www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - D website pointing to 2.0, not 1.0

reply Alexander Panek <alexander.panek brainsware.org> writes:
Walter, no offense, but I think pointing digitalmars.com/d/ directly to
the D 2.x specification is a Bad Thing(tm), not to say stupid,
marketing-wise. I keep reading comments about D being unstable and hard
to use and whatnot, even though D 1.x is totally stable and great
already!

I would rather want to see a big "See D 2.0 (experimental branch)"
somewhere on the home page, than having to click "1.0" for the stable
branch. This makes no sense; we want to attract new users actually,
no?

Best regards
-- 
Alexander Panek <alexander.panek brainsware.org>
Oct 24 2007
next sibling parent "Chris Miller" <chris dprogramming.com> writes:
On Wed, 24 Oct 2007 05:31:58 -0400, Alexander Panek  
<alexander.panek brainsware.org> wrote:


 Walter, no offense, but I think pointing digitalmars.com/d/ directly to
 the D 2.x specification is a Bad Thing(tm), not to say stupid,
 marketing-wise. I keep reading comments about D being unstable and hard
 to use and whatnot, even though D 1.x is totally stable and great
 already!

 I would rather want to see a big "See D 2.0 (experimental branch)"
 somewhere on the home page, than having to click "1.0" for the stable
 branch. This makes no sense; we want to attract new users actually,
 no?

 Best regards


Agreed. Also consider new users who try to follow along with the  
documentation to see the newer features failing to work because they  
downloaded 1.0 and are looking at 2.0 documents.
Oct 24 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> writes:
Alexander Panek wrote:

 Walter, no offense, but I think pointing digitalmars.com/d/ directly to
 the D 2.x specification is a Bad Thing(tm), not to say stupid,
 marketing-wise. I keep reading comments about D being unstable and hard
 to use and whatnot, even though D 1.x is totally stable and great
 already!
 
 I would rather want to see a big "See D 2.0 (experimental branch)"
 somewhere on the home page, than having to click "1.0" for the stable
 branch. This makes no sense; we want to attract new users actually,
 no?
 
 Best regards


Votes++

This has been said before on several occasions.
Is there anyone out there who thinks that having the main page be D2.0 
makes sense?

--bb
Oct 24 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent Aarti_pl <aarti interia.pl> writes:
Alexander Panek pisze:

 Walter, no offense, but I think pointing digitalmars.com/d/ directly to
 the D 2.x specification is a Bad Thing(tm), not to say stupid,
 marketing-wise. I keep reading comments about D being unstable and hard
 to use and whatnot, even though D 1.x is totally stable and great
 already!
 
 I would rather want to see a big "See D 2.0 (experimental branch)"
 somewhere on the home page, than having to click "1.0" for the stable
 branch. This makes no sense; we want to attract new users actually,
 no?
 
 Best regards


Thanks for this post! I was going to send similar one, but you replaced me.

I agree in 100%. There can be probably nothing worse for D adoption, to 
direct newcomers to unstable, experimental and (very possibly) buggy D 
branch on main web page.

BR
Marcin Kuszczak
(aarti_pl)
Oct 24 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Alexander Panek wrote:


 Walter, no offense, but I think pointing digitalmars.com/d/ directly to
 the D 2.x specification is a Bad Thing(tm), not to say stupid,
 marketing-wise. I keep reading comments about D being unstable and hard
 to use and whatnot, even though D 1.x is totally stable and great
 already!
 
 I would rather want to see a big "See D 2.0 (experimental branch)"
 somewhere on the home page, than having to click "1.0" for the stable
 branch. This makes no sense; we want to attract new users actually,
 no?


Also, site http://www.d-programming-language.org/ seems out of date ?

Although it is not as bad as http://www.opend.org/ - it still gives
a strange impression when looking for information on the D language.

--anders
Oct 24 2007
next sibling parent reply Aarti_pl <aarti interia.pl> writes:
Anders F Björklund pisze:

 Alexander Panek wrote:
 

 Walter, no offense, but I think pointing digitalmars.com/d/ directly to
 the D 2.x specification is a Bad Thing(tm), not to say stupid,
 marketing-wise. I keep reading comments about D being unstable and hard
 to use and whatnot, even though D 1.x is totally stable and great
 already!

 I would rather want to see a big "See D 2.0 (experimental branch)"
 somewhere on the home page, than having to click "1.0" for the stable
 branch. This makes no sense; we want to attract new users actually,
 no?


 
 Also, site http://www.d-programming-language.org/ seems out of date ?
 
 Although it is not as bad as http://www.opend.org/ - it still gives
 a strange impression when looking for information on the D language.
 
 --anders


In case of this page maybe it will be just enough to make redirection:

<meta http-equiv="refresh" content="0; url=http://www.digitalmars.com/d">

BR
Marcin Kuszczak
(aarti_pl)
Oct 24 2007
parent =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Aarti_pl wrote:


 Also, site http://www.d-programming-language.org/ seems out of date ?


 In case of this page maybe it will be just enough to make redirection:
 
 <meta http-equiv="refresh" content="0; url=http://www.digitalmars.com/d">


But it could be useful to have a vendor-neutral landing site about the
D programming language itself, before going into DMD or GDC specifics ?

Then again I don't think the specification is released except for in the
compiler, so maybe it makes sense to redirect to the DM implementation.

