19 ms·

While being technically correct, your statement is pretty much pointless. All development is 'just' re-solving an existing problem with better performance, or

While being technically correct, your statement is pretty much pointless. All development is 'just' re-solving an existing problem with better performance, or 'just' extending an existing algorithm to be more resilient, or 'just' implementing a legacy interface on a new platform. There are lots of very obvious reasons that the web has the constraints that it does and describing them as 'unnecessary' adds literally nothing useful to that conversation.

analognoise 10y ago
Very obvious? Could you elaborate? I don't mind changing my opinion, but it looks like the web is a mishmash of poor implementations made possible by increasing bandwidth and ram.
coldtea 10y ago
>All development is 'just' re-solving an existing problem with better performance, or 'just' extending an existing algorithm to be more resilient, or 'just' implementing a legacy interface on a new platform. Only this is "re-solving an existing problem with worse performance that we had decades ago (on native), but slightly faster than the previous speeds we achieved having it run with its feet tied". (Where by "feet tied" we refer to the performance penalty imposed by having everything run on the web stack).
- analognoise 10y ago
  This is what I meant!
- zedadex 10y ago
  If the problems were solved for people on native, there wouldn't be this much focus on reinventing the wheel on mobile. Clearly for some subset of people, "something" is missing for those native solutions (I can guess - portability, convenient 'moddability', etc) which they believe the standardization-reliant web can better address for them.
  - astrobe_ 10y ago
    Obviously the browser has become the universal VM. It solves the same problem as Java, but with Javascript instead of Java. So this decade Java school became Javascript schools, next decade it will be something else.
- pcwalton 10y ago
  Can you explain how "native" solved the problem of performing minimal MVC-style updates to a UI "decades ago"? Decades ago, we had the Win32 API, which didn't even try to solve this—apps had to roll their own.
  - astrobe_ 10y ago
    Smalltalk?
    - pcwalton 10y ago
      Smalltalk isn't native!
      - pjmlp 10y ago
        It is a matter of implementation. It was native on the Alto, as the primitives were implemented in microcode, which could be a FPGA nowadays. Also Squeak and Pharo are implemented in Smalltalk.
        pcwalton 10y ago
        When people complain about "Web" vs. "native", they are not talking about the Web versus the Xerox Alto.
        pjmlp 10y ago
        Well I wish that web was able to achieve those boring native hypermedia systems from Xerox PARC, instead of squeezing a VM into a document platform.
      - astrobe_ 10y ago
        Then one of the "RAD" tools from the nineties. Delphi maybe?
  - analognoise 10y ago
    As mentioned below - Smalltalk. You know, the language MVC was invented on...
gmfawcett 10y ago
All development is just re-solving or extending? That's a sweeping generalization. My own work is definitely the incremental kind, and maybe yours is too --- but surely you'd agree that someone, somewhere in the world is doing truly innovative work.
- samth 10y ago
  No, this is false. All "innovation" can be characterized as re-solving or extending. Pick a computing technology, and I'm happy to do it.
  - gmfawcett 10y ago
    Well, of course you can. Pick any human endeavour, including software development, and I can demonstrate that it's just applied philosophy. But it's not a useful exercise, IMO, it's just a reductionist rhetorical device. I think it's wise to keep ourselves humble -- few of us are blazing new trails, in anything that we do. And I agree that many so-called innovations are nothing of the sort. But if we reduce everything that we do to revision and extension, then the word "innovation" entirely loses meaning. Why would we want to do that?
Pxtl 10y ago
Yes, but the point here seems to be that once again, the web platform is obstructive and forcing us to build abstractions on abstractions.
- always_good 10y ago
  As opposed to what, exactly? "abstractions on abstractions" defines all of computing. As said above, it's not a distinction, thus it's meaningless.

analognoise 10y ago

Very obvious? Could you elaborate? I don't mind changing my opinion, but it looks like the web is a mishmash of poor implementations made possible by increasing bandwidth and ram.

coldtea 10y ago

>All development is 'just' re-solving an existing problem with better performance, or 'just' extending an existing algorithm to be more resilient, or 'just' implementing a legacy interface on a new platform. Only this is "re-solving an existing problem with worse performance that we had decades ago (on native), but slightly faster than the previous speeds we achieved having it run with its feet tied". (Where by "feet tied" we refer to the performance penalty imposed by having everything run on the web stack).

analognoise 10y ago
This is what I meant!
zedadex 10y ago
If the problems were solved for people on native, there wouldn't be this much focus on reinventing the wheel on mobile. Clearly for some subset of people, "something" is missing for those native solutions (I can guess - portability, convenient 'moddability', etc) which they believe the standardization-reliant web can better address for them.
- astrobe_ 10y ago
  Obviously the browser has become the universal VM. It solves the same problem as Java, but with Javascript instead of Java. So this decade Java school became Javascript schools, next decade it will be something else.
pcwalton 10y ago
Can you explain how "native" solved the problem of performing minimal MVC-style updates to a UI "decades ago"? Decades ago, we had the Win32 API, which didn't even try to solve this—apps had to roll their own.
- astrobe_ 10y ago
  Smalltalk?
  - pcwalton 10y ago
    Smalltalk isn't native!
    - pjmlp 10y ago
      It is a matter of implementation. It was native on the Alto, as the primitives were implemented in microcode, which could be a FPGA nowadays. Also Squeak and Pharo are implemented in Smalltalk.
      - pcwalton 10y ago
        When people complain about "Web" vs. "native", they are not talking about the Web versus the Xerox Alto.
        pjmlp 10y ago
        Well I wish that web was able to achieve those boring native hypermedia systems from Xerox PARC, instead of squeezing a VM into a document platform.
    - astrobe_ 10y ago
      Then one of the "RAD" tools from the nineties. Delphi maybe?
- analognoise 10y ago
  As mentioned below - Smalltalk. You know, the language MVC was invented on...

gmfawcett 10y ago

All development is just re-solving or extending? That's a sweeping generalization. My own work is definitely the incremental kind, and maybe yours is too --- but surely you'd agree that someone, somewhere in the world is doing truly innovative work.

samth 10y ago
No, this is false. All "innovation" can be characterized as re-solving or extending. Pick a computing technology, and I'm happy to do it.
- gmfawcett 10y ago
  Well, of course you can. Pick any human endeavour, including software development, and I can demonstrate that it's just applied philosophy. But it's not a useful exercise, IMO, it's just a reductionist rhetorical device. I think it's wise to keep ourselves humble -- few of us are blazing new trails, in anything that we do. And I agree that many so-called innovations are nothing of the sort. But if we reduce everything that we do to revision and extension, then the word "innovation" entirely loses meaning. Why would we want to do that?

Pxtl 10y ago

Yes, but the point here seems to be that once again, the web platform is obstructive and forcing us to build abstractions on abstractions.

always_good 10y ago
As opposed to what, exactly? "abstractions on abstractions" defines all of computing. As said above, it's not a distinction, thus it's meaningless.