

From my past experience I'd say that the concept is not so easy to grasp unless you explain it in an "easy way".

You should not duplicate content, but I always advocated that having a simple scheme that depicts the project as a header in the index would be really useful.

My 2 cents.

Javi

On Jan 28, 2013, at 5:32 PM, Nick Jennings notifications@github.com wrote:

I don't think that just because something describes a project that we shouldn't use it to help people understand what the basic concept of unhosted is. So what if later on the info is redundant. The purpose of the landing page is to convey a concept, not avoid duplicating text.

On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 5:03 PM, Michiel@unhosted notifications@github.comwrote:

@skddc https://github.com/skddc sure! my idea is what i pasted above, you can use that as a starting point for the etherpad

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/unhosted/website/issues/27#issuecomment-12788777.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

michielbdejong commented 11 years ago

oh right, the ML and irc links were missing from https://unhosted.org/index-proposal.html . i added a 'forum' link now.

@silverbucket so the brief description is there now; instead of a list of core projects i did the list of tools, which is a subtle but important presentation difference. i will push /index-proposal.html live tomorrow; can you check if that resolves your issue? do you think we need a scheme as @edokoa suggests? anything else you think can still be improved?

silverbucket commented 11 years ago

I'm not sure it addresses what people have said they miss from the old site

I liked the old description/synopsis, and I also like the 'five reasons to develop unhosted web apps' part of the main page, I don't understand why that needs to go..

In addition, I think parts from the manifesto are pretty informative, specifically the section named 'free technology of the people' - is it being dropped all-together?

You've added more links on the main page, but you haven't really added any content aside from the very very brief little bit of text. The issue we have, which was why I filed this bug, is that the landing page simply isn't informative enough and fails at giving people an overview of the project. I still think this is the case.

It's empty looking, pretty uninformative, and feels like a splash screen, also it just doesn't seem as interesting as the old one did.

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 2:05 PM, Michiel@unhosted notifications@github.comwrote:

oh right, the ML and irc links were missing from https://unhosted.org/index-proposal.html . i added a 'forum' link now.

@silverbucket https://github.com/silverbucket so the brief description is there now; instead of a list of core projects i did the list of tools, which is a subtle but important presentation difference. i will push /index-proposal.html live tomorrow; can you check if that resolves your issue? do you think we need a scheme as @edokoahttps://github.com/edokoasuggests? anything else you think can still be improved?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/unhosted/website/issues/27#issuecomment-13075916.

michielbdejong commented 11 years ago

ok, so let's add the 'How does it work?' section from https://unhosted.org/flyer.html to remedy:

no longer a good overview of the concepts behind unhosted [web apps]. I think the new description is a little vague, and still very brief"

and then mention the following advantages of unhosted web apps:

the 'data freedom' point on https://unhosted.org/index-removed.html only applies to remotestorage, and is mentioned on http://remotestorage.io/ as 'compatibility is king'.

would that do the trick? anything else?

silverbucket commented 11 years ago

Seems like that will help, although, what do you mean by 'web apps compared to native apps' by native apps I assume you mean non-web apps (desktop apps), but don't understand how that has anything to do with 'technology free from control by a greedy superpower platform', seems almost like a non sequitur, and isn't not actually true since there are many open-source operating systems and native apps.

Might make sense to just leave that all out all together, and just dfocus on the unhosted web apps vs hosted web apps - those are good points.

On Mon, Feb 4, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Michiel@unhosted notifications@github.comwrote:

ok, so let's add the 'How does it work?' section from https://unhosted.org/flyer.html to remedy:

no longer a good overview of the concepts behind unhosted [web apps].

I think the new description is a little vague, and still very brief"

and then mention the following advantages of unhosted web apps:

  • web apps compared to native apps:
    • technology free from control by a greedy superpower platform
    • unhosted web apps compared to hosted web apps:
    • choice of server provider not determined by choice of app provider (was: 'more privacy')
    • the app provider no longer gets to see your data by default. (was: 'more privacy')
    • cheaper to publish
    • easy mirroring for resilience (was: decentralization)
    • infinite scalability the 'data freedom' point on https://unhosted.org/index-removed.html only applies to remotestorage, and is mentioned on http://remotestorage.io/ as 'compatibility is king'.

would that do the trick? anything else?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/unhosted/website/issues/27#issuecomment-13081841.

michielbdejong commented 11 years ago

no, i meant smartphone apps and platform apps. on /index-removed.html we had:

Most importantly, unlike Apple/iOS, Flash, and Facebook apps, the web platform
is open and free: controlled by you and not by stockholders.

unhosted web apps apps the only good 'software freedom' way to publish apps like FarmVille, AngryBirds and WhatsApp. i think that deserves a mention?

silverbucket commented 11 years ago

Ah, I see - but it's important to be clear, and I don't think I agree with that point. In this case, a native app is simply an app that runs natively, there's no "crime" there in and of itself. It could be open-source, could even be unhosted (no server-side proprietary logic, no data stored on their server), so I don't think it's fair to target "native apps" as if they are all part of the problem as a group.

