19 ms·

Netscape and Sun announce JavaScript (1995)

337 points by damethos 3y ago

flangola7 3y ago
[flagged]
- suction 3y ago
  I admire your ability to maintain a rational view on this.
- amedvednikov 3y ago
  They said: "I admire your ability to maintain a rational view on this." Really sad that comments with opposing views can be so easily removed by downvoting.
  - jve 3y ago
    Actually it is a very low quality comment. Per guidelines: > Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. I, personally, would like to know how dynamic web is a disaster for human race.
dingi 3y ago
worst thing ever happened to web
- phatskat 3y ago
  How so?
  - mihaic 3y ago
    It's the generic HN snark that pushes for no JS websites for everything, without considering the benefits of users having such a powerful VM that probably protected them from running random executables.
    - flangola7 3y ago
      You shouldn't be running random executables period. At one time people still had the common sense not to run code they wasn't vetted and that they trusted.
      - quickthrower2 3y ago
        You run random executables via RPC when you use the web anyway, and that code runs on the server. The problem with JS in browser has been security, specifically cross origin not that JS is code
      - zweifuss 3y ago
        Your definition of common sense is not really common. Flash, for example, was one of the very early use cases of an ActiveX control. This unsafe technology was supported by Internet Explorer until the end. The IE11 engine is still an installable part of Windows 11. Netscape Navigator plug-ins also were binary code modules. NPAPI was supported by Google Chrome until 2015. There were warnings from the beginning (both with ActiveX and NPAPI), but for most engineers, getting things done took precedence over trust issues. Youtube, for example, would not have been possible until much later without Flash.
        flangola7 3y ago
        Flash is one example of the problems of this new attitude, yes.
      - foul 3y ago
        In Windows-land and seldom elsewhere, it was more like "don't run random executables and don't open attachments and ask a sysadmin about the site/flash page/applet you're about to visit". I dare you to ask your grandma what is a .vbs file, without googling...
      - mihaic 3y ago
        We both know that, but then came the users that opened CoolPic.jpeg.exe and installed wallpaper packages from .ru domains. I honestly can't see a much better compromise than JS to include the common users.
  - anticodon 3y ago
    Javascript is a constant reinvent of the wheel. Sites had become much bigger and much slower contrary to JS crowd promises. Development is a devilish entanglement of tens of thousands of tiny libraries, and almost every one of them is changing several times a day. I do not do frontend programming now, but I see how slow it became compared to the old good Web 1.0. Monster frameworks that require changing hundreds of files daily, sometimes front development is behind backend development because of this burden and cognitive load. And one fact which annoys me the most: in all other areas we are free to choose any language to do the job. But in the web we're forever stuck with one language which was quickly concocted in a few days and still to this day many of the original flaws remain.
    - zogrodea 3y ago
      I'm not a fan of JS myself in all honesty (just not my favourite language to code in), but I think your first point is more about front-end dev culture than flaws inherent to the language itself. An alternative world could have existed where we have the same exact Javascript, without the culture of using "tens of thousands of tiny libraries" which change "several times a day". It was possible to avoid these faults while still keeping the language itself. So I think it's unfair to say (as the comment you agreed with said) that Javascript is the worst thing to happen to the web, because all the cognitive load being pointed to comes from widespread human usage of the language rather than the language itself. That's on us.
      - Dalewyn 3y ago
        Personally, I distinguish the culture of using tens of thousands of frameworks from JavaScript the scripting language by calling it all collectively JavaShit. JavaScript is fine, but JavaShit and everyone who partakes in it are a plague.
