<div dir="ltr">On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 3:19 PM, Andrew Brunner <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:atbrunner@aurawin.com" target="_blank">atbrunner@aurawin.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div class="im">
<div><span style="color:rgb(34,34,34)">Ok, I can tell you are no fan of HTML5 :-(</span></div></div></div></blockquote><div> </div><div style>No actually i am a fan, but not for shoving in the browser stuff that should have been native applications that take full advantage of my computer's resources and my operating system's facilities.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>For example i am a fan of offline storage for storing things like the last mailbox i opened in my web-based mail client (which makes total sense since we're talking about something networked). I'm a fan of JavaScript using requests to update the page partially so the whole thing doesn't have to be reloaded every time. I'm a fan for WebGL when it is used for stuff like showing "in practice" how some 3D math work (a recent series of OpenGL/WebGL tutorials did that - for every lesson you had interactive demo alongside the lesson - and it was a very good to learn).</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>I'm not a fan for trying to mimic desktop UIs (we have the desktop for that) using a much slower technology that was never designed for such a use. I'm not a fan of "web apps" which try to do stuff that would have been trivial to do in the desktop using a dedicated tool for that (such as Lazarus) and present the "feat" as something positive. I'm not a fan for trying to create "editors" that - for security reasons obviously - cannot fully access my file system. I'm not a fan of playing Quake 2 on my browser when i can simply launch Steam and do it fine.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>I'm not a fan of "web apps" which do stuff that proper native programs did better and faster 20 years ago on the desktop.</div><div style><br></div><div style>I'm not a fan of "web apps" that if they were released as shareware 10 years ago would have been largely ignored by the users because of their mediocre features and design and the only way they manage to survive today is that users do not have to pay for them because the developers managed to convert users to products by selling ads, usage statistics and other stuff.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>I'm not a fan of relying on programs developed by people like the above and by people whose only reason to make the program ("service" they call it usually - but service to whom?) is so they get big and be bought by Facebook, Google, Microsoft or whomever for whatever reason on which later people will depend on them to not shut down like many others in the past. Of course if you ask these developers they'll swear that they would never do that and it never crossed their minds.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>I'm not a fan of losing control of my computer.</div><div style><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">That's simply not going to happen. There is a rising tide that is
pushing HTML to new heights.</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>The higher it'll go, the more painful the crash will be when it falls on our heads.</div><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Wow. That has to be the boldest statement I have ever heard. On
who's authority did you make that assessment? </div></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>it is right there in the name of the most important part of the whole "web platform": Hyper*TEXT* Markup Language.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
First loading, your browser must cache the framework. Subsequent
loads are fast.</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>Subsequent loads from the same computer with the same browser and assuming i haven't configured the browser (or isn't configured by the IT department) to clean the cache when i close it. Which, btw, even if it wasn't configured as such, it is still too small (and for a reason: i'm not using a cache to download the whole Internet).</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>If every site needs 1MB of framework (or whatever, i didn't really check the framework size there) then they'll start fighting against each other in the cache and invalidate it.</div>
<div style><br></div><div style>I'm not getting a faster connection so people can make bloated pages made using the latest and greatest fad they learned about, i'm getting a faster connection so things *will load faster*.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Ah, so you are a minimalist. <br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>When i want to do X i prefer a tool that does X alone, not X and Y and Z and a bunch of other stuff i do not care about, especially when the latter tool is MUCH slower than the former.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
Care to elaborate?</div></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>Do not develop software only to have more things to list as features. Good software isn't always the software that has the most features. </div><div>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><a href="http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/04/16/windows-its-over-tech-site-declares/" target="_blank">http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2013/04/16/windows-its-over-tech-site-declares</a></div>
</blockquote><div><br></div><div style>You could link to the original article, i found it more interesting :-P.</div><div style><br></div><div style>Yes, i agree that Metro is a failure and shouldn't exist (and probably wont exist for long), but Microsoft has a TREMENDOUS inertia. It'll need multiple equally big blunders for them to start being anything close to irrelevant.</div>
<div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
As HTML5+ becomes adopted you will see a shift in alliances towards
independence. <br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>Sadly most of the time this independence seems to be "independence from users".</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
I like to think that's what we're doing here.<br></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div style>Hopefully not. After all browsers aren't written to run in themselves.</div><div><br></div></div></div></div>