4
webketje
197d

So I was browsing the https://travis-ci.com website and was bothered by the weird gradiants, familiar layout and awkwardly timed animations (normally I only use https://app.travis-ci.com).

I navigated to all their top-level pages and paid attention to the incoherent/ sluggish design (see screenshot). So I got this feeling that it was a cheap-ass Wordpress template purchased from Themeforest and implemented by a webmaster with little to no dev-skills.

Sure enough, I checked the Wappalyzer extension and it is using Wordpress. Compare that to the old https://travis-ci.org which was custom-built on Ember and looks professional.

I'm aware of the negative PR they have generated over the past year but gave them the benefit of doubt and they have been good in their support and credit allotments, but man... that WP site looks so amateurish and marketed to the wrong target group. I don't know maybe I'll be forced to reconsider

Comments
  • 3
    I tried to give a chance to Travis CI after the acquisition but that amateurish hard to browse website turned me off so I’m just going with Circle.
  • 0
    People liked Travis when it was one of a few good CI tools for GitHub. Now the situation has changed, there's plenty of options (including GitHub actions), and honestly, Travis has been lagging behind for a long time now. That's why the takeover happened in the first place, and honestly, I'll be really happy if it turns to complete shit and mayor OSS projects finally ditch it.
  • 0
    @hitko I'm not sure I agree with that analysis. I think the takeover happened because of poor marketing/ mgmt (paid customer acquisition). The OSS plan limits have been introduced in competing CI as well and yes they did a PR blunder in september.
    But how is it lagging behind technically? It supports all features other CI's offer (os choice, languages, expressive build matrix). I think Travis is still a good CI, the front website is just a disgrace
  • 0
    @webketje Just because it can do everything others can doesn't mean it's good at it. Other systems are way more straight-forward to configure, way easier to use with docker images, and most importantly, don't have a fucking pile of different language / use-case specific keywords you have to learn to use them.
Add Comment