On 1/25/10 3:01 PM, "Nick Peelman" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Performance and Features do not have this inverse relationship people > seem to think they do. There are for-shit implementations of some > features that can bring apps to their knees, yes, but that's the > developers' fault. Given the braintrust this app stands to have > behind it, I don't think designing a wrapper for various plugins is a > good idea. You end up with a bunch of plugins that work haphazardly > together and have to be continually maintained outside of the progress > of the app, not to mention conflicts, precedence, etc. I'm not > against a solid plugin architecture, mind you, but John's thoughts > echo my own here; pushing what should be streamlined features out to > plugins breaks up the coherence of the app. The one thing that worries me about projects like this is the idea that you can code core functionality first, then design the rest of the application. That's a myth, and it's one that Mac users should be more resistant to. The UI design is a major part of the overall code, because that's where your features are used. You can't just slap it on later, or sluff everything off to a plugin. Because then you screw your users over. "Oh, that plugin is incompatible with the new release. Sorry" "But it's your plugin" "We haven't had time to update it. Here's the source, you can do it" "Trash. Empty Trash" -- John C. Welch Writer/Analyst Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions [email protected] _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list List help: http://lists.ranchero.com/listinfo.cgi/email-init-ranchero.com
