I'm not saying that good design isn't important. And, frankly, I loved those little kwicks on the original Mootools.net as much as anyone. But when I compare it to the current MooTools site which is somewhat underspoken and the design for the new site which is also somewhat subdued, it doesn't bother me that there's not shit flying around the page just because we can. Anyone remember this<http://www.ericmmartin.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/jquery_homepage-500.jpg> ?
[image: jquery_homepage-500.jpg] When I talk about Apache's site it's not because I like it - I don't! - but rather to say that good community and good documentation and good code are about a billion times more important. The current MooTools site is simple, easy to find your way around, and easy to use. I agree it could use a little more information in places (the home page, imho, could feature some demos, featured sites, etc), but I disagree that MooTools.net needs to itself be a design showcase for the framework. On Thu, Sep 29, 2011 at 6:47 AM, RipTheJacker <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree with some of the others about the old, more flashy and > friendly, design. That's what initially brought me to using MooTools > over other frameworks out there. Apache is a poor example. Like > someone earlier said, that market is not the same as with MooTools. > Also, plenty of tools target toward developers have nice designs > anyway. Look at Nginx, or the Ruby community, or the website for our > President (which influenced better design in every other candidate's > site). Design is as important a tool to get your point across as > documentation. > > > On Sep 29, 2:48 am, Christoph Pojer <[email protected]> wrote: > > At this point I am convinced Aaron gets paid for all the lobbying he does > > for Apache. >