--anders
Oct 24 2007
prev sibling parent jcc7 <technocrat7 gmail.com> writes:
== Quote from Anders_F_Björklund (afb algonet.se)'s article

 Alexander Panek wrote:

 Walter, no offense, but I think pointing digitalmars.com/d/
 directly to the D 2.x specification is a Bad Thing(tm), not to say
 stupid, marketing-wise. I keep reading comments about D being
 unstable and hard to use and whatnot, even though D 1.x is totally
 stable and great already!

 I would rather want to see a big "See D 2.0 (experimental branch)"
 somewhere on the home page, than having to click "1.0" for the
 stable branch. This makes no sense; we want to attract new users
 actually, no?




I absolutely agree. The D 1.0 spec is more stable, more tested, etc. D 2.0 is a
rough draft. The stable version should be more prominent. It should take extra
links to get to the current draft of D 2.0.

Also, I'm suspicious of the need for 2 versions for some pages, such as "D
links"
(http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/dlinks.html).

(By the way, there are some suggestions for D links on the DocComments wiki page
that might be nice to apply to that page. Are bug reports the way to get those
things improved these days?)



 Also, site http://www.d-programming-language.org/ seems out of date
 ?

 Although it is not as bad as http://www.opend.org/ - it still gives
 a strange impression when looking for information on the D language.

 --anders



The "vendor-neutral" http://www.d-programming-language.org/ page isn't as
out-of-date as opend.org, but I did notice that the Gnu D link (should probably
say "GDC") should be: http://dgcc.sourceforge.net/

I don't know who is "in charge" of opend.org, but it's a pity that they can't at
least add a message to the home page to indicate that the website isn't been
maintained and the projects hosted there aren't being developed (at least at
opend.org) anymore.
Oct 24 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent Clay Smith <clayasaurus gmail.com> writes:
Alexander Panek wrote:

 Walter, no offense, but I think pointing digitalmars.com/d/ directly to
 the D 2.x specification is a Bad Thing(tm), not to say stupid,
 marketing-wise. I keep reading comments about D being unstable and hard
 to use and whatnot, even though D 1.x is totally stable and great
 already!
 
 I would rather want to see a big "See D 2.0 (experimental branch)"
 somewhere on the home page, than having to click "1.0" for the stable
 branch. This makes no sense; we want to attract new users actually,
 no?
 
 Best regards


Agreed, I think D newcomers will get easily burned by D 2.0.
Oct 24 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Saaa" <empty needmail.com> writes:
That website needs a whole overhaul.
The ubuntu website might be a good example.
Emphasis on the 'stable 1.0' and the 'experimental 2.0' as well on how to 
get it working are essential on the frontpage.

I'd love to help out if necessary.
Oct 24 2007
next sibling parent janderson <askme me.com> writes:
Saaa wrote:

 That website needs a whole overhaul.


I agree.  It would be nice if Walter had someone else (perhaps u) 
maintaining the website long term, making it look pretty.  That would do 
a lot for attracting new users.  Hopefully that would give Walter more 
time to focus on D.  I'm sure we could find someone, half the people in 
this forum maintain there own websites anyway.


 The ubuntu website might be a good example.
 Emphasis on the 'stable 1.0' and the 'experimental 2.0' as well on how to 
 get it working are essential on the frontpage.
 
 I'd love to help out if necessary.
Oct 24 2007
prev sibling parent Andrea Agosti <cifvts gmail.com> writes:
Saaa wrote:

 That website needs a whole overhaul.
 The ubuntu website might be a good example.
 Emphasis on the 'stable 1.0' and the 'experimental 2.0' as well on how to 
 get it working are essential on the frontpage.
 
 I'd love to help out if necessary. 
 
 


 Agree++

-- 
Andrea[Cif]Agosti
http://www.linkedin.com/in/aagosti
Oct 24 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent "Anders Bergh" <anders1 gmail.com> writes:
On 10/24/07, Alexander Panek <alexander.panek brainsware.org> wrote:

 Walter, no offense, but I think pointing digitalmars.com/d/ directly to
 the D 2.x specification is a Bad Thing(tm), not to say stupid,
 marketing-wise. I keep reading comments about D being unstable and hard
 to use and whatnot, even though D 1.x is totally stable and great
 already!

 I would rather want to see a big "See D 2.0 (experimental branch)"
 somewhere on the home page, than having to click "1.0" for the stable
 branch. This makes no sense; we want to attract new users actually,
 no?

 Best regards
 --
 Alexander Panek <alexander.panek brainsware.org>


votes++;

Anders
Oct 25 2007
prev sibling parent reply "Chris Miller" <chris dprogramming.com> writes:
One fine example:
http://programming.reddit.com/info/5yznx/comments/c02b0d6
might also be an indication that the GDC pages need clarification.
Oct 25 2007
parent reply "Anders Bergh" <anders1 gmail.com> writes:
On 10/26/07, Chris Miller <chris dprogramming.com> wrote:

 One fine example:
 http://programming.reddit.com/info/5yznx/comments/c02b0d6
 might also be an indication that the GDC pages need clarification.


That Tommstein guy is just trolling...

Anders
Oct 26 2007
parent =?UTF-8?B?QW5kZXJzIEYgQmrDtnJrbHVuZA==?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Anders Bergh wrote:


 might also be an indication that the GDC pages need clarification.


 
 That Tommstein guy is just trolling...


It would be great if the D 1.0 specification could be released though,
now that all work is being done on the next version of the language ?

--anders
Oct 26 2007