Coffeehouse Thread

75 posts

I can't believe how much web programming has changed

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • vesuvius

    @Sven Groot: Mvc is brilliant, coming from WPF and MVVM it is a real departure from classic webforms. I'm not the strongest JQuery developer, and it has sometimes been frustrating when you want to do advanced stuff, as MVC 2 and 1 examples don't work, but all in all is it web programming done right.

     

    I will never write another webforms website again....evah!

  • fanbaby

    , evildictait​or wrote

    *snip*

    Don't get me wrong - the Internet is a big revolution (also: please don't mistake the Internet for the web - the Internet stack is pretty innovative, fast and well designed. The web on the other hand is utter crap - HTTP, HTML, Javascript and CSS have been holding back the web for literally years). 

     

    Psst, here's an idea for you: use Microsoft WCF to make a new protocol on top of TCP/IP or better yet, on top of IP. One that's better designed then the crappy HTTP. Make it binary for better efficiency, and non of that stateless sh!t that's holding the web back.

  • spivonious

    , vesuvius wrote

    @Sven Groot: Mvc is brilliant, coming from WPF and MVVM it is a real departure from classic webforms. I'm not the strongest JQuery developer, and it has sometimes been frustrating when you want to do advanced stuff, as MVC 2 and 1 examples don't work, but all in all is it web programming done right.

     

    I will never write another webforms website again....evah!

    If you're looking for a nice intro to jQuery, check out the course here: http://try.jquery.com/

    I totally agree about MVC (at least 3+). It is 1000x better than WebForms.

  • evildictait​or

    , fanbaby wrote

    Psst, here's an idea for you: use Microsoft WCF to make a new protocol on top of TCP/IP or better yet, on top of IP. One that's better designed then the crappy HTTP. Make it binary for better efficiency, and non of that stateless sh!t that's holding the web back.

    Well, apart from the WCF thing (strawman much?) That's exactly what all games have done, all streaming video applications (like Skype) have done. What RDP has done, what bittorrent did, what dropbox does etc etc etc.

    The web is always playing catch-up with the rest of computing.

    We had stateful connections with bidirectional low-latency communications in 1970. The web threw all that away with HTTP, and then had to retro-fit statefulness (cookies), lower-startup times (keep-alive) and bidirectionality (websockets).

    In fact, the very fact that HTTP is so crap is the very reason why Google got fed up and rebuilt it (SPDY).

    You might think that the web is oh-so-very-clever because you can now just about achieve a proper connection to a website and send data back and forward, but the rest of the computing world has had that from the very start. It only feels new because the web was retarded and threw all of the good bits away and is only just about getting back to where the networking stack was in 1970 and where desktop applications were in 2003 (and where security was in 1998)

    As I said before - the web is getting better, because it is becoming more like the desktop - not because the desktop is becoming more like the web. The crap that is the web-stack has been holding back computing for over a decade.

    We're where we are now despite the web being a pile of poop. Not because of its shining brilliance.

  • TexasToast

    , evildictait​or wrote

    *snip*

    Well, apart from the WCF thing (strawman much?) That's exactly what all games have done, all streaming video applications (like Skype) have done. What RDP has done, what bittorrent did, what dropbox does etc etc etc.

    The web is always playing catch-up with the rest of computing.

    We had stateful connections with bidirectional low-latency communications in 1970. The web threw all that away with HTTP, and then had to retro-fit statefulness (cookies), lower-startup times (keep-alive) and bidirectionality (websockets).

    In fact, the very fact that HTTP is so crap is the very reason why Google got fed up and rebuilt it (SPDY).

    You might think that the web is oh-so-very-clever because you can now just about achieve a proper connection to a website and send data back and forward, but the rest of the computing world has had that from the very start. It only feels new because the web was retarded and threw all of the good bits away and is only just about getting back to where the networking stack was in 1970 and where desktop applications were in 2003 (and where security was in 1998)

    As I said before - the web is getting better, because it is becoming more like the desktop - not because the desktop is becoming more like the web. The crap that is the web-stack has been holding back computing for over a decade.

    We're where we are now despite the web being a pile of poop. Not because of its shining brilliance.

    Right on brother !  I totally agree.   Even all this Model View Controller stuff is old .   MFC apps had doc views with separated handlers.  

  • kettch

    Even stuff like HTML and JavaScript aren't helping. The only reason we can get anything done is because of the huge numbers of script libraries that provide canned functionality. HTML5 is really only requiring that browsers implement natively what people have been doing by hand for years. Then, tooling like VS helps developers herd all of these cats.

  • ZippyV

    Sven, don't forget to install the Web Essentials plugin from Mads Kristensen (asp.net team). It makes web coding even more fun: http://vswebessentials.com/

  • MasterPi

    , kettch wrote

    Even stuff like HTML and JavaScript aren't helping.

    I think it's really HTML that holds JavaScript back. Are we still performing string manipulation on document.cookies to read an individual cookie?

  • evildictait​or

    , kettch wrote

    Even stuff like HTML and JavaScript aren't helping. The only reason we can get anything done is because of the huge numbers of script libraries that provide canned functionality. HTML5 is really only requiring that browsers implement natively what people have been doing by hand for years. Then, tooling like VS helps developers herd all of these cats.

    ++

    The biggest problem with HTML5 is that it's providing code in a can, not let's program this better. That's why jQuery is a more important innovation on the web than all of HTML5, by some margin.