    - patates 3y ago
      > Sites had become much bigger and much slower contrary to JS crowd promises Where are those people promising slimmer and faster websites compared to absolute no JS? > Development is a devilish entanglement of tens of thousands of tiny libraries, and almost every one of them is changing several times a day Nothing to do with JS. Many libraries is a symptom of popularity and them being tiny is caused by trying (unsuccessfully though) to send the absolute minimum over the wire. > I see how slow it became compared to the old good Web 1.0. Monster frameworks that require changing hundreds of files daily What web 1.0 was doing is completely different to what the current JS apps are doing. Good luck implementing Figma with the good old web 1.0. I'd even say good luck implementing it anything other than the current web-app dev stack or some custom native UI library which would take a millennia to develop. > sometimes front development is behind backend development because of this burden and cognitive load backend and frontend dev have completely different constraints. Doing frontend dev for a native app is also cognitively nearly completely different monster. > in all other areas we are free to choose any language to do the job. But in the web we're forever stuck with one language I mean you could always compile to JS and these days there are many good webassembly frameworks. > still to this day many of the original flaws remain But also almost always easy to avoid. It's a necessary evil for backward compatibility.
  - skeletal88 3y ago
    The language is only popular because it has a monopoly in the browser, there are no alternatives to JS. We are all held hostage by it.
    - phatskat 3y ago
      There was a time when there were options and they died out because they weren’t as popular. VBScript and JScript to name a couple. Java is still around but I haven’t seen an applet in probably over a decade. Flash was a thing.
      - mcpar-land 3y ago
        Never forget that the killshot to the back of Flash's head wasn't the technology itself being bad, but Apple's total refusal to support it on iPhones. Now the only thing keeping an entire generation worth of games alive is the Flashpoint Archive.
        phatskat 3y ago
        As much as I miss Newgrounds and grew up with Flash games, and used Flash for lots of art projects, it needed to go. The list of high score CVEs for Flash is 74 with a CVE score of 9 or higher. A decent number were exploits that made use of being able to execute code. I don’t blame Apple for that decision, honestly. And I’m sure security wasn’t apple’s only reason of course, I’m not going to be naive about that. All around, we may be better off without it. It will also be missed - both can be true.
    - b3n 3y ago
      But there's plenty of transpilers: ClojureScript, Nim, etc.
- intelVISA 3y ago
  SWE in general too!
gregjw 3y ago
Unforeseen consequences
- shmde 3y ago
  Canon Event
sgammon 3y ago
1995: javascript is deeply integrated with java 2023: java is to javascript like car is to carpet
- foota 3y ago
  Funny enough they've more gone from being integrated with each other to being in some sense parallels of each other, if you're willing to stretch the definitions a little bit, as one of several languages executing on top of a VM (V8 and friends and the JVM).
  - sgammon 3y ago
    very true
ars 3y ago
Who remembers when it was called LiveScript? Then they got excited about Java and renamed it which confused generations of programmers. No one understood the power of JavaScript when it first came out. For example at first hardly anyone understood Closures, and the full power of JavaScript being a functional language. And when Google made Google Maps which was dynamic unlike MapQuest it was a revelation and influenced so many people in what JavaScript (and the web) could do.
- gleenn 3y ago
  Maps was amazing but I remember being blown away by xmlHttpRequest and the dynamic search that autocompleted. It had hilariously little to do with XML.
  - toyg 3y ago
    > It had hilariously little to do with XML Er, it had everything to do with XML. It was introduced to give pages the possibility to fetch XML (typically feeds) and render their content dynamically; which is basically what it ended up being used for, except XML feeds were then replaced by simpler files.
    - cabalamat 3y ago
      > except XML feeds were then replaced by simpler files Yes. XML was basically superceded by JSON, which was far less verbose and clunky.
      - oaiey 3y ago
        XML in XMLHttpRequest was first superseded by HTML and then by JSON. And JSON only because the JavaScript API for XML (aka. the DOM API) is the worst thing imaginable compared to the simplicity offered by JSON.parse and then the JS native representation of it as objects. The same ugly DOM API let to the advent and rule of jQuery. The success of JSON has less to do with verbose/clunkiness but a lot with the available APIs in the JavaScript frontend.
barosl 3y ago
> A server-side JavaScript script might pull data out of a relational database and format it in HTML on the fly. A page might contain JavaScript scripts that run on both the client and the server. This is exactly what we do with server-side rendering today, huh. So the originally intended uses of JavaScript included servers too. > Java programs and JavaScript scripts are designed to run on both clients and servers, with JavaScript scripts used to modify the properties and behavior of Java objects This, not quite so.
