It isn't clear to me that she used the credits for this project. She doesn't explicitly mention using them anywhere. The only step I can see that might use them is for hosting content but the videos are on YouTube and she mentions a platform called Teachable that appears to include hosting.
Money. I work for a large Enterprise software company and we are not "changing the world." That's fine, by the way, but the answer is money and it always has been.
I have two young children at home and nothing is going to come close to making me feel as fulfilled as being their father. Since we need money to live I have to go away for 8-9 hours a day, working on CRUD applications and their supporting systems. What keeps me in my seat is the money I can eventually bring home to to my wife and children.
To a non-parent this may seem a somewhat bleak and uninspiring vision of what we do as software developers, but the truth is that being able to provide for my family is one of the most intensely satisfying enterprises I have ever taken-on. It allows us to put good, healthy food on the table and live in a neighborhood with walking trails and a nearby lake. My children sleep in comfortable beds. The temperature in our home is always appropriate.
If I can't spend the bulk of my time with my family then next best thing is producing money that directly benefits them.
Yeah, people won't admit it but not much has changed other than the marketing that sells people on the jobs. Whether it's software development now or good-paying factory work a while back (but not too far back...), most people would like to try to work to live. If we lived in some sort of post-scarcity society, people might "work" but it most likely wouldn't be as much and maybe not exactly what you're doing now. There'd probably be a lot more polymaths out there - people that wrote some programs for a few years then decide to play guitar for a decade, etc etc.
> There'd probably be a lot more polymaths out there - people that wrote some programs for a few years then decide to play guitar for a decade, etc etc.
I did that in reverse. Once I "make enough" I intend on going back.
I spent a lot of my early 20s working then quitting to travel to other countries. I've been bitten a little in my later twenties, now early-30s having tried to "settle" down but ending up trying out a lot of different careers. Now about 3-4 years into an "IT" career but working to leveraging that into either contract and/or remote work in the future. Plus trying to keep creative outside of it.
Unless someone has a kid, and feels that gravitational pull towards them; they probably won't understand. That's okay with me, it's my little secret I get to enjoy the rest of my life with.
"React is just JavaScript, there is a very small API to learn, just a few functions and how to use them. After that, your JavaScript skills are what make you a better React developer. There are no barriers to entry. A JavaScript developer can become a productive React developer in a few hours."
To me, this is the major driver of React's adoption and thus its success. Angular 1 took me a while to grok because there were so many moving parts. React's API is small and consistent a la JQuery, with the added bonus of being incredibly powerful.
I've never seen someone being productive with react in a few hours, unless we're talking about very basic, static layouts.
Stateful components are still hard to write (but are useful!).
Component lifecycle is not trivial and has many traps.
Newcomers put the craziest things in render(): side effects, etc. JS or even TS has no way to enforce that render should just return a VNode and do nothing else.
Data management is very, very difficult (beginners use props and state interchangeably).
Using higher order components or generally writing reusable components with clean APIs is an art in itself.
Separation of concerns in React is tricky too, as the community like to say "everything is a component" and this again has many traps.
The concept of keys or in general, when a node is reused vs when it's destroyed/recreated is not easily understood by newcomers too. But you HAVE to understand that to do animations, etc.
Also, you're productive if you don't care about performances; Once you do, you will be much slower. shouldComponentUpdate, using immutable updates everywhere, not creating lambdas everywhere on each render (idiomatic react), using virtualized lists, etc.
Let's not pretend React is very easy. It only is fairly easy if you compare it to something extremely bloated like angular.
I guess it depends on what you mean by productive. I completed the React official tutorial in less than an hour and started writing a simple app, which then grew to a more complex app. Component lifecycle was trivial to me. There are only five or six lifecycle hooks. I was answering React Stackoverflow questions within a few weeks of starting.
Does React have some gotchas? Yes, but most of the time devs who get caught by those simply haven't read the very short and very good docs.
I've used loads of frameworks in my long programming career and React has been one of the easiest to pick up. Agreed that Angular is a bit of a nightmare. I studied that for months and still feel like a beginner even after building a side project with it.
I argue that React is only difficult because you have to unlearn a lot of bad "tricks". For me the hard part to learn was JS..
I only started JS development because React enables me to build UI software like i always have done, except now in a browser.
React is components 101 for use in browsers.
Flux is business logic 101.
Both (React/Flux) are great for devs that have no prior experience with building normal desktop applications. And ideal for devs that DO have that experience. That is where the (non-early) adoption wave is comming from imho.
Productive as in "has produced something." I agree with bulk of what you're saying here, but my point was about barrier to entry, not being good or even great at it.
It's fair to point out, considering that the general attitude towards React is that it's some panacea of simplicity, shining down from atop the mountain upon the unwashed masses. We still need developers in this world. :)
Thanks for clarifying. Parents comment was a little extreme.
Also you have to include learning the front end ecosystem, webpack, Commons vs the other one, all the transpilation, react architecture which is diff from Js/jquery and even get into the.fluxes.
Let's not kid ourselves - React is not jquery, by a long stretch. There is a reason why react developers can charge $100hr+ to do things effectively with react.
"Hello world" in react is deceptively easy, that is true.
Electron apps can be packaged up as UWP and submitted to the Windows Store (with the restriction that you can't currently target Xbox, HoloLens, or Windows Mobile via Electron)[0]
To the contrary, I think they're encouraging Electron apps. Electron apps can be packaged directly to Windows Store. Another case in point: Visual Studio Code.
