Long story short: They solve a problem that is attractive to solve in a way that is not super useful for how most people want to develop an application. They're client side only (in practice) and poorly compatible. The developer problem they set out to solve is mostly solved elsewhere, better, by other frameworks. What those frameworks don't solve is usually not the parts that are useful about Web Components.
Which is a shame - as there are some genuinely good ideas in the set of tech that makes up Web Components. They just aren't very attractive to work with.
I kind of feel they need to scrap it and come up with a compelling v2 that uses what we know now.
Potential utility is different to actual utility though. Is that stuff actually useful to them right now? Or in general? If the answer is no then it has zero utility.
> So every employee gets to be badmouthed in front of as many as hundreds of former co-workers, as Netflix's special parting gift?
Well no. It’s usually very positive about them and generally sad that things couldn’t be made to work.
The point is not that they were bad - the idea is Netflix wouldn’t have hired them if that were so! It’s that it just wasn’t a good fit due to misalignment of goals. Perhaps someone doesn’t want to change or just keeps behaving in a way that they’ve been asked not to.
I’ve read a few departure emails in my time at Netflix and none of them - even the one with the C level exec who is mentioned in the article - were “badmouthing” anyone.
If anything they’re quite positive about the person tbh.
> It’s that it just wasn’t a good fit due to misalignment of goals.
That's not what Netflix's own spokesman say:
> Richard Siklos, a Netflix spokesman, said the company only fires employees for performance reasons
Only "performance reasons", not "misalignment of goals".
> Perhaps someone doesn’t want to change or just keeps behaving in a way that they’ve been asked not to.
Saying someone "just keeps behaving in a way that they’ve been asked not to" is a very negative thing to say. As a hiring managing, hearing that about a candidate would cause me not to hire them.
> It’s usually very positive about them
Something is very distorted if you think saying about someone that he "just keeps behaving in a way that they’ve been asked not to" and similar stuff that make a person unemployable is "very positive about them".
And once more, this contradicts everything else in the article. You can't have your cake and eat it, too: if Netflix is saying (through it's spokesman and multiple other execs in the article) that firing is always due to performance reason, then that's not a "very positive" statement about the person being fired. It's actually a very negative statement.
If it was a fear based culture I would agree with you - I’ve worked in those & left as fast as I could.
Netflix is not even close to that in my experience, nor have I seen any evidence of that in the engineering teams around me.
Of course some teams may be different-and it certainly is different to how many companies operate-but the article seems to be unfairly characterizing the culture based on grumbling from a few disgruntled ex employees.
LOL what? BASIC has been around since before Microsoft was even a glint in Gates & Allen’s eyes. Since 1964 to be exact.
While many 8-bit versions of BASIC were derived from MS BASIC (1975) it was hardly Microsoft’s baby. Atari BASIC for example has zero to do with MS. Neither does TinyBASIC
BASIC itself is absolutely free. Certain implementations are not.
You're getting downvoted for some reason. You're 100% correct.
In Indian cuisine it's used as an umami enhancer. Usually with turmeric in vegetable dishes - especially lentil curries like dal and sambar but also those based on potato and cauliflower.
