qiskit.org
qiskit.org copied to clipboard
Qiskit
"Quick Start" should be more hardware agnostic
Where does the issue happen?
Landing page
What is the content issue?
The Quick Start in the landing page is very IBM Quantum centric. The website needs to highlight the possibility to connect with hardware and simulators.
Screenshots
I suggest something like this. Figma link.
Additional information
I think the "unstable" section can be removed. Typical, the information to install dev version is in the GitHub README file.
Currently, the supported backends are:
Simualtors:
- https://github.com/Qiskit/qiskit-aer/
- https://github.com/cda-tum/ddsim
QPU:
- https://github.com/Qiskit/qiskit-ibmq-provider
- https://github.com/Qiskit-Partners/qiskit-ionq
- https://github.com/Qiskit-Partners/qiskit-aqt-provider
- https://github.com/qiskit-community/qiskit-quantinuum-provider
- https://github.com/rigetti/qiskit-rigetti
Multiprovider:
- https://github.com/qiskit-community/qiskit-braket-provider
- https://github.com/microsoft/qdk-python/tree/main/azure-quantum/azure/quantum/qiskit
Other candidates (thanks @mtreinish !):
- https://github.com/iqm-finland/qiskit-on-iqm
- https://github.com/pnnl/NWQ-Sim
- https://github.com/SupertechLabs/qiskit-superstaq
- https://github.com/qcware/qiskit_qcware
- https://github.com/gaqqie/gaqqie-door
- https://github.com/0tt3r/QuaC-qiskit
The other thing we should do if we make a page like this is document how someone should be able to add themselves to the list (and the criteria for being on the list). Having maintained lists like this in the past people sometimes care quite a bit about being advertised on a project's website.
Fully agree. Maybe we can isolate the code and running as part of the ecosystem check ups. Mocking might be hard.
Other option is to go for a very arbitrary GH start minimum or months since the last release.
This would basically be updated the component on the homepage of qiskit.org, right? Would it mean removing the "start online" CTA that goes to Quantum Lab? There is another code cell directly below the current version of this component on qiskit.org that might visually conflict (although it might be okay). Does that section, the "What Can Qiskit Do" section need to be reworked too, or is that out of scope for now?
@1ucian0 I took a quick pass at cleaning up the design file at the top of the thread here, but I think we should meet to discuss it briefly to make sure it scales up well, especially if there are going to be a lot of circuit libraries and providers.
A possible simple solution is adding a dropdown for additional options. But depending on how many options there are, we may need to rethink the component a little bit.
Let me know when you have some time and we can discuss it in detail.
Also FYI, I updated the figma link in the description. I started a new file because I think the other wasn't a part of our workspace in figma
