Coffeehouse Thread

58 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Deadkit?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    It seems as though another spat between children will ultimately result in more compatibility issues and other brokenness that WebKit was supposed to help prevent. I think it's great that they'll start with removing dead code and reducing the bloat but when that work is done... quirks for everyone!

    Gotta wonder how the folks in Oslo are taking this news?

    I would think this was good news for Microsoft as an opportunity for those concerned to move away from the newly forming unknown.

    If we all believed in unicorns and fairies the world would be a better place.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    Blue Ink

    , DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

    Gotta wonder how the folks in Oslo are taking this news?

    I would think this was good news for Microsoft as an opportunity for those concerned to move away from the newly forming unknown.

    According to the FAQ, Opera is also moving to the new rendering engine, so I guess they are pretty happy.

     

  • User profile image
    blowdart

    Wait, didn't youtube devs at google say IE should move to the one true rendering engine, WebKit a couple of months back? Oh yea, they did.

  • User profile image
    elmer

    This sounds a bit like stripping out all of the Chromium specific bloat, to leave a common core engine that everyone can then base their implementations on - i.e. Opera can use the blink engine and not have to adapt chrome-specific code to their browser.

    Basically, seems like a sensible move.

  • User profile image
    Bas

    It's a sensible move, sure. So was following standards, or every browser using the same rendering engine. There are plenty of sensible ideas that all lead to heaps of trouble, and this is just the next one in line, demonstrating once again why web languages are still not viable as an application development platform.

  • User profile image
    exoteric

    Great! More innovation and competition! Smiley

  • User profile image
    PopeDai

    I think Opera would stick with Apple's WebKit - Opera makes money by selling browsers for embedded devices like the Wii. Note that announcement said that Blink was for Chrome - not Android. Presumably Google's Blink will be optimized for raw performance on the desktop and Chromebook, but WebKit will still be maintained by Google, Apple and Opera for strong cross-platform support...

    And by "cross-platform" I mean really cross-platform, like low-powered handheld games consoles, to smartphones, to slate tablets, to laptops, to desktops - getting good performance on the gamut from Tegra to GeForce.

  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    , Bas wrote

    demonstrating once again why web languages are still not viable as an application development platform.

    Remind me again why we decided a structured document is a good way of rendering an application.

    Or why we decided a type-less interpreted language that sucks at data processing and doing anything in an object orientated way is the way we try and achieve high speed graphics for applications on the web?

    Microsoft should never have killed Silverlight. HTML sucks so bad, and Silverlight fixed so many of it's obvious deficiencies (like XSS for instance, video streaming, DRM video, templating, object orientation by default etc etc etc).

  • User profile image
    TexasToast

    , evildictait​or wrote

    *snip*

    Microsoft should never have killed Silverlight. HTML sucks so bad, and Silverlight fixed so many of it's obvious deficiencies (like XSS for instance, video streaming, DRM video, templating, object orientation by default etc etc etc).

    I totally agree.  Silverlight was a great move and whoever killed it should be strung up on the Microsoft campus.   We will eventually come back to this one way or the other.  Stupid ideas eventually die and good ones get resurrected.

    It is almost like Microsoft somehow forgot how to lead and is now trying to follow everyone else.  They need to get some strong leaders back who know the right thing to do for the long haul.

  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    , evildictait​or wrote

    *snip*

    Remind me again why we decided a structured document is a good way of rendering an application.

    Or why we decided a type-less interpreted language that sucks at data processing and doing anything in an object orientated way is the way we try and achieve high speed graphics for applications on the web?

    Microsoft should never have killed Silverlight. HTML sucks so bad, and Silverlight fixed so many of it's obvious deficiencies (like XSS for instance, video streaming, DRM video, templating, object orientation by default etc etc etc).

    Amen. Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. Well...the ship has sailed. It'll be interesting in a year or two if we're knee-deep in HTML/JS development or if a new programming paradigm is on it's way from Microsoft.

    EDIT: Another analyst's prediction of Microsoft's irrelevancy... Maybe not true but still sad.

    If we all believed in unicorns and fairies the world would be a better place.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    figuerres

    , evildictait​or wrote

    *snip*

    Remind me again why we decided a structured document is a good way of rendering an application.

    Or why we decided a type-less interpreted language that sucks at data processing and doing anything in an object orientated way is the way we try and achieve high speed graphics for applications on the web?

    Microsoft should never have killed Silverlight. HTML sucks so bad, and Silverlight fixed so many of it's obvious deficiencies (like XSS for instance, video streaming, DRM video, templating, object orientation by default etc etc etc).