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 1:45 AM, Michiel@unhosted notifications@github.comwrote:

no, i meant smartphone apps and platform apps. on /index-removed.html we had:

Most importantly, unlike Apple/iOS, Flash, and Facebook apps, the web platform is open and free: controlled by you and not by stockholders.

unhosted web apps apps the only good 'software freedom' way to publish apps like FarmVille, AngryBirds and WhatsApp. i think that deserves a mention?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/unhosted/website/issues/27#issuecomment-13109016.

michielbdejong commented 11 years ago

FarmVille is a Facebook app. evil. AngryBirds is a Flash app. evil. WhatsApp is either an android app or an iOS app. Evil, evil, evil.

the fact that you don't see a crime in that only makes me realize more how important it is to emphasize the importance of open technology versus monopoly platforms.

It is not only about the freedom of users, also of app developers. Did you know Apple takes 30% off the revenue of apps they allow, and blocks apps according to their own business interests?

This would be OK if Apple's products were did not play such a vital role in the life of so many people. It is technology that is important to society itself, and it is being controlled by billionaires.

Also, creating Facebook apps makes people lock their data into Facebook. Likewise, creating iOS apps makes people lock their data into iCloud.

Native apps are at least as criminal as hosted apps. At least hosted web apps let people choose their device and their OS freely.

edokoa commented 11 years ago

Oh man this is beginning to sound like Westborough Baptist Church. People don't get a gun to their heads to make the choices they make regarding Apple and other systems. Like you don't get it to buy a Coke or Nike shoes.

Open technology is important and I agree and share it. I share my code and whatnot, but a person or system that wants to convert everyone, whatever the cost, to open source, open technology, Linux, you name it, comes out as annoying as a fundamentalist christian or an annoying vegan that criticizes your way of eating. (I am veg and still find this annoying)

And it's not the first time I say this in the Unhosted group. Stop demonizing other technologies and focus in what you can improve. The way is showing why Unhosted is better, not why other things are terrible and beat you in dark alleys.

Javi

Sent from my iPad

On 05.02.2013, at 09:58, "Michiel@unhosted" notifications@github.com wrote:

FarmVille is a Facebook app. evil. AngryBirds is a Flash app. evil. WhatsApp is either an android app or an iOS app. Evil, evil, evil.

the fact that you don't see a crime in that only makes me realize more how important it is to emphasize the importance of open technology versus monopoly platforms.

It is not only about the freedom of users, also of app developers. Did you know Apple takes 30% off the revenue of apps they allow, and blocks apps according to their own business interests?

This would be OK if Apple's products were did not play such a vital role in the life of so many people. It is technology that is important to society itself, and it is being controlled by billionaires.

Also, creating Facebook apps makes people lock their data into Facebook. Likewise, creating iOS apps makes people lock their data into iCloud.

Native apps are at least as criminal as hosted apps. At least hosted web apps let people choose their device and their OS freely.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

silverbucket commented 11 years ago

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Michiel@unhosted notifications@github.comwrote:

FarmVille is a Facebook app. evil. AngryBirds is a Flash app. evil. WhatsApp is either an android app or an iOS app. Evil, evil, evil.

the fact that you don't see a crime in that only makes me realize more how important it is to emphasize the importance of open technology versus monopoly platforms.

What I said is I don't see a crime in an app just because it's 'native'. That's the term you used (native app), which is why I brought this all up in the first place.

Vendor lock in is not good, but it's your choice to buy an iPhone, and our choice to create alternatives (FirefoxOS), it sounds pretty awful to make the argument that something is evil simply because the developer chose to write in Objective-C

You're also completely ignoring the fact that these apps may need to use the technologies they do simply because html5 does not perform adequately on mobile for these games. (especially when they were created).

It is not only about the freedom of users, also of app developers. Did you know Apple takes 30% off the revenue of apps they allow, and blocks apps according to their own business interests?

Yes, and I also know it's much easier for an open source app to make money using the Apple store than it is using the android store, or an open app store. Kind of one of the ironies of these closed app stores is that they generally lead to increased revenue for developers.

This would be OK if Apple's products were did not play such a vital role in

the life of so many people. It is technology that is important to society itself, and it is being controlled by billionaires.

This would be OK if Apple was not so successful?

Also, creating Facebook apps makes people lock their data into Facebook. Likewise, creating iOS apps makes people lock their data into iCloud.

Native apps are at least as criminal as hosted apps. At least hosted web apps let people choose their device and their OS freely.

