evlapix

Thank you, I get the sense that you're not trying to be overly negative. But I'm also slightly confused. If you can't gain credibility with valid arguments and research, how else can you?

> This is kinda funny to me because I know it's untrue. The product I work on in my day job is based on JMVC 3.2 and we can't upgrade to 3.3 because of the size of our app and the amount of refactoring work that would need to be done to make it work with the new concepts.

While it may be a large undertaking for your organization, I wouldn't consider any of these to be irrational changes in API from 3.2 to 3.3: http://www.javascriptmvc.com/docs/done.html

Yes, and I think we do a decent job of highlighting why.

Backbone/Knockout may be well maintained but their scope is fixed. CanJS has gone from the times of $.widget() to <app-component> while maintaining backward compatibility.

I don't think FB is a fair comparison. They are a mature company that operates at incredible scale.

Addendum: The intended audience for this article will not share these same properties.

It's fair to have compromised your expectations of frameworks - since there aren't many that have been around for long - but Bitovi and its clients have not. Our libraries are both backward compatible and constantly innovating.

I had attempted to bring a product like this to life a while back: http://gigyard.com/

Maybe I should re-visit it.

I played around with something like this once: http://akagomez.com/demo/packaging-lazy-dependencies/

The goal was to illustrate how unique dependencies could be packaged separately for progressive loading while navigating single page javascript applications.

If you're interested in the real deal though, checkout http://stealjs.com/docs/StealJS.why.html#section_FasterLoadi...

I haven't used this yet, but it seems like it should make updating mappings much easier. See the "using aliases for greater flexibility" section in this article: http://www.elasticsearch.org/blog/changing-mapping-with-zero...

I had to write the scripts to implement this concept myself and it wasn't a quick and easy task. It would had gone along a lot easier if I was able to abstract away some of those queries with a tool like this.

TaskRabbit seems to focus more on simple errands that anybody can do and handles the details for you. They describe it as "Your to-do's, done".

GigYard focuses on helping people describe their unique qualifications so that they can be offered as specific services. Then gives customers the tools sort through those qualifications in order to find what they're looking for. It also takes a more hands off approach and expects that the customer and service provider work together. Similar to the way Craigslist works for buyers and sellers.

Except then I wouldn't like the name as much.

My instinct tried to steer me away from doing that, but my urgency to get something out there overcame it. I had anxiety about every damn word I wrote so I ended up settling with copy I felt "flowed".

I'll look into the type thinness. Thanks for the feedback.

Maybe you're right. I could had titled it.. "Show HN: GigYard - My first landing page".

Thanks! I sourced them from Flickr. You can filter your search to only include photos that are licensed for modifying, adapting, and building upon.

I'm so glad to have this feedback. Identifying my audience and avoiding feature speak where two things I tried to give consideration to while writing the copy. Still, I couldn't work out how to accomplish that.

The biggest difference from TaskRabbit is likely the direction of communication. GigYard encourages you to seek out and engage a candidate based on your needs. While TaskRabbit encourages you to describe your needs then promotes them to candidates for bidding.

For simple tasks I think the TaskRabbit approach works well. I expect that GigYard will be used to find service providers that meet more specific requirements.

Yikes! Thanks for pointing that out.

I'd rather not get distracted by potential issues like that for now. If GigYard gets enough users to upset Fiverr over a potential registered service mark conflict, I'll consider that a good thing.

It seems the service I used for those "share" links is conflicting with my CSS (www.addthis.com). Can't fix it right now, but at least I know where the problem is. Thanks for pointing it out!

I'm thinking that sharing it with existing communities that already engage in this way will be the easiest sell. My first target is my neighborhoods Facebook page that has something like 300+ user. Besides that there are a ton of folks attempting to do this type of work with Craigslist's service postings and I'm hoping a few considerate posts there might help.

This seems unique to your device. Mind sharing the specs? Here's what it's supposed to look like: http://imgur.com/RgoXZuO

You're absolutely right. I made the rookie mistake early on of focusing entirely on the app before getting any market feedback. The copyright issue you pointed out is evidence of that.

I do have a ton of the app built. I'd actually be done if I hadn't made a silly mistake a while back while migrating computers and having to redo a bunch of work.

As a side project though, the amount of work I accomplish in 4 months is something that is entirely unique to my situation. And in this cas I'm terrible at marketing copy, design, etc. So I'm proud of what I've accomplished.

Thanks for your feedback!

Zaarly is new to me, but yes it seems similar. Probably the biggest difference between the two is that GigYard's service providers are individual people, not businesses.

Good morning HN! This is the first of my side projects to make it into public view. Let me know what you think.