[PYTHON] Ideas worth stealing?

[james_b]

There's a link on Sean McGrath's web log [0] (well worth reading) to a
mock-up of an imagined Python home page [1]. As Sean describes it, the
design is "problem oriented." It presents Python as a product or tool
for solving problems, with targeted (though non-working) links for
different audiences.

Unlike many language or software home pages, it does not assume that a
visitor has already made a decision to use it; instead, it seems to make
an effort to sell the language to potential users.

It has a nice clean, crisp look, too.

Could the Ruby home page (or any other Ruby-related sites) do with a
redesign?


James Britt

[0] http://seanmcgrath.blogspot.com/
[1] http://www.pollenation.net/assets/public/python-main.html

 

[gabriele renzi]

There's a link on Sean McGrath's web log [0] (well worth reading) to a
mock-up of an imagined Python home page [1]. As Sean describes it, the
design is "problem oriented." It presents Python as a product or tool
for solving problems, with targeted (though non-working) links for
different audiences.

Unlike many language or software home pages, it does not assume that a
visitor has already made a decision to use it; instead, it seems to make
an effort to sell the language to potential users.

just my 2 cents:

I think that is really clever.

BTW, in the mainlines it resembles http://www.rebol.com , or
http://www.tcl.tk , java.sun.com etc..
I think that's worth noting:

- beginners' access
- news (releases, Conferences etc)
- articles and web-stuff (community aka wiki aka related websites)
- docs & downloads
- success stories and propaganda.

now, if you look at the actual ruby-lang.org you'll find:

- whats' ruby (~beginners)
- news about conferences and releases
- community links
- documntation and downloads links

now: where is the differnce?

1- we're not pushing 'success stories'
Possibly we could just add a random quote like python.org actually
does. I like this. It makes the casual reader think
'Hey that's not a toy!'
BTW I just took a look at RealWorlRuby and it's impressive how that
page has grown in the last months ^_^

2- Our homepage, is , possibly , too noisy.
There are more than 60 links! notice that this may appear
as a problem even in the real python website and in the tcl one.
On the opposite, take a look at http://www.eiffel.com

3- what's the point in having the 'Whats new' box? Are'nt this
news those in the main column ?

4- Why the duplication for the left column Download->Documentation
and Documentation->more ? Duplication is bad, you know..

5- the RAA-updates box communicates very little. Possibly we should
limit it to less entries, but with the complete short description.
Compare these:
rdindex: rdindex
ruby-gst: Ruby bindings for ..
ruby-gnome2: Ruby-GNOME2
ruby-dbi: Ruby/DBI

with this:
New Reblet: IOS Sharing Manager. A handy tool for IOS
administrators.



And obiouvly, having click&open menus/submenus would be a really cool
think and a really good usability enhancement

But probably, the point in all this is that the 'concept-art' is
always better than reality

PS
obviously I'd like to thank all the people that help to keep
ruby-lang.org updated and that spend time to make it work.

As usual, those that don't work, speak , and I'm a great speaker and a
bad worker

PPS
ruby-lang.org Powered by Ruby version 1.6.7 ???

 

[Ged]

This type of approach is probably good for Python now, at its stage of
its development. I'd argue that Ruby is not ready yet for this type
of pitch.

Eric Sink does a great job of explaining the life cycle of a technical
product, such as a programming language.

http://software.ericsink.com/Act_Your_Age.html

The key here is to recognise where the product currently is in its
life cycle.

In this model there are 4 groups: The early adopter, the pragmatist,
the conservatives and the laggards. Each group require a different
strategy.

To attract the early adopter you say 'Look, shiny new language. Brand
new, all the latest, coolest stuff.' The early adopter says 'Great,
there isn't a library for accessing databases yet. I can't wait to
write one.'

Ruby has succeeded here by being a truly object oriented, yet
practical, scripting language. Take two paradigms into the project
with me, no chance. Ruby does it all in one.

To get the pragmatists on side, you have to solve problems. You have
to say, this is new but it works. You have a problem and this is a
neat solution. The payoff is worth the risk and effort of using a new
language. The pragmatist says 'Oh, there isn't a database library in
the basic package. I need one of those, so I'll need to google for
it.'

I think this is the market that Ruby is now appealing to, and I think
the home page is pitched right. Clean and easy to navigate. All the
information I need to get going is accessible. Pragmatists (not just
the Pragmatic Programmers) are picking up on Ruby. This can be seen
by its use in "Code Generation in Action". Herrington bascially says
"we are using Ruby because it is the best tool for the job."

Python is now moving into the corporate world, and I home page like
this is going to reflect that. It looks like a corparate home page,
like Sun's. The corporate decision maker isn't necessarily
technically minded. He want's to know what the language will do for
him. What difference will it make to the bottom line?

If he were to read about Ruby in some trade paper, he might think it
looks good and then force it upon one of his techies. "Use this on
your next project" he demands. "I can't" responds his harrassed
programmer, "I'd doesn't seem to have a database library." "What",
sneers our manager, "type of micky mouse language is this!"

A few weeks later he is at the golf course and one of his friends
mentions he is considering using Ruby in his next project.
Thankfully, he is warned before any valuable time is wasted.

You only get on shot with the Conservatives, so you need to make sure
that your ready before you pitch your product to them.

Another interesting article is Joel Spolsky's " Good Software Takes
Ten Years. Get Used To it.
"

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000017.html

 

[james_b]

This type of approach is probably good for Python now, at its stage of
its development. I'd argue that Ruby is not ready yet for this type
of pitch.

Eric Sink does a great job of explaining the life cycle of a technical
product, such as a programming language.

http://software.ericsink.com/Act_Your_Age.html

Interesting, but way too generalized. It sems to presume that there's
a common, fixed-time formula for all computer-related technology, from
open-source langauges to complex corporate-backed products.

Image *is* important, and if you present yourself as targeting a
particular audience (e.g, pragmatists or early adopters) you may likely
be seen as being only suited for that audience.



James