I completely disagree with the term "native app" here. A native app is also something like Audacity or VLC. To say they are at least as evil/criminal as hosted apps, simply because they are not web-apps, comes off as complete hyperbole IMO.

silverbucket commented 11 years ago

amen!

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 10:32 AM, edokoa notifications@github.com wrote:

Oh man this is beginning to sound like Westborough Baptist Church. People don't get a gun to their heads to make the choices they make regarding Apple and other systems. Like you don't get it to buy a Coke or Nike shoes.

Open technology is important and I agree and share it. I share my code and whatnot, but a person or system that wants to convert everyone, whatever the cost, to open source, open technology, Linux, you name it, comes out as annoying as a fundamentalist christian or an annoying vegan that criticizes your way of eating. (I am veg and still find this annoying)

And it's not the first time I say this in the Unhosted group. Stop demonizing other technologies and focus in what you can improve. The way is showing why Unhosted is better, not why other things are terrible and beat you in dark alleys.

Javi

Sent from my iPad

On 05.02.2013, at 09:58, "Michiel@unhosted" notifications@github.com wrote:

FarmVille is a Facebook app. evil. AngryBirds is a Flash app. evil. WhatsApp is either an android app or an iOS app. Evil, evil, evil.

the fact that you don't see a crime in that only makes me realize more how important it is to emphasize the importance of open technology versus monopoly platforms.

It is not only about the freedom of users, also of app developers. Did you know Apple takes 30% off the revenue of apps they allow, and blocks apps according to their own business interests?

This would be OK if Apple's products were did not play such a vital role in the life of so many people. It is technology that is important to society itself, and it is being controlled by billionaires.

Also, creating Facebook apps makes people lock their data into Facebook. Likewise, creating iOS apps makes people lock their data into iCloud.

Native apps are at least as criminal as hosted apps. At least hosted web apps let people choose their device and their OS freely.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/unhosted/website/issues/27#issuecomment-13121309.

raucao commented 11 years ago

creating iOS apps makes people lock their data into iCloud

That is a ridiculous claim. Take e.g. the WordPress app. It's an open-source app connecting to your own WordPress instance in order to edit the content there. There's no reliance on any other backend or Apple server. And you could just as well build an app that uses remoteStorage.

I agree that vendor lock-in and closed platforms are a bad thing, but I'm completely with @edokoa and @silverbucket on this: please don't tell others that what they're using or doing is criminal and evil. A lot of decent people make a living as independent developers on these platforms, whereas the same cannot be said for every open-source platform (yet). The only result of being exclusive and aggressive towards anyone using proprietary technologies will be that you turn them off from your idea, no matter what it even is.

jancborchardt commented 11 years ago

Yeah, I thought we were clear on this: Bashing other technologies or platforms is not proper advertising, but whining. And oftentimes they are false accusations, which diminish your credibility.

If you want to convince people how cool and great your solution is, then do it by showing exactly that – and not by propagating how purportedly »evil« other products are.

michielbdejong commented 11 years ago

ok, so let's remove the double negative ("unlike native apps, not evil"), and phrase it as the corresponding positive statement:

unhosted web apps compared to hosted web apps:

    choice of server provider not determined by choice of app provider (was: 'more privacy')
    the app provider no longer gets to see your data by default. (was: 'more privacy')
    cheaper to publish
    easy mirroring for resilience (was: decentralization)
    infinite scalability
silverbucket commented 11 years ago

Much much better!

A few sentence fixes:

  1. you can distribute your app through anywhere ... you can distribute your app anywhere OR you can distribute your app through any app store (not sure what you were trying to say)
  2. (excluding Chrome packaged apps here for a moment) ... I assume you mean something like: (excluding Chrome packages, for the moment)

As an aside, whats the issue with chrome apps?

On Tue, Feb 5, 2013 at 2:57 PM, Michiel@unhosted notifications@github.comwrote:

ok, so let's remove the double negative ("unlike native apps, not evil"), and phrase it as the corresponding positive statement:

  • web apps work on any device, any manufacturer, any platform, any provider

  • you can distribute your app through anywhere (excluding Chrome

    packaged apps here for a moment)

    additionally, (see above)

    unhosted web apps compared to hosted web apps:

    choice of server provider not determined by choice of app provider (was: 'more privacy') the app provider no longer gets to see your data by default. (was: 'more privacy') cheaper to publish easy mirroring for resilience (was: decentralization) infinite scalability

    — Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/unhosted/website/issues/27#issuecomment-13130137.

michielbdejong commented 11 years ago

yeah, i meant both, sort of. through any existing app store, or you can even start your own app store if you feel like it, or distribute your app straight from your website. i'll write something up probably next week when i have some more time hopefully.

