Comment by kabes
4 hours ago
I'm not sure the creators of tailwind share your definition of winning though. They recently had to let go of most staff since revenue has plummeted die to LLMs
4 hours ago
I'm not sure the creators of tailwind share your definition of winning though. They recently had to let go of most staff since revenue has plummeted die to LLMs
Winning here means being more widely used than others; it doesn’t have to be commercially successful.
Considering they (tried) to turn Tailwind into a for-profit project, I also think the creators/maintainers would disagree.
If it was just a FOSS project then indeed wider usage should be considered a success no doubt.
any information about it? what did they sell? I don't even see a sales link on tailwind page
https://tailwindcss.com/sponsor
That's an incomplete story though, 'revenue has plummeted due to LLMs', 'revenue is from people sponsoring the project', so... what, people that formerly liked and sponsored Tailwind stopped, figuring they can just ask AI now?
Bit surprised that would have happened in significant volume (I'd have thought the LLM using non-sponsors would have far more overlap with the prior non-sponsors) but maybe.
3 replies →
They aren’t in conflict. Tailwind hasn’t performed well commercially because it’s open source. Even though it’s being used more and more by AI coders, the issue is that they don’t have to pay for it.