zlacker

>>jjcm+(OP)
Congrats on the hard work, and the idea is fine, but the problem is that tech like this is a cheap commodity in a massively oversaturated space, and without a hook that makes the platform exceptional (innovative/clever/beautiful design, unique aggregation features, inherently interesting content, reimagined user/content/moderation dynamics etc etc), this kind of thing is dead in the water because it lacks a network effect. Add in the upfront subscription model and failure to launch is basically assured.

When I visit the root domain I shouldn't be greeted with a marketing splash page, you need interesting content in the user's face right away, entice their curiosity and drive the user to explore the site... even as a fellow developer, my first instinct is to abandon the page as soon as I'm greeted with the cliche startup marketing page. Consider the user experience when I visit reddit.com or news.ycombinator.com or any other link aggregation competitor. What you have now is a tech demo, not a platform. Sorry if that's a little harsh, but I mean well! Good luck!

>>root_a+Ih
Mostly agree. The screenshot in the top right looks good, like professional app I might actually use. But I want to actually browse the site and check it out without first slogging through a registration process. If it’s free to view/browse anyway, then enable doing that without registering. Register and pay if you want to post.

Edit: You can browse without registering after all, here’s the link: https://non.io/#all (didn’t see it on the landing page or OP post).

>>SkyMar+aj
Oof, I clicked one of those posts and immediately lost all back-button functionality to an endless stream of history events.

>>neogod+Vo
Was it the "Daniel's Site" post? There's some weird interactions I'm finding with that iframe'd html upload and the history events.

>>jjcm+Ur
As someone who dealt with payment iframes in SPAs I'm so happy I don't have to use any iframes nowadays. There are a few articles how you can "kind of track" when the iframe caused extra history entries then you need to increase your back navigation by the count of them, it was a mess back in the days so not sure how is it solved nowadays.

>>jefoza+yZ
Today you can still use iframes but most gateways now provide a tokenization api that provides the form to produce the tokenized cc. Afaik tokenized cc isn't falling under PCI.

My big issues with iframes is the checkout process which inevitably has to make callbacks to your api with the results of the transaction. If you're behind any sort of firewall (like most businesses are) you're in for a world of http pain.

>>_madma+4x1
The payment gateways still use iframes, they just don’t tell you that.

This is also why styling such forms is always some species of wonky.

>>Wesoly+sT2
The gateways I use don't, or at least give me the option not to.

Those iFrames cause all kinds of headaches when the user hits the back button or double clicks a submit button or does any number of other things that happen thousands of times a day on a moderately high traffic site, and when it messes up you either miss out on a sale (ouch) or charge the customer twice (double ouch).

>>abhibe+3C3
> The gateways I use don't, or at least give me the option not to.

They usually don't tell you they do. For example, both Stripe and Square use iFrames; otherwise it's not possible to hide credit card entry from your main application.

There are gateways that redirect you away and return you back after payment, but that's a whole another story.

>>Wesoly+m54
You're right, but it's worth noting that the iframes used today are better at hiding the fact that they're iframes, it's usually hidden behind an API call from a library that you import, and that doesn't affect your browsing history, or at least not as bad as those huge forms used in the past that would essentially replace the page you're on for the sake of paying.