fix(landing): try to pimp the landing page#57
fix(landing): try to pimp the landing page#57Geobert wants to merge 1 commit intocobalt-org:sourcefrom
Conversation
|
@epage : I feel there's an issue with this, isn't it? ^^' |
Well, I had some feedback but I also have been getting really far behind as well which is the bigger issue. |
epage
left a comment
epage
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for working to improve the site!
| <h3>Simple</h3> | ||
| <p>Cobalt will help you get up and running quickly but scales to handle | ||
| your more complex cases</p> | ||
| your more complex cases: multiple <b>collections</b>, <b>tagging</b>, <b>categories</b>…</p> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
multiple collections doesn't exist yet. I also feel like tagging and categories are too weak right now (without your index work) to really talk them up.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok, I'm gonna find something else and we'll add tags and categories once indexation for them are done :)
| <h3>Fast</h3> | ||
| <p>Written in Rust, Cobalt is blazing fast and allows you to quickly see | ||
| <p>Written in <b>Rust</b>, Cobalt is blazing fast even with | ||
| <b>sass</b> and <b>syntax highlighting</b>, and allows you to quickly see |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Again, can we really say it is fast? How is our sass and syntax highlighting compared to others? For example, I think both are relying on C libraries.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah this is quite arbitrary but it's what a landing page do :-/ I know you want to be honest, but I can't say that cobalt feels slow neither, it behaves pretty fast to me (until the indexation on tags which is slow in debug, as I said in cobalt-org/cobalt.rs#548). So we're not really lying. That's what marketing is about :-/
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Justifications don't need to be on the landing page but we should be able to back them up. Whenever I see a program get posted to Hacker News, or Proggit, it gets shredded by people if the numbers can't be backed up which can then hurt perception.
btw regarding justifications, I've been considering ideas for sharing more information on the claims
- Sections below the fold
- Provide details below when hover or select each claim
- link to pages with more detail
Whichever one we choose, it doesn't have to be in this PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Whenever I see a program get posted to Hacker News, or Proggit, it gets shredded by people if the numbers can't be backed up which can then hurt perception.
Oh, I didn't know that as I don't go there myself. I'll change that.
I think link to pages with more detail is clearer. Section below the fold will make the page too clutter, and on hover seems not really intuitive as there nothing to click, it's not natural to put the mouse hover.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think link to pages with more detail is clearer. Section below the fold will make the page too clutter, and on hover seems not really intuitive as there nothing to click, it's not natural to put the mouse hover.
And yet ive seen each of them on company websites :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
To be clear, Im not defending just finding it amusing the trends in site layout and their problems.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
And yet ive seen each of them on company websites :)
Since when a company website is a good practice ;-p
2 participants
No description provided.