[zepto]

I am the demographic in that I love using the command line and want to see it get modernized.

I thought the design was terrible. Noisy and pointless and frankly hard to see what is on offer.

It’s pretty and stylish but absolutely awful if you care about the content, and that makes me worry that the components themselves will be similar.

[bostonsre]

Maybe it's aimed at a younger demographic and not just all devs that use cli tools. The design doesn't appeal to me but the several animated examples and quick blurbs about functionality seemed to showcase what was on offer pretty well.

[OJFord]

I'm young and had the same experience as GP - for me it's just too little said about too many different things, it's hard to tell what 'it' is (and I only realised on the second read through that that's partly because they are many things).

Imagine if Amazon had a landing page with headings like 'eShopping', 'Internet', and 'Cashierless Shopping' to describe what the company did. (And worse, then obscured them behind fun but not descriptive names.)

It's a nice page, a lot's gone into making it obviously, but it could be about just one project, each section that's currently a different one instead explaining a feature or aspect of it. Or as it is, the big headings should be the class of thing each project is, not its 'fun but not descriptive' name, IMO. (Underneath: 'FunName approaches blah differently by ...', sure, just not the big eye-catching heading when I'm just scrolling trying to see what's on offer.)

[bostonsre]

They are a company that writes several different tools for developers, not an e-commerce site for the general population. Which tool has a useless description that doesn't tell you what it does? If one tool is interesting to someone they can click it and they are presented with a great Readme that explains it in more detail. It takes like 30 seconds to parse the page and find out if they offer anything that is interesting to you.

[zepto]

You can’t tell if it’s interesting until after you have read the GitHub read me. That’s the problem.

[ncpa-cpl]

> Imagine if Amazon had a landing page with headings like 'eShopping', 'Internet', and 'Cashierless Shopping' to describe what the company did. (And worse, then obscured them behind fun but not descriptive names.)

Well, they do have Route 53, EC2, Elastic something on AWS.

[OJFord]

Yes, AWS is infamous for it, but at least in the closest I can think of to a single landing page (the 'service' drop down selector) they're grouped by 'compute' etc. And that's not really intended for describing each one, they each have a separate landing page.

[zepto]

Do you know what language the libraries are written for?

[achileas]

From the first line of the readme of the first listed lib:

> The fun, functional and stateful way to build terminal apps. A Go framework based on The Elm Architecture.

[zepto]

Not being able to determine that without having to go to GitHub seems like a problem with the design of the website.

[majkinetor]

I am of the same opinion. I closed it although CLI screens look nice, as I couldn't stand the arbitrary attention stealing noises all around.

[skavi]

`ssh git.charm.sh` is maybe more your style?

[zepto]

Considerably better