re Chrome, see https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/d/topic/chromium-apps/AZcMm413xww/discussion

silverbucket commented 11 years ago

If I understand correctly, then, Chrome packaged apps can be unhosted web apps. You just need to register then with Chromes App Store. No?

michielbdejong commented 11 years ago

yes. and not even Chromium allows you to configure any other app store than their one. not even in advanced settings.

the only exception is if you use Chromebooks as an enterprise IT solution, then you would configure your own intranet app store within your corporate VPN.

also, packaged apps lock content into a place that has no URLs, so you cannot link to in-app content from the outside, which is in a way bad in itself.

silverbucket commented 11 years ago

So, we can say that you are able to distribute your unhosted app in chrome, no?

michielbdejong commented 11 years ago

yes, but i would encourage people to host them themselves, and submit only the manifest, instead of packaging them as .crx, for the reasons mentioned.

silverbucket commented 11 years ago

On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 5:32 PM, Michiel@unhosted notifications@github.comwrote:

yes, but i would encourage people to host them themselves, and submit only the manifest, instead of packaging them as .crx, for the reasons mentioned.

What's the difference between hosting an app on 5apps, for example, and hosting it in the Chrome App Store? (aside from the absence of external reference via URLs)

michielbdejong commented 11 years ago

that's one thing, and the other thing is what was discussed in that link i pasted: Chrome allows you to install hosted apps from anywhere, but packaged apps only from the Chrome Web Store. and so by distributing packaged apps, you are tying your apps fate to one specific app store, which makes for a very fragile business decision.

silverbucket commented 11 years ago

On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Michiel@unhosted notifications@github.comwrote:

that's one thing, and the other thing is what was discussed in that link i pasted: Chrome allows you to install hosted apps from anywhere, but packaged apps only from the Chrome Web Store. and so by distributing packaged apps, you are tying your apps fate to one specific app store, which makes for a very fragile business decision.

Sorry if I'm being dense, but I don't understand what you mean here. I'm confused by your use of the word 'hosted' now. If your app is not hosted, it has no URL. Right? In this context, that's what you mean by 'hosted app' (an app that is hosted on a domain name) ? (A)

Using unhosted lingo, a hosted app is an app that uses proprietary back-end logic and data store, does not allow users access to their data. An app that is "hosted" on a domain name can still be "unhosted", (B) so... How is that determined via. Google? (or was I right in assuming you were using the term differently in this case?).

If by hosted you mean (A) then you can 'host' your unhosted app.

If by hosted you mean (B) then you need to package that up and distribute it in some form anyway, and that's the way it's done on 5apps.

Either way I don't see how the fate of your app is tied to one specific app store. You can distribute your app on any multitude of app stores you want.

The premise doesn't really connect for me, so I'm just trying to make sure I'm not missing a key element, so we can maybe rephrase and be clear, or remove that side-note altogether - as someone reading this on the unhosted page might get just as confused.

michielbdejong commented 11 years ago

yeah, sorry, it's confusing, i should have said a not-packaged app. to see the tied fate in action, try the 'install chrome app' on https://5apps.com/apps/50fa7613bc73cb253c000025

anyway, people were quite clear that we shouldn't talk about evil things other people do, so we won't mention this anyway.

i will just prepare the overview pages as discussed, and not talk about any of these evilness issues.

michielbdejong commented 11 years ago

staged: https://unhosted.org/staging/

this is where you say i cannot reprimand the Chrome platform in that way ;)

silverbucket commented 11 years ago

On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 8:07 AM, Michiel@unhosted notifications@github.comwrote:

staged: https://unhosted.org/staging/

this is where you say i cannot reprimand the Chrome platform in that way ;)

It's not that you cannot reprimand Chrome, it's that the phrase does not make any sense, which is why I was asking about it in the first place. Why on earth would the fact that I use Chrome mean I can't run an unhosted web app store? It just sounds like troll bait to me :P

need to re-read the front page a few times, so more comments later. first impression is it doesn't read nearly as well as the old one. the language is a little tricky, and i think overall it's still confusing for a new user

interested to hear what others think.

michielbdejong commented 11 years ago

Why on earth would the fact that I use Chrome mean I can't run an unhosted web app store?

you could run an app store but then you couldn't install packaged apps from it, so in theory you could do it, but it would make you a bit of a vegetarian butcher. i rephrased it to:

anybody can run an unhosted web app store (with only the minor regrettable exception of Chrome packaged apps)

sorry to hear the language is tricky, open to rephrasing suggestions!

michielbdejong commented 11 years ago

ok, i also fixed some more typos in all the blogposts. will push the ubiquitous nav and the new front page live tomorrow, after that people can propose further improvements incrementally.

raucao commented 9 years ago

FYI: removed a spam comment.