I can't wait for Flexbox wide-spread adoption - especially in popular frameworks. It's too bad so many people are forced to not be able to use it because of IE9's total lack of support [1]. TBH, I'm not even sure if there's a good polyfill for it.
Dimitar Stojanov (@justd100) wrote a super kick-ass write-up on scotch.io covering basically everything there is on Flexbox [2]. It's probably much quicker than 20 videos, has an amazing interactive demo, been shared over 2.4k times, and is probably the best write-up on Flexbox I've read (I'm obviously biased though).
I recently open-sourced a pattern-library/framework that uses mainly FlexBox to arrange/layout items: http://bowlingx.github.io/flexcss/. FlexBox for me was especially useful for big forms while using less markup.
Yep. Flexbox is maybe the best development to happen to CSS in a decade. Makes layouts that were once impossible without JS into trivial three-lines-of-css solutions.
As of now, and most likely the next couple of years, I'm stuck needing to support IE8 as as first class citizen in my designs at my day job, unfortunately. We have put our foot down about the remaining IE6 installs one of our clients (a large bank) apparently has though, so that much is good...
In personal projects I can afford to be more fussy and only support recent browsers, but in the day job these things are beyond my control even if they seem to be beyond good reason.
Of course flexbox is for the most part a display issue - as long as your layout changing in an older browser that doesn't support it doesn't break your application (by stopping features being accessible or by making it ugly enough to fail UAT) you can still use it (with care) even if needing to support legacy user agents.
I really do appreciate the effort you put into these videos, and I definitely understand you want something out of this as well but the user experience of having to go through your site instead of a link to a youtube playlist does put me off quite a bit.
Either way, the first few videos I've watched so far are great, thanks.
I'm not sure how much views get lost, but I wonder is it worth it? There is a short video as introduction which doesn't tell much, I'd much prefer a random video from the series.
Now by making these private, no one will find this from youtube, other sites won't link it and there is no playlist so I will have to click each url every 5 minutes or so, which is not the end of the world, but not fun.
He could have asked for my email for the project files(videos and project files get sent to your email currently as I understand it), and gave videos for free. Anyone actually interested in this would definitely give their email for the files. If he wants my email to teach me something else later -- or sell me something, I think someone who entered their mail while watching the series will be more interested in what he could use the emails for, and now he won't be able to reach these kinds of people from random views, in exchange for the initial email count.
I don't think this is a nice deal, but I have no data, so just an opinion. Maybe something to consider.
I'm a big fan of Wes' and don't want to mess up what he's doing, but as a clue.. the URLs for the preview graphics of each video contain each video's YouTube ID :)
Are there any examples around of combining Bootstrap and Flexbox; i.e. relying on Flexbox for layout and NOT using Bootstrap's grid, but using Bootstrap's other components... is that practical without a significant rewrite of Bootstrap (i.e. do the component styles make lots of assumptions about being sited within the Bootstrap grid).
Flexbox makes web development bearable. I use it for all my new work. Telling clients they must have IE11, Chrome, or Firefox ceased to be an issue many moons ago. It means you can also drop bloated frameworks like Bootstrap (and JQuery for that matter).
For what it's worth, I watched the first of these a couple years ago when they first came out, and I've been waiting for the rest ever since. None of the one-page flexbox tutorials on the web really do the technology justice.
I was curious as well so took a look at the durations. This is over 2.5 hours of content. About a layout system. I have to agree with another commenter, either this is far too much content or what should be a pretty simple layout system is insanely complicated.
If you're unwilling to spend two and a half hours learning flexbox, you're asking for a bad time with CSS in general. The flexbox spec alone is about 18,000 words long, which is about an hour and a half reading time for most people, to say nothing of comprehension or grasping the nuanced details.
One could spend a lifetime learning the geometries of grid systems, so 2.5 hours seems pretty reasonable to me.
Except you haven't learned much after watching those two and a half hours. I would argue reading this [1] or this [2], while simultaneously mocking up a flexbox grid will give you at least the same amount of knowledge in much less time.
I generally agree that reading is a lot more efficient but some people have different learning styles and videos work a lot better for them.
There's also (bad) university lectures that are essentially just the textbook in lecture form without much extra benefit. I've always wondered why people bothered attending these since I'm a "book learner". I've had a couple of long talks on the topic and now understand that some people simply learn better with audio. Unfortunately for them it's less convenient than reading (time wise, quick reference etc.) but it's still good to have the option.
Lynda.com would be screwed if people knew they could just crack open some reference material instead of wasting away in front of friendly introductory videos where another human eases them into a new subject!
Creating a layout is not a simple problem, but implementing it is. The reason 'most applications suck' is more likely because of the designer (or lack thereof).
It's a lot, but it's mostly ordered by importance so if you only need to know the basics, you could easily watch the first few videos and be happy with that until you need the rest someday.
This is great! Ever since our company quit supporting IE9, I've had the joy of working with flexbox. What once took 10-20 lines of Sass hackery now takes only a few, and the code makes sense.
Things have changed since I was doing frontend dev (<table>), and I want to brush up on modern CSS techniques. Could someone answer the following for me?
1. Is flexbox the way to go (i.e. the new standard?)
2. Is there a css primer to help with all this? I tried centering a div with CSS once, it didn't end well!
93.99% is more than "support isn't there yet", in my opinion. Enough for many projects at least.
Obviously if you develop sites with a big IE8/9 audience you should think twice.
1) Yes. 2) This is a pretty nice short intro http://flexboxin5.com or for a fuller treatment check MDN, as for any other web technology. There are a bunch of other sources linked from this discussion thread if you scroll down a bit.
I think everything related to layout can be made with flexbox (e.g. you can avoid doing ugly tricks with tables, blocks, floats, calc(), calculating percentages, etc), but you still need the usual style for text, size of images, borders, backgrounds...
Essentially, it avoids the "I FSCKING HATE CSS" parts.
Erm.. flexbox is just one part of CSS, useful for a particular subset of layout tasks. CSS has many other parts you need to learn if you want to style web pages.
I learned flexboxes from flexboxin5.com and use it wherever I can now. I love it! my only gripe is safari needing the vendor prefixes. I don't know what IE does - but i only care about real browsers anyway.
bookmarked, will be going through these tutorial, especially since CSS has never been a strong point for me as I've always focused on the backend. It always filled me with envy when people seem to have the entire CSS memorized and can create sexy UI out of thin air.
now is flexbox supported widely or is this still ongoing thing?
The only gotcha is IE9 - but most people are either on IE8 or IE11 - so not really an issue anymore. In 6 months to a year, support will be wide spread - so now it's time to start learning!
That and React Native is using Flexbox to layout their apps too!
I can't wait for Flexbox wide-spread adoption - especially in popular frameworks. It's too bad so many people are forced to not be able to use it because of IE9's total lack of support [1]. TBH, I'm not even sure if there's a good polyfill for it.
Dimitar Stojanov (@justd100) wrote a super kick-ass write-up on scotch.io covering basically everything there is on Flexbox [2]. It's probably much quicker than 20 videos, has an amazing interactive demo, been shared over 2.4k times, and is probably the best write-up on Flexbox I've read (I'm obviously biased though).
[1] http://caniuse.com/#feat=flexbox
[2] https://scotch.io/tutorials/a-visual-guide-to-css3-flexbox-p...