3 ms·

I think you're confusing concepts: >> I'm simply asking if using an entertainment medium to do your job is such a good idea. HTML isn't an entertainment mediu

by lhorie 16y ago

I think you're confusing concepts: >> I'm simply asking if using an entertainment medium to do your job is such a good idea. HTML isn't an entertainment medium... you need css, javascript, http, sql, apache, php, flash, linux, (or equivalent technologies) and a plethora of other technologies to run this entertainment medium. Do we need any of them? Technically speaking, no. You could write markup in lisp, network with ftp and run Solaris on your server. Pragmatically speaking though, you do need something and the technology stack that we're currently using isn't exactly going away to make way for a gazillion ad-hoc domain-specific stacks.

DanielBMarkham 16y ago
I think you are confusing a tiny little piece of grass with the field that I am describing. I probably wasn't clear enough. Instead of listing all the various pieces of technology and how they come together to make a web page, it might be more interesting to ask whether or not the average web experience -- browsers, pages, css, servers, databases, the cloud -- is a good fit for what we use it for. The point was very clear that I was referring to the common way html is consumed. Not really interested in all the little pieces, at least not for this essay. One of the commenters on my blog said that I obviously didn't know anything about html, so, for the record, I've written and deployed dozens of web apps. And I am proficient in CSS and SQL and all of that. Very neat stuff. But not germane here. I'm not saying change the stack. If anything, the implication is to vastly simplify the browser.
- rimantas 16y ago
  > The point was very clear that I was referring to the > common way html is consumed The point was not clear at all. And calling various pieces HTML does not help a bit. > for the record, I've written and deployed dozens of web apps. > And I am proficient in CSS and SQL and all of that I have seen people doing web apps for the big money without any understanding what they were doing. Using tables for layout and class names like "leftCol" really show neither proficiency nor competence with markup. > If anything, the implication is to vastly simplify the browser. That's frequent: request for a change most often comes from those who don't really understand the thing they want to change.
  - DanielBMarkham 16y ago
    This is very easily settled. Explain to me what you know that I do not that will change my opinion. Simply belittling me doesn't help very much. Doesn't phase me a bit, makes you look like a jerk, and advances the discussion nowhere. Make a case that there is some piece of the stack that somehow invalidates the claim made in the essay. I respond here (against my better judgment) because I posted this on HN to incite a discussion about technology. Not get in some pissing match over how smart I or somebody else might be. So enough with the ad hominem. Do us both a favor. Do us all a favor. Explain why the essay is misguided. Make a case.
    - lhorie 16y ago
      >> One of the commenters on my blog said that I obviously didn't know anything about html Just for the record, I don't doubt your programming skills, I was just saying that there's a rather fundamental difference between the need for HTML vs the need for, as you call them, "jumping bunnies". I completely agree that distractions are becoming a real part of the work environment because of the ubiquitous nature of the web, but, when you ask "But who's job requires a hyperlink?", well, mine, for one, does a lot. And FWIW, they're pretty important to just about anyone who uses an intranet system for work. Imho, the how-do-we-keep-people-away-from-facebook-during-work problem isn't really a technology one.
      - DanielBMarkham 16y ago
        Could you edit this to say what kind of job you have? I specifically exclude certain types of work. Did I miss something? Or are you agreeing with me? And this isn't about keeping the workers away from FB (although you could spin it that way) The point is much more about the extremes of simplicity. What is the absolutely most simple thing that most folks would need to do their jobs.
        lhorie 16y ago
        >> What is the absolutely most simple thing that most folks would need to do their jobs. I'd say pencil and paper, but who thinks that's a good idea these days? As far as forms go, the Microsoft stack is pretty much laser-focused on data entry/display apps, which I guess is what you're focusing on. So technically, you can use IIS and deploy custom built desktop clients today if you wanted to. Of course, there are pros and cons and I'm sure you already know what the arguments are. (btw, since you asked, I'm a web developer)
- lhorie 16y ago
  Yeah, I'm not following your argument. It seems you're saying that since the "cloud" stack is becoming focused on entertainment consumption, we should use something more focused for business. Is that what you mean? Out there in the real world, people use Photoshop to do graphics because the cloud just doesn't work for them. Microsoft Word and Excel because they can't afford the risk of leaking documents out. AutoCAD. ProTools. Maia. Powerpoint. Snagit. Adobe Acrobat. Supermarket cash register software, air traffic control software, etc etc. Use the right tool for the job and all that.
  - DanielBMarkham 16y ago
    No this really isn't much of an anti-tech rant, although it looks like some folks mistakenly took it for that. Trying to shorten it, there is a huge amount of stuff in the world that you can accomplish with just 3 very simple UI controls. HTML has gone zillions of miles past that. Distraction can become a productivity issue in itself. Perhaps there is an opportunity for a vastly more simple technology interaction experience. Or -- the iPod did one thing and did it well. That's why it was such a huge hit. Can you out iPod the iPod? Is there further to go down the simplicity path and still keep usefulness? I think there is.
    - lhorie 16y ago
      I'd say simplifying wouldn't really work in today's world. e.g. enterprise software development: Things like calendar controls, auto-completing fields and sortable paginated tables - which are far more complex than what plain vanilla HTML offers - are client requirements these days. Sure you can make nice games and distraction sites with the same technology, but then, that's what monitoring sotfware exists for (and like I mentioned in the other comment, I don't think technology solutions are particularly good to deal w/ distractions)
      - DanielBMarkham 16y ago
        I don't know. Let's try it. I'll mock up something with the minimal amount of controls that still accomplishes a useful task, say reading HN, and post it. Shouldn't be too difficult to do.

