4 ms·
This is all right and all, but I have one question: why the hell it needs to be inside of a browser? To do what exactly? I don't care about browsers, I care abo
by ConanRus 8y ago
This is all right and all, but I have one question: why the hell it needs to be inside of a browser? To do what exactly?
I don't care about browsers, I care about applications. I don't want freaking Photoshop in my browser, because I want a browser to die.
This should be a part of the OS, not a freaking browser. Give me a built-in runtime with sandboxing, a delivery method, and an AppStore.
Give me next generation Java/Flash. I tired of a browser as an OS replacement. It is not and it shouldn't be.
- corey_moncure 8y agoDude, like, just get with the program, man.
- justinclift 8y agoSomething like these? * https://github.com/Xe/olin https://github.com/Xe/olin * https://github.com/WAVM/WAVM https://github.com/WAVM/WAVM
- msla 8y agoBecause it effectively solves the distribution problem in a way which includes non-technical people. If you think your solution does that, meditate on what "non-technical" means.
- user111233 8y agoHaving the URL system also makes them so much better for sharing. Imagine being able to share a link that someone could click and it would open up your shared image inside of photoshop.
- pjmlp 8y agoAndroid, iOS and UWP do that with deep links.
- moosingin3space 8y agoWhy is it such a bad thing for a browser to act as an OS?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- krapp 8y agoIt doesn't need to be inside of a browser[0], that's just going to be the most common client. [0]https://webassembly.org/docs/non-web/ https://webassembly.org/docs/non-web/