    To get to a better web, we need people to stop spitting out webpages from the back-end of a console PHP/ASP/RoR/whatever program into a DOM that works differently on every browser. We need web-developers to write classes and components.

    jQuery helps in this regard -- encourage developers to write your javascript as a "sort of" class instead of blindly giving developers more elements they can shove out the backend of a PHP script because you object on principle to Adobe Flash and you've realized that your platform can't handle living without it.

    In the 1980s we invented a language called C where everything was an int or a pointer (which is an int), the compiler tries to second-guess what you were doing (rather than helping you weed out the ambiguities), and no two platforms were the same - so writing cross-compatible code was a total ball-ache. Those ambiguities led to unstable programs that were difficult to understand, but pretty easy to hack.

    Fast-forward to 2013, where by the grace of God we've somehow invented a series of dangerous languages where everything is a variant or a string (which is a variant), the compiler and the browser both compete to come up some baffling interpretation of what you've written (rather than helping you weed out the ambiguities) and no two platforms work the same - so writing cross-compatible code is a total ballache.

    Oh yes - and it's also really easy to hack web-applications because they're just spaghetti that's been duck-taped together by monkeys and rammed into a command prompt on a linux box.

    Desktop developers on the outskirts aren't "jumping ship" to the web because the web is shiny and beautiful and does everything they want it to. They're standing on their aircraft carrier laughing at your dingy made of logs tied together with some string you found on a beach.

    Don't get me wrong, we're impressed that you made it this far into the ocean with an oar made out of a plastic spade and a seagull that you've tied to the front of your dingy. But that doesn't make you the king of the navy, or demonstrate that the world "better look out" because of your platform's new innovations.

    I'm not sticking with the Desktop because I'm stubborn. I'm sticking here because it's better. The web is no less than 20 years behind the desktop in terms of security, ability to write good code and platform stability - and solidly five or six behind in terms of speed. If the platform of the web didn't suck so much, maybe people would be jumping ship to the web instead of jumping ship from the web to write apps. But sadly it's not. The web is just awful, and it's an embarrassment to those of us who can actually program worth a damn.

  • vesuvius

    , evildictait​or wrote

    *snip*

    Desktop developers on the outskirts aren't "jumping ship" to the web because the web is shiny and beautiful and does everything they want it to. They're standing on their aircraft carrier laughing at your dingy made of logs tied together with some string you found on a beach.

    This may seem like a dig, but it is true. I write software using the complete stack, from dinky Intranets, to Websites to middle-ware and so on. A lot of programmers today developing software commercially have to know and use both.

    Some guys just prefer CSS and JavaScript, compared to Winforms or XAML, but most end users will tell you the prefer a desktop app to an HTML site, especially if you need to use it every day

  • Bass

    Standard Disclaimer: The opinions of people on Channel 9 do not remotely match the opinions of the larger technology industry.

  • vesuvius

    , Bass wrote

    Standard Disclaimer: The opinions of people on Channel 9 do not remotely match the opinions of the larger technology industry.

    Hopefully they exist to please their customers, rather than dictate what is good or not. Android, iPhone, iPad, IPod , iTunes and Windows (i.e desktop applications) make people spend their hard earned money and create the biggest technology industries.

    People are not exited about booking trains or checking their bank account which the web does brilliantly, it is the desktop they find immersive.

  • Bass

    @evildictaitor:

    You seem quite misinformed here confusing ideas and terms and the like. HTTP requests are stateless between each other. But HTTP itself is not a stateless protocol, as it uses connection state in resource negotiation (which is what TCP provides). Good luck implementing HTTP without any connection state.

    And that was a conscious design decision. The stateless nature of RESTful resources is what allows the web to scale. Many highly scalable languages like F#, Go, Scala, Erlang etc. mimic this idea for similar goals.

  • figuerres

    , Bass wrote

    Standard Disclaimer: The opinions of people on Channel 9 do not remotely match the opinions of the larger technology industry.

    I like that one,  as you are one of the "people on Channel 9" that means that your statement also includes you and your opinion is also null and void.

    Nice!

  • fanbaby

    @Bass: hahaha. where else can you meet developers so out of touch. Developing desktop apps today?? Who are your customers, and why are they accepting this? On second thought i'm cool with it. It seems you and your customers deserve each other.

    But please no more FUD, you don't want your children learning XAML instead of HTML, do you?

  • vesuvius

    , fanbaby wrote

    @Bass: hahaha. where else can you meet developers so out of touch. Developing desktop apps today?? Who are your customers, and why are they accepting this? On second thought i'm cool with it. It seems you and your customers deserve each other.

    But please no more FUD, you don't want your children learning XAML instead of HTML, do you?

    Can I have an answer to this please as it is the children enjoying the desktop and the world of apps?

    Hopefully they exist to please their customers, rather than dictate what is good or not. Android, iPhone, iPad, IPod , iTunes and Windows (i.e desktop applications) make people spend their hard earned money and create the biggest technology industries.

    People are not exited about booking trains or checking their bank account which the web does brilliantly, it is the desktop they find immersive.

  • Bass

    , fanbaby wrote

    @Bass: hahaha. where else can you meet developers so out of touch. Developing desktop apps today?? Who are your customers, and why are they accepting this? On second thought i'm cool with it. It seems you and your customers deserve each other.

    But please no more FUD, you don't want your children learning XAML instead of HTML, do you?

    Yup. While at the same time, you have threads like this being made all the time over here. I just imagine people having a poster in their office with "I don't want to believe!". It's just bizarre.

  • MasterPi

    , figuerres wrote

    *snip*

    I like that one,  as you are one of the "people on Channel 9" that means that your statement also includes you and your opinion is also null and void.

    Nice!

    Yeah...especially since many in the "larger technology industry" specifically come here whether to ask for help or to participate.

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.