4 ms·

You seem to think i'm advocating for sloppy and un-maintainable programming... I'm advocating that the web is going to be the best platform for some applicatio

You seem to think i'm advocating for sloppy and un-maintainable programming... I'm advocating that the web is going to be the best platform for some applications. Users aren't going to want to go through complicated installs to install a program that they will only want to use a few times. They don't want to spend minutes or sometimes hours installing a program that they will only use every now and then. They want to be able to use the software from their iOS/android mobile device, computer, laptop, tablet, friend's computer, osx/window/linux/whogivesafuckOS. They want it to "install" in less than a second, and they want to be able to use it and leave. They want it to be secure, sandboxed, and know that it won't interfere with other programs they are running on their device. They want to know that it is in it's own sandbox, and they want it to be as easy as typing in an address or clicking a single link from a search engine. If you know of any other platform (even a single other platform) where that amount of speed that the average person can install, use, and "uninstall" a program with the security, ease of use, and sandboxing of the web, then by all means please let me know. But until then don't act like anyone writing software targeting the web as a platform is doing some kind of disservice to society. It's not. The people doing a disservice to society are people like you who "look down upon" those who develop for or use the web to get shit done. Calling it "bad service" because you don't like how it's used is juvenile, and downright wrong.

nickpsecurity 10y ago
"They want it to "install" in less than a second, and they want to be able to use it and leave. They want it to be secure, sandboxed, and know that it won't interfere with other programs they are running on their device. They want to know that it is in it's own sandbox, and they want it to be as easy as typing in an address or clicking a single link from a search engine." I don't know why anyone would trust a web browser or app to do all that. They fail to every day due to enormous complexity. Sounds like you need a https link to a standalone exe that's written in portable, safe-by-default code utilizing only necessary OS API's. Like us non-Web types build things past and present. Interestingly, one of the old arguments was that even our micro-apps would be too large vs web pages. The web app, framework, and JS craze mean those are now bigger than many stand-alones. That's funny. "They want to be able to use the software from their iOS/android mobile device, computer, laptop, tablet, friend's computer, osx/window/linux/whogivesafuckOS" Only part that's tricky. Gotta compile the portable code into standalone for all the common OS's. Many tools to make that easy. Then, perhaps a page or JS that determines their platform then redirects to the right link. Problem solved.
- Klathmon 10y ago
  >I don't know why anyone would trust a web browser or app to do all that. Because at the end of the day running code in a sandboxed browser is better than running native code on the OS. Yeah, they aren't perfect, but it's better than most alternatives.
  - nickpsecurity 10y ago
    Displaying some text and graphics on a browser with user's privileges is better than printing some text and graphics to a window in a process with little or no privileges? It wasn't better at any point in web development. There were simpler things at each point. Just not widespread adoption. ;)

nickpsecurity 10y ago

"They want it to "install" in less than a second, and they want to be able to use it and leave. They want it to be secure, sandboxed, and know that it won't interfere with other programs they are running on their device. They want to know that it is in it's own sandbox, and they want it to be as easy as typing in an address or clicking a single link from a search engine." I don't know why anyone would trust a web browser or app to do all that. They fail to every day due to enormous complexity. Sounds like you need a https link to a standalone exe that's written in portable, safe-by-default code utilizing only necessary OS API's. Like us non-Web types build things past and present. Interestingly, one of the old arguments was that even our micro-apps would be too large vs web pages. The web app, framework, and JS craze mean those are now bigger than many stand-alones. That's funny. "They want to be able to use the software from their iOS/android mobile device, computer, laptop, tablet, friend's computer, osx/window/linux/whogivesafuckOS" Only part that's tricky. Gotta compile the portable code into standalone for all the common OS's. Many tools to make that easy. Then, perhaps a page or JS that determines their platform then redirects to the right link. Problem solved.

Klathmon 10y ago
>I don't know why anyone would trust a web browser or app to do all that. Because at the end of the day running code in a sandboxed browser is better than running native code on the OS. Yeah, they aren't perfect, but it's better than most alternatives.
- nickpsecurity 10y ago
  Displaying some text and graphics on a browser with user's privileges is better than printing some text and graphics to a window in a process with little or no privileges? It wasn't better at any point in web development. There were simpler things at each point. Just not widespread adoption. ;)