Congrats to Geoffrey and his team! PeepCode's screencast have been a huge time saver for us and I hope this acquisition will only allow them to do even more awesome things.

+1

@topicstarter: consider taking a break. Things usually make more sense once you've taken a breather and focus on other things in life than "doing a startup". It can provide you with a new sense of perspective on your current situation (i.e. it's not as bad as you think it is).

Moreover, creating well executed solutions is a hard thing to do, period. Try adjusting your goals on what you hope to get out of your startup: not only financially but intrinsically as well. Setting the bar too high on day 1 is the same as setting yourself up for failure. Taking things one step at a time works much more motivating and allows you to iterate to your desired end-goal.

Also, consider reading up less about what others do. In particular, consider reading up less about other people's successes and so forth. They can easily create this feeling of "being a failure" for not having been able to achieve that just yet. Startups tend to fail more often than not, although I wouldn't necessarily be too comfortable to use the word "fail" in this context: it's often a necessary thing to learn what one did wrong and how one can improve. In that sense, you might want to take another look at your undertakings of the past few years :)

Nice, not familiar with Pixate, but I wonder if the author has considered making this work with SCSS too :) That'd be pretty bad ass if it could be done fairly easily and would be nice for styling nested layouts.

In a different conversation about Pixate (a few days back) I mentioned LESS and SCSS/SASS and I suspect as long as you write your CSS parts to conform with Pixate's standards, your SCSS code should work fine since the pre-processor will compile it down to CSS anyways.

If you define "No meetings" as !meetings, and "No communication" as !communcation, which to me sounds reasonable, then they are in fact equivalent.

This becomes apparent when you create a truth table for it:

    !meetings != !communication

    meetings | communication | expr
    F        | F             | F
    T        | T             | F
    T        | F             | T
    F        | T             | T

This is the same truth table one would get with "meetings != communication" so they should be logically equivalent.

"No meetings != no communication" is analogous to saying "Without meetings, people may still be communicating."

"Meetings != communication" is analogous to saying "At meetings, communication doesn't necessarily occur."

In terms you would personally appreciate: (No Patrick Hernandez != No Dancing) similarly is not equivalent to (Patrick Hernandez != Dancing)

One says without Patrick Hernandez, there may be dancing. The other says with Patrick Hernandez there certainly is not any dancing ;-)

You're referring to implication then, i.e. P => Q <=> !P || Q and in that case, I definitely agree. ;-) That's also why I started my comment with a propositional "if" on how one could define "no meetings" and "no communication" to show that there is something to be said for the P != Q interpretation.

In short, I believe neilk should have used => instead of !=. Or just plain english. ;-)

But in dealing with language here, there are subtle differences in connotation between the two options. Just like how saying "not bad" isn't that same as saying "good".

The symbols are simply shorthand. Trying to parse it as a mathematical equation was your mistake, not his.

Pies and cactus.

Jackalope.

If you read the above as anything other than a nuanced and well reasoned response thats your mistake, not mine.

You can't replace a complex concept with a boolean. This isn't JavaScript.

^ This. It depends on the kind of software you're interested in writing. Algorithms, datastructures & complexity analysis is imo arguably among the most valuable of the bunch due to its broad applicability. This is for instance particularly useful when writing software that needs to scale and perform well, e.g. server/system software.

In short, I feel there is merit to each CS course but want to underline that it's information you can self educate yourself on should you be so inclined to do so. Attending a CS major however helps with keeping one motivated. That brings me to imo the most important point of attending a traditional CS major: meeting fellow CS'ers to do a startup with :) I think that has been the most valuable CS experience for me. That's something I kinda miss with this "new era" of online courses.

Definitely agree.

I had a CIS degree (not exactly computer science but some overlap) and I'd say some of the most helpful material I read to get myself on par with day-to-day developers was related to algorithms, data structures, and design patterns (the GOF book is very course-bookish but there are friendlier head start books if you're just getting into it).

To be honest though I'd say the best learning material I experienced was just surrounding myself with people who know more than myself. Ask for code reviews (don't just get forced to do them) from people you know to be excellent developers (not the easiest thing to spot when you're green though).

