It's much more than that. When people use a CDN for their applications, they want to be 100% (or 1000% if that were possible) sure that the CDN will not be compromised. They also want to be sure that the people running the CDN do not have nefarious intentions. They also want 100% uptime. They also want the CDN to stick around as long as their web app is around.
That's why CDN's from Microsoft, Google, and the official jQuery CDN's are trusted (and will inevitably be trusted) more than this one.
As awesome as this is, I'd quite honestly rather host my JS myself than use it. Once Google adds more libraries, I may use their CDN.
EDIT: I don't mean to come off too harsh, but a lot of people don't use CDN's altogether because of the potential for downtime. Combine that with a not-globally-recognized brand and it may not work too well.
Trust has to be earned. The goal of this website is to decrease the barrier of entry for people wanting to try out some cool new libraries and/or jQuery plugins on their site, so we aren't really targeting the upper end of the market.
Having said that, we have been using this for all of our personal and business endeavors, so it will be around for the foreseeable future.
It would help a bit. At the moment there's no indication at all of who is running this thing.
The only way I'd trust something like this is if someone stood to take a major blow to their reputation if it failed. Google, Amazon, AOL would be fine. A company that made a living doing high profile operations work (like http://omniti.com/ ) would be OK. An anonymous web page doesn't cut it.
Comments
No, this website doesn't engender trust, and that's vital for a cdn of this nature.
Would you care to elaborate?
Would putting some links to our profiles on things like Twitter and LinkedIn help add credibility?
It's much more than that. When people use a CDN for their applications, they want to be 100% (or 1000% if that were possible) sure that the CDN will not be compromised. They also want to be sure that the people running the CDN do not have nefarious intentions. They also want 100% uptime. They also want the CDN to stick around as long as their web app is around.
That's why CDN's from Microsoft, Google, and the official jQuery CDN's are trusted (and will inevitably be trusted) more than this one.
As awesome as this is, I'd quite honestly rather host my JS myself than use it. Once Google adds more libraries, I may use their CDN.
EDIT: I don't mean to come off too harsh, but a lot of people don't use CDN's altogether because of the potential for downtime. Combine that with a not-globally-recognized brand and it may not work too well.
Great point.
Trust has to be earned. The goal of this website is to decrease the barrier of entry for people wanting to try out some cool new libraries and/or jQuery plugins on their site, so we aren't really targeting the upper end of the market.
Having said that, we have been using this for all of our personal and business endeavors, so it will be around for the foreseeable future.
It would help a bit. At the moment there's no indication at all of who is running this thing.
The only way I'd trust something like this is if someone stood to take a major blow to their reputation if it failed. Google, Amazon, AOL would be fine. A company that made a living doing high profile operations work (like http://omniti.com/ ) would be OK. An anonymous web page doesn't cut it.