    Funny I recall posting the idea that browsers might be updated to support a different connection and use that for "applications" not "web pages"  and no one wanted to hear the idea....

    well in case anyone wants to think on this a bit....

    take the Silverlight runtime system, make it an option that a browser can use it as a plugin or as some standard library ....  allow for some form of hyperlink and possibly a new prefix in place of http as a way to signal that we want to do the application markup stuff not html.

    say APP://  as an example....

    if the mono / moonlight folks and the right folks at MS would get together and work out some details I think they could offer a new open standard that could work and I think 90% of the tooling and code is just sitting there for them to put together and package.   a way to do a LOB app over the web using a load of already known web standards and the client side could work on a bunch of clients in no time.   the only place I see a problem is in iOS   that should be fixable but has a lot to do with apple and how they want to make $$$ selling apps.

     

  • User profile image
    exoteric

    , evildictait​or wrote

    *snip*

    Remind me again why we decided a structured document is a good way of rendering an application.

    You mean like XAML? Wink

    Obviously the browser was not invented as an application platform, it just grew into one, with the whole world hacking away on it, trying to solve its deficiencies with libraries, new standards and super-performant implementations.

    I guess after seeing the Unreal 3D engine ported to Javascript and run with great performance, the statement from Meijer that "Javascript is the assembly language of the Web" rings truer than ever before - dispite it being very far from one in a technical sense.

    Whenever you think "surely the browser is not suited for this", just wait a couple of months and a demo will pop up.

    It's impressive really. I have to agree with the sentiment of your post though.

  • User profile image
    Bas

    , exoteric wrote

    Whenever you think "surely the browser is not suited for this", just wait a couple of months and a demo will pop up.

    Unfortunately, it'll be a demo of something that was done better eight years ago in more capable languages and frameworks.

  • User profile image
    Minh

    , DeathBy​VisualStudio wrote

    It seems as though another spat between children will ultimately result in more compatibility issues and other brokenness that WebKit was supposed to help prevent. I think it's great that they'll start with removing dead code and reducing the bloat but when that work is done... quirks for everyone!

    Gotta wonder how the folks in Oslo are taking this news?

    I would think this was good news for Microsoft as an opportunity for those concerned to move away from the newly forming unknown.

    I'm surprised you're not calling Google evil for embrace & extend. I have a feeling if MS had done this, you'd be all over them.

  • User profile image
    PopeDai

    , evildictait​or wrote

    Remind me again why we decided a structured document is a good way of rendering an application.

    Or why we decided a type-less interpreted language that sucks at data processing and doing anything in an object orientated way is the way we try and achieve high speed graphics for applications on the web?

    Microsoft should never have killed Silverlight. HTML sucks so bad, and Silverlight fixed so many of it's obvious deficiencies (like XSS for instance, video streaming, DRM video, templating, object orientation by default etc etc etc).

    Tough crowd! I shall rebutt:

    • User interfaces inherently have structure - far more than the old flat/simple-nested style VB6 Forms. Mozilla's XUL and Microsoft's XAML are examples that show a structured document is a great way to implement a UI (though I prefer XUL to XAML as it separates presentation from content, whereas XAML combines the two).
    • Describing ECMAScript as a data-processing language is a straw-man argument. Browser scripting is ostensibly meant for DOM manipulation and simple interactivity - anything more is a cool tech demo. Heavy-lifting is meant to be done on the server-side. But if you want typing, there is TypeScript.
    • And what's wrong with high-speed graphics?
    • On the contrary, it is Silverlight that sucks:.the web is meant to be an open platform, accessible to all, regardless of device, platform or browser. Plugins are dead. XSS is a server-side issue, not an issue with HTML itself. HTML5 <video> works fine for streaming: YouTube uses it, as does Apple, to great effect. I'm personally opposed to DRM, especially on video (because cryptographically DRM doesn't work because Bob and Charles are the same person), but HTML5's working group is looking to make HTML5 support DRM video without actually providing it. And object orientation has what to do with HTML exactly?
  • User profile image
    DeathBy​VisualStudio

    , Minh wrote

    *snip*I'm surprised you're not calling Google evil for embrace & extend. I have a feeling if MS had done this, you'd be all over them.

    Wrong but good point. I guess I shouldn't criticize Google because I am all over embrace & extend. All I want is one giant homogeneous platform that is a joy to develop for and something my customers can afford. If it's standards based great. If not oh well... 

    If we all believed in unicorns and fairies the world would be a better place.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    elmer

    , TexasToast wrote

    *snip*

    Silverlight was a great move and whoever killed it should be strung up on the Microsoft campus.   

    Actually, I believe they sacked him.

    http://www.riagenic.com/archives/960

  • User profile image
    elmer

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.