Also never stop learning whether it's through a degree or online through one of these sort of courses.

It's quite simple actually. If your business is not dependent of consultancy, i.e. it's not your primary source of income, you'd do yourself a disservice by not TRYING to charge a significant amount: you never know who might be willing to pay it. In particular, an amount that would be at least the lower bound of what you expect your app to generate in terms of income on an hourly basis.

After all, you're not dependent of those consultancy funds, but if you find someone who's willing to pay the requested amount, it's win-win. You're basically put in a unique situation where you're able to experiment with that and you might end up with a few interesting contacts as well by doing so.

moleskine, which is kind of weird though if you think about it: any other sketchbook is likely to be a magnitude cheaper and would for me probably suffice the purpose of doodling/sketching just as well. I do catch myself subconsciously factoring this in when sketching/doodling though by using the paper surface more errr... economically ;-) The best reason I could think of is the leather cover; it holds amazingly well in my overly packed backpack :)

Aaah, we initially considered stacking the open source version against the enterprise version in a comparison table, but due to some previously made design choices, were unable to fit the column properly in time! Instead, we opted to drop that column in favor of being able to launch today and potentially fix in a future update.

Considering the feedback from this thread, it definitely looks like something we need to fit back in and will be among the things we'll work on for the next iteration/deploy. Thanks for the feedback and kind words, it's much appreciated seeing as we've been working on this for a while now; it easily becomes hard to look at things with a fresh pair of eyes after a while, which is definitely needed for giving a good first impression imo.

Hongli, Ninh, I've always loved Passenger (it's running almost all of my Rails apps) and am happy to see you guys try to get paid directly for all the effort that went into Passenger.

I just wanted to add my voice that I think it'll be useful for developers to know what you guys intend to do with the open source version now that you've the Enterprise version. A comparison table like mlitwiniuk mentioned would be useful.

Would also like to know when the open source version of Passenger 4.0 will be available so I can decide whether to pay for a few Enterprise licenses now or hold on.

Hey chuyeow, nice to see you like Passenger.

The Open Source version of Passenger will always be our core product, and it will be maintained and developed just as it always has been.

Phusion Passenger Enterprise is a set of features added on top of the Open Source version, to add stability and deployment features to high performance applications. As Ninh posted earlier, we are working on a direct comparison table to make the differences more clear.

Because Passenger Enterprise is built directly on top of Passenger Open Source, both versions are always released in tandem. This means that Open Source 4.0 and Enterprise 4.0 will be released at the same time.

+1 for ETA. Also - there is one thing more, that is unclear - I know, that you will not limit functionality of OS Passenger and it's still fully legit to use current version, but it would be great, if you could exclusively mark it somewhere, that this wouldn't be unclear. Or just create some kind of FAQ. You know - after all MANY people are using your software and once you've decided to start offering paid version, there are doubts about future etc

Hey mlitwiniuk, those are some very good suggestions. For version 2 of the site, we will make sure to include a FAQ.

For now we just want to make clear that Passenger Open Source will remain a fully legit product, and it will never be limited in functionality to increase sales on our paid products.

Hi Chuyeow, glad you like it. The open source version of Phusion Passenger 4 is already available, and has been for a while now. It hasn't reached beta status yet, but you can find the code in the 'experimental' branch on Github. Phusion Passenger 4 contains many rewritten subsystems, allowing it to perform better. It also supports multiple Ruby versions.

There's no need to hold on to buying Enterprise. All Phusion Passenger 4.0 open source features will become immediately available to Enterprise users. We also have some more Enterprise-only features planned for the future, and we will be announcing them on our blog.

We protect through our license, not through engineering. There is no copy protection implemented in Phusion Passenger Enterprise, so technically speaking, we can't stop you. Instead, we trust that our users won't abuse this fact.

Re: 'Get rid of "ninja"' Done. Please consider pointing your boss to our website ;-) Thanks for the feedback, phusion.nl definitely needs a facelift and we're working on that, too :)

In the "Nedap story": "With activities branching into healthcare as well, it is important for their systems to be available at all times."

I think you can afford to lose the "as well".

Agreed, updated and should be visible in the next rolled restart ;-) Thanks!