by lhorie 16y ago

DanielBMarkham 16y ago

I think you are confusing a tiny little piece of grass with the field that I am describing. I probably wasn't clear enough. Instead of listing all the various pieces of technology and how they come together to make a web page, it might be more interesting to ask whether or not the average web experience -- browsers, pages, css, servers, databases, the cloud -- is a good fit for what we use it for. The point was very clear that I was referring to the common way html is consumed. Not really interested in all the little pieces, at least not for this essay. One of the commenters on my blog said that I obviously didn't know anything about html, so, for the record, I've written and deployed dozens of web apps. And I am proficient in CSS and SQL and all of that. Very neat stuff. But not germane here. I'm not saying change the stack. If anything, the implication is to vastly simplify the browser.

rimantas 16y ago
> The point was very clear that I was referring to the > common way html is consumed The point was not clear at all. And calling various pieces HTML does not help a bit. > for the record, I've written and deployed dozens of web apps. > And I am proficient in CSS and SQL and all of that I have seen people doing web apps for the big money without any understanding what they were doing. Using tables for layout and class names like "leftCol" really show neither proficiency nor competence with markup. > If anything, the implication is to vastly simplify the browser. That's frequent: request for a change most often comes from those who don't really understand the thing they want to change.
- DanielBMarkham 16y ago
  This is very easily settled. Explain to me what you know that I do not that will change my opinion. Simply belittling me doesn't help very much. Doesn't phase me a bit, makes you look like a jerk, and advances the discussion nowhere. Make a case that there is some piece of the stack that somehow invalidates the claim made in the essay. I respond here (against my better judgment) because I posted this on HN to incite a discussion about technology. Not get in some pissing match over how smart I or somebody else might be. So enough with the ad hominem. Do us both a favor. Do us all a favor. Explain why the essay is misguided. Make a case.
  - lhorie 16y ago
    >> One of the commenters on my blog said that I obviously didn't know anything about html Just for the record, I don't doubt your programming skills, I was just saying that there's a rather fundamental difference between the need for HTML vs the need for, as you call them, "jumping bunnies". I completely agree that distractions are becoming a real part of the work environment because of the ubiquitous nature of the web, but, when you ask "But who's job requires a hyperlink?", well, mine, for one, does a lot. And FWIW, they're pretty important to just about anyone who uses an intranet system for work. Imho, the how-do-we-keep-people-away-from-facebook-during-work problem isn't really a technology one.
    - DanielBMarkham 16y ago
      Could you edit this to say what kind of job you have? I specifically exclude certain types of work. Did I miss something? Or are you agreeing with me? And this isn't about keeping the workers away from FB (although you could spin it that way) The point is much more about the extremes of simplicity. What is the absolutely most simple thing that most folks would need to do their jobs.
      - lhorie 16y ago
        >> What is the absolutely most simple thing that most folks would need to do their jobs. I'd say pencil and paper, but who thinks that's a good idea these days? As far as forms go, the Microsoft stack is pretty much laser-focused on data entry/display apps, which I guess is what you're focusing on. So technically, you can use IIS and deploy custom built desktop clients today if you wanted to. Of course, there are pros and cons and I'm sure you already know what the arguments are. (btw, since you asked, I'm a web developer)
lhorie 16y ago
Yeah, I'm not following your argument. It seems you're saying that since the "cloud" stack is becoming focused on entertainment consumption, we should use something more focused for business. Is that what you mean? Out there in the real world, people use Photoshop to do graphics because the cloud just doesn't work for them. Microsoft Word and Excel because they can't afford the risk of leaking documents out. AutoCAD. ProTools. Maia. Powerpoint. Snagit. Adobe Acrobat. Supermarket cash register software, air traffic control software, etc etc. Use the right tool for the job and all that.
- DanielBMarkham 16y ago
  No this really isn't much of an anti-tech rant, although it looks like some folks mistakenly took it for that. Trying to shorten it, there is a huge amount of stuff in the world that you can accomplish with just 3 very simple UI controls. HTML has gone zillions of miles past that. Distraction can become a productivity issue in itself. Perhaps there is an opportunity for a vastly more simple technology interaction experience. Or -- the iPod did one thing and did it well. That's why it was such a huge hit. Can you out iPod the iPod? Is there further to go down the simplicity path and still keep usefulness? I think there is.
  - lhorie 16y ago
    I'd say simplifying wouldn't really work in today's world. e.g. enterprise software development: Things like calendar controls, auto-completing fields and sortable paginated tables - which are far more complex than what plain vanilla HTML offers - are client requirements these days. Sure you can make nice games and distraction sites with the same technology, but then, that's what monitoring sotfware exists for (and like I mentioned in the other comment, I don't think technology solutions are particularly good to deal w/ distractions)
    - DanielBMarkham 16y ago
      I don't know. Let's try it. I'll mock up something with the minimal amount of controls that still accomplishes a useful task, say reading HN, and post it. Shouldn't be too difficult to do.