What is Digg?45 Comments
- Dayz, on 10/12/2007, -1/+18wtf 2 diggs and on front page?
- dshPls, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17A horrid style. A horrid website.
- cornyflake, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14a photoshop tutorial site with no screenshots...nice
Edit: ah, wtf, now they're loading. but still, goodtutorials.com blows them out of the water. - Ludwig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Odd. Says 40 diggs on front page, yet 2 here.
- rages4calm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8thats what im saying how the hell??
- dclowd9901, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9How in the hell did this piece of crap get dugg up? it's got the narrowest content column I've ever seen, and its tutorials are... elementary and useless. Isn't it passe to make web2.0 stuff now... like a joke, or something?
- affanjam, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7it says 145 on the frontpage but 40 on this page.
WTF - Dested, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Holy ***** theres a Digg page with compeltly different comments on it. Haha wtf.
- SilentBobSC, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Woo! Can I pleeease have a link to some lame wordpress blog w/ all the screenies gone?
- ericnmu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5thats a fkn terrible tutorial site. piss poor navigation, tiny ass content frame, no screenshots, wtf.
- tofuoni, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5"web 2.0 style graphics"
So, just to clarify, web 2.0 is a look?? duh, I thought it had somethng to do with ajax. - josho, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5This is worthless and just silly. Burying as 'lame'. Oh, yeah, and http://*****.com
- porkstacker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4“Web 2.0” is the biggest techno-cliché for 2006. I’ve even seen job postings online which are looking for web designers for “creating rich Web 2.0 content”. Whatever. Techno e-leveraged buzzword-per-kilosecond mission-critical business objects.
- avsa, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Am I missing the point or this link is just a wordpress blog that posted a couple psds and wrote ONE tutorial (with no image) ?
I came here looking for a big web 2.0 community of tutorials and psds. if someone creates one call me (tip for entrepeneurs looking for an idea).
That and the funny digg inconsistency. not front page worthy. not een digg worthy - TheKingInYellow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4the first rule of logo design:
logos should be designed in illustrator and not photoshop. - FastZ, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5How can a .psd file be "open source"? Free, yes, but open source?
- TomP, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4and 35 here
- BobMysterioso, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yes, you can. just click the link at the top.
Its everything you asked for.
Looks like christmas came early for you SilentBobSC. - BlueLaser, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Yeah...still a bug. Homepage now report 240+ diggs but the page is reporting 89 diggs. I've never seen anything like this before on Digg.
- cmw72, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Um ... well I tried to post a link to the other article, but It just brings you back here. Still, on the frontpage it says 104 diggs presently, while this page says 14.
- poondoggle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2http://www.tipclique.com is a much better site for this type of stuff. Not sure why mentioning Web 2.0 gets you to the front page, but whatever. :)
- jenk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The number of diggs and comments reported on the front page are way off for this story. what's going on here?
- TinMan, on 10/12/2007, -0/+282 diggs here
- mopper, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3http://duggmirror.com/design/Photoshop_Web2_0_style_tutorials_and_free_open_source_psds/
- cmw72, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The other story: http://digg.com/design/Photoshop_Web2_0_style_tutorials_and_free_open_source_psds
- AcidBath, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I posted a comment a few minutes ago and it isn't even on here. Digg is flaking out a bit.
- nmaster64, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Update: 350+ on homepage, 110+ here...
This is really weird... - pumacub, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Ummm, digg bug! Digg bug!
The homepage says 200 diggs, 3 comments. When you click on comments to get here there are 54 diggs, 21 comments. - ZaNkY, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2350 FP for me, 106 here.
Coolness. Never seen Digg bugg up this goofy.
digg++ for bugg++
(pun on "C++ for You++" lol) - waxdart, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Thank you, Photoshop tutorials. You keep art school from being obsolete.
- danshields, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I'm so sick of the term Web 2.0 its merely just what all of us developers have been working in the last 5 years or so and now technology and browsers are letting us use it the way it is suppose to be like XHTML,CSS,AJAX,DOM and letting users upload content and tag stuff LOL. Web 2.0 is just used by all the idiots that we were trying to convice to code in better standards a couple years back and now are jumping on the bandwagon.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm not seeing screen shots.
Now I am. WTF? - cogsprocket, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1http://www.commonsdesign.com
No tutorials but at least it is sort of what you're talking about. - Himself, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ahhhh
.
.
.
.
.
.
http://digg.com/tech_news/Digg_Trauma_Photoshop_Web2_0_style_tutorials_and_free_open_source_psds
.
.
. - Himself, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@AcidBath:
"how the heck... without images"
RAR(PDF + lesson files) & FileFront? - Bennethon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I made a comment and now it's gone. WTF Digg?
- masprema, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2794 diggs on front page, 175 diggs here. Terrible site.
- jenmo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Totally agree. Buried as lame.
- jonathono2000, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Exactly what I was going to say.
He should try figuring out how to do that in Illustrator.
Yeah that's right—its not that easy is it? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Web 2.0 style graphics is quite like the Snakes on a Plane movie. It all started gaining popularity with bloggers poking fun at it because of the utter silliness.
But somewhere along the way the joke got lost, and now webmasters are seriously using Web 2.0 for their professional web designs. Sad but true! - seventoes, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Yes.
- palmer, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4WTF, there's still someone on the planet who thinks "Web 2.0" exists?
- bcardarella, on 10/12/2007, -4/+3Am I the only one who cannot load the pictures from the site?
- Robert0, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I thought the same thing. This should be sweet, maybe some content that goes beyond the normal scope of some tut with a few screenies. What did we get? One or two "tutorial" blogs with no screenshots and no real new content. IDK WTF someone was thinking posting this here.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -9/+2depends on digg rate, of course having web 2.0 in the title helps, attracts attention.
Also note, WTF does this have to do with web 2.0?
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is