[whopa]

Yeah, interesting article, weird conclusion.

The comparison of hotels to website design is pretty apt. A hotel is often just a place to sleep, and not the point of the trip (resorts are an exception), so even if it makes the room prettier, in the end it doesn't justify straying from standard expectations. Same with most websites, people generally aren't interacting with one given site continuously for 8 hours a day, so they don't have time nor inclination to get used to some quirks.

But for web development frameworks? Lots of people do work on web dev for 8 hours a day, so if some nonstandard framework trades a couple days of learning curve that results in productivity gains measured in months, it's totally worth it. E.g., Rails and Django fell out of such things, and they had to start somewhere.

[Periodic]

He does mention that things that make you more productive in the long run really should be exempt.

I think the moral is that your quirks may not be welcome for other people, even if you think they are the best way to do things. Unless they add continuous and lasting value it's best to just leave them out when working with other people.

[whopa]

Yeah, but it seems like you rarely want to be radical when it comes to consumer focused web UX design, whereas when it comes to development itself, it could be justified a lot more often, because people are really dealing with tools for hours a day. So bringing up a dev example just seems weird.