4 ms·

> You just fundamentally cannot put everything on the web. It works for incredibly simple things. But that's it. The web isn't everything - no perfect solution

by azakai 15y ago

> You just fundamentally cannot put everything on the web. It works for incredibly simple things. But that's it. The web isn't everything - no perfect solution exists for every problem. But you go way too far in the other direction. Modern web browsers can run very complex code at very high speeds. Saying the web can only do incredibly simple things is like saying Java can only do incredibly simply things (which people did say, several years ago). > What would interest me more in B2G is whether the Linux base underneath it is fully functional. And not just a slightly advanced "bootloader" for B2G. A fully functional, mostly free GNU/Linux system that gets widespread adoption, even just as a smartphone OS, would be a great blessing to the efforts of the Free Software community. The problem is that such an OS cannot easily get widespread adoption, because it would have no apps. That is the problem of every new phone OS today, people develop for iOS and Android, and that's it. That's what makes it so hard for Bada and Windows Phone and WebOS to get any traction - developer attention is all on the top two mobile OSes, and users buy those OSes to get those apps. So inventing a new development platform is incredibly hard, and that's what using Linux as a development platform would get us. The only real way to get around that is to leverage an existing development platform. The best existing such platform is the web - it's open, has multiple compatible implementations, is royalty-free, and a lot of effort is going into it (look at recent advances in web browsers). That's why B2G, WebOS and Tizen are all using the web as their development platform. It's the only approach that has a chance. They are all also using Linux underneath - it's the best OS for that. But it's not the best app development platform.

tjoff 15y ago
The problem is that such an OS cannot easily get widespread adoption, because it would have no apps. That is the problem of every new phone OS today, people develop for iOS and Android, and that's it. So true. And that's what I base my assumption that there will be no enthusiast-phone on the market in the future (today we have Maemo/meego and that's it). But, an enthusiast OS running linux could, in theory, run android apps and that could be a loophole. I know work was put in to doing this on Maemo but it never got mature (or else I should have heard about it). The same goes for the web. It might suffice for the average Joe but for those doing "real" work on their machines or want more control of their machine will suffer. In this evolution I truly hope that the mainstream-focus doesn't get all the attention. An App/OS doesn't have to be dumb to be beginner-friendly, an advanced application doesn't have to be beginner-unfriendly and please for the love of god realize that beginner friendliness IS NOT the same as easy to use. Those are completely separate topics and today when people talk about user-friendly interfaces they only talk about beginner-friendly and actually making them very hard to use but easy to learn. There are experts everywhere. Ten-year-olds that utilized every obscure shortcut available on the old phones without for that matter being interested in tech or even phones have no parallel today. They just learned how to use their phone effectively but today there is no room for growth on our dumb devices (thanks apple). A good interface is an interface that is easy to use and depending on the target audience relatively easy to use up front (or very easy to use up front) and sports advanced features and room for growth. A bad interface is one that is easy only because it is dumb.

by azakai 15y ago

tjoff 15y ago

The problem is that such an OS cannot easily get widespread adoption, because it would have no apps. That is the problem of every new phone OS today, people develop for iOS and Android, and that's it. So true. And that's what I base my assumption that there will be no enthusiast-phone on the market in the future (today we have Maemo/meego and that's it). But, an enthusiast OS running linux could, in theory, run android apps and that could be a loophole. I know work was put in to doing this on Maemo but it never got mature (or else I should have heard about it). The same goes for the web. It might suffice for the average Joe but for those doing "real" work on their machines or want more control of their machine will suffer. In this evolution I truly hope that the mainstream-focus doesn't get all the attention. An App/OS doesn't have to be dumb to be beginner-friendly, an advanced application doesn't have to be beginner-unfriendly and please for the love of god realize that beginner friendliness IS NOT the same as easy to use. Those are completely separate topics and today when people talk about user-friendly interfaces they only talk about beginner-friendly and actually making them very hard to use but easy to learn. There are experts everywhere. Ten-year-olds that utilized every obscure shortcut available on the old phones without for that matter being interested in tech or even phones have no parallel today. They just learned how to use their phone effectively but today there is no room for growth on our dumb devices (thanks apple). A good interface is an interface that is easy to use and depending on the target audience relatively easy to use up front (or very easy to use up front) and sports advanced features and room for growth. A bad interface is one that is easy only because it is dumb.