Just flat counter fields are terrible in audio software interfaces. Sliders and knobs give you visual feedback of where you are along a line and an easy way to quickly increase/decrease speed when adjusting.

Most software I use does still show some numeric value somewhere, either around the element when changing it, or in some other panel. This way you get some more information than in the hardware equivalent if you need more granular control. Its particularly nice if they allow you to click/double-click for editing values.

From my perspective as a user, knobs convey exactly what I need. Mostly I don't care about the exact number, just about what position something is in. Knobs behaving like sliders is fine. I'm not physically moving a knob, I might be moving it with a mouse or touchpad. You can't stray with a physical control the way you can with a digital one. And they allow interface designers to put a lot more information on screen where space is at a premium.

Honestly, just go download a trial version of something like Reaper or Reason and go make some music. You'll get a better feel.

Yes it would. People have no choice but to read college textbooks. They do have a choice when it comes to the usability of your site. You might not care, but you are not your users.

Oh, it opens a little toolbar with that option. I literally just discovered this because of your comment.

This highlights my experience with these controls pretty well... I have no idea what is n-finger touchable or holdable anymore and I just stumble into features accidentally.

Couldn't you use something like GitLens for that? I haven't used it in a bit but IIRC it lets you see your changes versus any branch pretty easily. Personally if I do feel the need for a view of what I've touched, I just open up a draft PR.

You certainly can, I specifically like being able to see it in real time though. It’s less useful if it isn’t constantly present without having to bring it up with a click/command.

Grow up.

And accept that both have merit. You may not like it but there's a reason languages, tools, companies, products, whatever become popular. And it isn't just because "people are idiots" or evil companies. Console wars are for teenagers.

Nah. You can be an adult and realise that your feelings don’t mean the world owes you anything, and still think Oracle are a bad company with bad values.

You have no idea whether or not I lack those. If you're going to make a blanket ad-hominem statement like that, at least don't follow it up by agreeing with my point.

Nobody is telling you to build things that just "have merit". Just because you don't like them, it doesn't mean that great things weren't built off the back of Oracle and in JavaScript.

If some Oracle product is the best pick for the task, or JavaScript is the best pick for the task... will you pick it? Or will you whine about what you dedicated your life to?

If you can't see that other people might feel different about this, or be able to build great products with these, maybe you're the one without the imagination and ambition...

For sure it isn't the perfect solution for everything, and I say that as someone who spends most of their time in either React or Angular now. For application-like development or just sites with tons of interaction it's become as standard as reaching for Spring or PSQL though.

I can't speak to the complexity you've encountered, but for me it's pretty much zero. A button component is just a function. React-Router is good enough and code splitting is pretty much just changing how to import something. Component state is dead-easy to write by just adding a useState hook. Bundlers pretty much handle everything these days so not to much concern about size.

Your view on front-end developers having been mediocre in the past isn't far off though, at least in my experience. I noticed a big difference between the people who wanted to build nice looking pages and the ones that wanted to build applications myself. Even today it amazes me how many people have never unit tested their code, have no idea about layering an application and have poor JS/TS fundamentals. It's gotten a lot better though.

Ultimately it isn't perfect for everything, but for a lot of people it's an easy choice. And for me personally, the tons of other JS frameworks do very little in that area that I'd pick them. I'd rather spend my time working on the product. Lol, maybe its just the default because its the default at this point.

> I can't speak to the complexity you've encountered, but for me it's pretty much zero. A button component is just a function. React-Router is good enough and code splitting is pretty much just changing how to import something. Component state is dead-easy to write by just adding a useState hook. Bundlers pretty much handle everything these days so not to much concern about size.

For me, everything depends on the site and the host.

For 80% of websites, a button is <button>, a router is just URLs that point to files, a state is just a json object in localStorage.

For 15% of websites, a button is <button>, a router is a single file that imports an auth provider and a storage provider which are chosen based on the host.

For the remaining 5% of websites which are actually true applications, I'd reach for a RoR inspired framework (so Laravel for PHP host, Adonis for js host, etc...).

No react needed.

Good. Innovation isn't the latest framework that barely improves the model and as much as front-end developers like to nit about bundle size, 100kb here and there isn't going to matter for most markets.

Honestly between React, Angular and Vue, there's enough jobs if you do want to specialise, but the mental model between the three isn't that different that a good engineer wouldn't be able to adapt.

React is boring old tech to me at this point and I'm happy with that. Like choosing Java, C# or Python for the back-end. I'd rather focus on innovating my clients products until something earth shattering comes along.

It think it says something that you'd be willing to jump to conclusions. You "learned" it was sanitised and make a point about people willing to alter the truth, then you personally attach some meaning to it. You made up your own reality, when the word "[people]" literally indicates that the OP did change the quote. Instead of assuming malice, you could have also just asked why they changed it, or looked up why words would be in brackets, or give the OP the benefit of the doubt.

If you selectively put words in [brackets] and remove others without adding ellipses you can alter anything to have any meaning.

I for one read this and assumed RFK was just discussing gun control in general, only weeks before he was killed. Adding in the context the speech was regarding MLK gives it a whole different meaning. Still powerful, but different.

Attributing “The only thing we [experience] is fear itself” to FDR suggests he said something a little different. That FDR needs to see a therapist for his anxiety.

This assumes facts not in evidence. While the posted quote is sanitized, the assumption that the poster did the sanitization vs. copying from a sanitized source isn't necessarily supported.

Fair enough. But no need for the faux-legalese, it isn't clear whether the OP sanitised it or copied it that way. That changes nothing about my comment though, just who sanitised it.

My current mornings are pretty relaxed. I wake up an hour before I have to go to work, drink a glass of water, have a coffee while listening to some music and I might be browsing something on the internet. No socials though. Then I fill a water bottle and put it on my desk, take a shower and get dressed/etc. I work from home so that's nice but I do get ready as if I have to go out, i.e. I make effort to look smart and even put on some cologne. I do need to wake up relaxed though, I f*king hate waking up and having to rush.

When I was in between jobs, it was mostly similar but I got up an hour later than I would usually and wouldn't hit the shower until like 10 am. Maybe work on some project or watch something, eat lunch around 12 and then either go out for a walk or get groceries done. Only in the afternoon I would job search, call back people. Its only a few hours but I had to learn not to try to constantly job search, because there simply is no point and it would just make me feel like I was failing at it.

I'd say you're right to want some structure, but you're perfectly fine not having it all be productive.

> The reason React is particularly disparaged, imho, is because the framework fashionistas have moved on to chase the new shiny thing, and everyone else has always hated all these frameworks to begin with, so there's no one left to defend this particular hot mess.

I think you're projecting here. Its fine not to like trends in tech, but tech will change whether you like it or not. The people who jump on every new thing and stress about having to learn it all will keep doing it. That doesn't mean that anyone else hated it all to begin with. That's a pretty weird assumption to make. Even this thread is full of people who enjoy using React. Meanwhile, React is pretty stable and boring if you ask me. Your nightmarish decade will be extended. I'll light a candle for you.