paulbakaus

Author here. Thanks for the feedback. Vocabulary helps in my experience, but definitely doesn't make the user or the LLM a great designer.

I toned down some of the language on the landing page, as it had sometimes too much snake-oil-salesman-energy, should not oversell. I've also toned down fluff, fixed some typography issues. I rushed the landing page and example case studies to get this shipped, whereas the actual skill and commands my colleagues and I have been using effectively on real projects (that I can't screenshot yet), and the open sourcing is a side product. Lesson learned!

I also hear you on the "Popular" $100 tier. That was a side effect of Claude Code trying to make this too "SaaS-y", and I admittedly didn't love it and shouldn't have shipped that language. While it might work for SaaS, this project isn't intended to be SaaS, and just open source for the community in the hopes that it helps somebody the way it helped me, so I toned it down significantly.

Author here. I ironically spent a lot more time crafting the commands and skill, and not enough time on the landing page. Agree that I overdid it on "editorial look" to match the cheeky domain name. Thank you for the feedback, I've hopefully now improved consistency and negative space issues.

Author here, fair feedback. These examples were rushed, and didn't come out great. For this particular one, the concept was 'trustworthy, expensive life sciences company" of sorts, but it's still not a great before/after example. Removed for now, and will switch out for better examples soon.

Agreed. Removed.

Should be fixed now. Sorry about that.

great to hear! Let me know how it goes for you, always happy for feedback from users.

poor choice indeed, and I say this as the one who put the example there.. I rushed and tried to make a case of removing the AI slop aesthetics but you're right, got functionally worse. The examples didn't communicate the value, removed and will replace with better ones.

Fair feedback. Removed the section for now, will replace with better, real examples.

Author here. Fair. Mentioned this in another reply, but yes, the case study examples were poor, and I shouldn't have shipped those. Ironically I've used these design commands on a production project very effectively, and hence decided to open source, but couldn't screenshot the real examples as the project has not launched. I've removed the lackluster examples for now.

Author here. Not a joke, but the case study examples were poor, and I shipped them anyway. Ironically I've used these commands on a production project very effectively, and hence decided to open source, but couldn't screenshot the real examples as the project has not launched. I've removed the lackluster examples for now.

Author here. I agree that that wasn't a strong example. I wasn't happy with the outcome of those before/after examples, it was rushed before the launch, and I shouldn't have shipped it. Removed. I mostly use these commands on smaller targeted sections on projects that I unfortunately can't screenshot, the case study examples where rushed and didn't communicate the value. Removed them for now, until I can fill in better, real examples.

Author here. That's actually great feedback. I accidentally broke the container scroll with a single line CSS change to fix something else, ugh. Should be fixed now.

AMP team member here. Not sure I understand the issue.

It's by design that our site is only available via HTTPS. Is there a good reason for why you can't consume the HTTPS version?

We're working on it! We heard this feedback a few times. Our intention is to make mobile the default in DevTools, but we don't want to make the experience worse for people building Desktop sites. So we'll come up with a better solution. Stay tuned!

Author of the linked post here. Definitely wasn't our intention to leave Desktop behind. A mobile-only world isn't better than a Desktop-only world. Thus, mobile first. Start with the most common scenario and build your way up to other platforms.

That being said, I realize that some apps and intranet sites will be Desktop only by design, and that's fine. We don't want to make your experience worse. Any feedback on that front is greatly appreciated.

...aaand it's fixed. Was a stupid recent spelling mistake.

OP here. It was 4-5 years ago and feels like an eternity. You're right though, "a few" would make more sense! Corrected :)

Thanks for letting me know! Will fix.

OP here. Thanks for the bug report! I'll fix. It's true, haven't used IE in the while, but that wasn't the point of the article. I care deeply about the web as a whole, and all of its evolution.

OP here. I actually agree, and that seems to be Google#s stance right now, from what I've heard (I work for Google but wasn't involved in the technical work on this feature so far). We might need an API that is slightly more low level but achieves the same. My point was that we need this functionality, and no other API offers it, so I took anything I could get :)