4 ms·
That's like saying "It's a little amusing how popular these web reimplementations of 2004-era word processors are". Dude, being on the web makes a huge differen
by saturn 15y ago
That's like saying "It's a little amusing how popular these web reimplementations of 2004-era word processors are". Dude, being on the web makes a huge difference. No software to install is massive. You can't link to a program running on your desktop. It's a great leap forward.
- mrdoob2 15y ago+1
- bugsbunnyak 15y agoHopefully JS/WebGL will help enable a client-server model for medical image analysis analogous to AWS/Hadoop/etc. JS has been successful not only for its ubiquity, but also because it - warts and all - hits a development sweet spot. Right now the big open source med image projects (MITK, Slicer, etc.) are almost all C++, so the barrier to entry is too high for some people who might be able to contribute substantially within the JS sweet spot. Here's a really neat step in this direction: http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/~rudolph/webgl/brain_viewer/brain_viewer.html http://www.nmr.mgh.harvard.edu/~rudolph/webgl/brain_viewer/b...
- roel_v 15y agoReally? You feel that reimplementing a word processor on the web is a major leap forward? To me it looks like old wine in new bags. I could link to word processor-like Java Applets in 1998. I realize it's not 100% the same, but trying to re-implement all these things we've had for 10 years in substandard technology just seems like a procession of Echternach. (btw current web word processors barely approach Wordpad level - the level of functionality we had on the desktop in 1995).
- ido 15y ago(btw current web word processors barely approach Wordpad level - the level of functionality we had on the desktop in 1995). And still I use google docs every day & can't remember the last time I used ms word, so maybe there is something to it ;)