I wouldn’t worry unduly at the moment, I suspect it will be at least 12-18 months before the first browser implementations and the adoption cycle will be long.
Who needs breakpoints when foldable or roll-up-able mobile devices are just around the corner. It will bring new meaning to Above the Fold, i.e. behind the fold or the middle fold being viewed.
I would also add that I have never seen the need for lots of breakpoints. At the large end, the size of the monitor for me is unimportant. The practical site width of 1000-1440 px (for decent typography etc) means that the rest becomes irrelevant.
I would also like to see examples of any major websites , award winning, big companies whatever, that use more than three breakpoints for the layout whether using a framework or not. I would be prepared to bet that almost none do.
This one is crying out for a big breakpoint :
That is crying out for
Got some great ideas for next project.
I purchased Blocs 3 at the end of last year. I’ve only briefly experimented with it. My first impressions were very positive. As I said on Twitter at the time, I think Blocs could compliment my Affinity Serif workflow rather well. I have a project coming up soon, for which I intend to jump in at the deep end and build the whole website with Blocs. A business associate has also asked me to present my findings - with the intention that Blocs might become one of the web design tools we use in our small agency - replacing the ill-fated Macaw app.
Several people have asked me when I will have my first Brics ready! The answer is that these are still a while away yet. But TopBox and / or WebYep CMS stacks seem likely that they might make it over to Blocs first. I’ll certainly be reaching out to @Norm soon to introduce myself and get some details on developer API / protocols etc. Blocs is definitly a platform I want to get involved with.
This discussion on the Blocs forums caught my eye, and I bookmarked it from some months ago:
And I have to say I agree with the comments people like ‘casey1823’ and ‘Bloc_User’ raised. So I think anything I develop for Blocs will get marketed / distributed completely differently; compared with how RapidWeaver has traditionally done things. This might mean offering the addons for free, but perhaps recouping revenue through consultation or other perks? I’m not sure yet.
I’ll be brutally honest - a lot of potential RapidWeaver users are put-off by the notion you have to spend £90 on the core app. Then you are expected to pay about the same again for Stacks and a theme or framework that looks half decent. You still have to put the website together yourself and pay for the hosting! I can say for sure that when I first came to RapidWeaver about 15 years ago, there is absolutely no way I would contemplate spending that amount of money.
And this is where I think Blocs becomes quite a formidable ‘disruptor’ in this market - because there appears to be a lot you can do with the basic app - before you reach ceiling limits and have to start buying yourself more creative freedom.
That’s great to hear @willwood. I know there are many Blocs users who will be happy to hear you may be bringing some of your products to Blocs.
I see there is an explanation here on the breakpoint XL question:
Wow, sure glad I ran into this thread on the forum. Had never heard about Blocs before so I thought I would give it a look. Very impressive!
Been having a lot of fun playing with it over the last few days.
My huge investment in RW is beginning to look a little bit at risk, have not had so much fun in awhile!
Glad you are having fun with Blocs, that’s a word you don’t hear very often when it comes to building websites.
Here’s an interesting video (created by a Blocs customer - Eldar) that shows not only how to achieve an impressive visual parallax effect, but shows how easy and quick it is to do in Blocs3. As a demonstration of what can be done with Blocs3, I find this really impressive.
Stop it - you know better than to call that parallax :)
Fixed backgrounds are not parallax in any sense of the word.
Star Trek’s Spock used to say, “A difference that makes no difference is no difference.”
Will viewers know or care?
EDIT: I think Spock copied it from Ciceronianus, but he was cool enough to get away with it.
Agree, however, there are some real scroll controlled animations features in Blocs, they are refererred to as scroll FX.
These are also pretty easy to use.
These Scroll FX animations are triggered by the scroll position of the page.
I don’t understand the relevance of this comment. I said above that the site is a beautifully executed recreation. That is not the point of this discussion.
This thread is about users comparing apps and their pro’s and cons at a (semi) technical level - i.e. what each can do and how easy / difficult it is.
Making a fixed background image and layering subsequent ones on top of each other cleverly is no different between the two apps and thus I would argue is of no relevance to these discussions. 4 subsequent SectionsPro on a page with a fixed background setting.
This forum is unique in that it allows open discussion of things like this without a commercial bias that closes threads or encourages partisan nastiness.
With that freedom comes a responsibility for technical accuracy and checks and balances to ensure what people read is fair and unbiased. All other forums seem to be predicated on a core group of fans / acolytes that operate in packs against the unbelievers. By being accurate and balanced we can ensure that RW4ALL does not become like that.
The scroll triggered animations give the illusion of parallax. If you compare the Apple MacMini page to Eldar’s demo page at the airflow section, on a mobile, the illusion of parallax works in the Blocs version.
Generally I don’t like parallax type effects and have never used them but this demo has made me consider it using this technique.
I think you are being a tad pedantic on this point.
I can’t agree more, and this is the real value in this forum.
A fact of web creation life, is that Parallax is often confused with fixed background images and probably with vertical animation objects too and the average RW or Blocs user would be unable to distinguish between them.
My point was that you can create a really cool looking effect with the core B3 app, with no extras required and some B3 knowledge. There are probably only a dozen RW users, who have years of experience and countless stacks and a great deal of BWD sectionsPro experience, who could build that part of the demo site. So from that point of view, B3 is impressive IMHO.
I actually tried to plan in my mind how to create that site. SectionsPro was the only stack that came close but I was thrown by the scroll triggered animated text and I found it very challenging and gave up. My mental failure was not to follow the cardinal rule to break each animation down individually and deny there is magic in the world.
Also if you created a demo video of how to create that effect in RW with Stacks+SectionsPro, you would be inundated with technical support questions because to get the same solutions demands a pretty complex solution in RW.
Which I completely agreed with the first time you posted it above. I have absolutely no disagreement with that at all.
I completely disagree with that one of course. I don’t see any difference in complexity of set up - but I do tend to not overcomplicate layouts when I build them any way.
Strange that 99% of the hundreds of emails that I get from designers demand more precision and pedanticism in relation to layout and operation. The same applies to technical issues even if they are apparently unimportant to that same individual.
Anyway, I think we’ve done this to death so I’ll leave it there.