Bill 18 August 2014 Nice try but I think Grunt is a solution to a problem I don’t have. For those developers who pump out site after site in a sausage factory environment, where everything you do goes through an identical process, then I’m sure it’s useful for you. I’m a frontend developer who works on a range of dev projects and bits and pieces. I prefer minimal, clutter-free workflows and tools. Command line anything sounds like something to actively avoid. I don’t need it, don’t want it. I don’t see the point of minifying CSS and JS files when the server already compresses those files. Most web servers I work with use HTTP compression (GZIP), so any files such as HTML and CSS are heavily compressed anyway. The extra compression you’d get from minifying would be negligible and I bet you could never measure a performance increase on the site between minified and unminified CSS or JS. As for the other tasks it can do… great. Knock yourself out making yourself feel better about using Grunt. While you’re messing around with all that stuff, I’m busy coding and creating websites and making them look and perform better because I’m giving them direct attention, not leaving it up to an external process to tell me I have an error. I won’t be installing Grunt or anything like it any time soon. Been developing for many years, and there’s no bottlenecks I can identify that would be resolved with tools like this. On large sites with content management systems, the images are optimised by content editors, not my the developer. Only the site furniture graphics are optimized by developers, and that takes no time at all and is best done when cutting up the graphics in photoshop. Sometimes you need more compression on an image than other times to avoid banding and so on. You don’t want to automate your image compression unless you have a large number of images to compress.