- gleenn 3y ago
  Java Applets were a thing for a long time though. Interesting but very dead tech.
  - cabalamat 3y ago
    They were essentially the same idea as WASM -- a portable machine code that runs on web browsers -- but a quarter of a century earlier. I suspect Java applets fell out of fashion because they could only manipulate a rectangular area of the screen and not the DOM. Did the DOM even exist in 1995?
    - nohuck13 3y ago
      Nope, at least not as a standard. The original DOM spec is dated 1 October 1998. https://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-DOM-Level-1-19981001/ https://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-DOM-Level-1-19981001/
      - shiomiru 3y ago
        Notably though, in 1997 Netscape 4 already had document.layers and IE4 document.all, two incompatible precursors to the DOM. Some info about the LAYER API (which Netscape eventually killed, as the MS/W3C DOM prevailed): http://web.archive.org/web/19971015223701/http://developer.netscape.com/library/documentation/communicator/dynhtml/index.htm http://web.archive.org/web/19971015223701/http://developer.n... Also, a DOM compatibility guide can be found here: http://www.dannyg.com/dl/JSB4RefPoster.pdf http://www.dannyg.com/dl/JSB4RefPoster.pdf
graypegg 3y ago
> … with JavaScript scripts used to modify the properties and behavior of Java objects Something I didn’t know was a consideration in the original spec of JavaScript: some sort of Java applet interop. I really thought the name was just a nod to it being a curly-brace object-y language! Does anyone know what that looked like? I know of <object> to embed applets into the document, which you could pass arguments to via attributes set by JavaScript, but the wording in this doc sounds like JavaScript could somehow use Java object instances?
- skrebbel 3y ago
  It was quite a direct and ergonomic interface iirc. The magic term was LiveConnect, do I googled that and got to this amazing piece of history: https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/javase/liveconnect-docs.html https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/javase/liveconnect-... The first example is quite illustrative I think. You’d call custom methods on a Java applet the way you call DOM methods on a div.
- cyberax 3y ago
  Oh wow. A blast from the past. It was called "LiveConnect" and allowed JavaScript to call applet's methods, via reflection on the Java side. Here you go: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/deployment/applet/invokingAppletMethodsFromJavaScript.html https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/deployment/applet/in... I remember using it to implement hardware key security for a website. A Java Applet loaded a JNI library, after exploiting a JRE security bug to escape confinement, which interacted with the hardware key. The JavaScript then handled all the "browsery" stuff like setting cookies. That was in 2001...
  - andirk 3y ago
    > Reflections on the Java side. Am I reading this correctly meaning you send a "some_variable_that_i_know_about=deleteAll()" via Javascript and it will just run `deleteAll()` method on a Java applet that has god knows what access it has to things on your machine?
    - 3y ago
tarsinge 3y ago
So this is the infamous communication that followed the move to add Java in the name just for marketing? Crazy how I still occasionally hear the confusion. Also interesting to see how strong was the object-oriented fad.
- sebstefan 3y ago
  Tech recruiters to this day still ask me to work on Java projects based on my previous Javascript experience
mixxit 3y ago
i am become death the destroyer of the internet
eXpl0it3r 3y ago
> Company Contacts: Imagine if companies provided contact information on software releases today. You know, where you could call and a human being would pick up. Maybe you could even get some customer support!
- tinus_hn 3y ago
  I doubt you would get customer support from a press contact. Companies still provide phone numbers in these kinds of statements and just like then they don’t deliver support.
  - afandian 3y ago
    Au contraire. Post on twitter and, if you've got enough social capital, you'll get fast-tracked.
    - renegade-otter 3y ago
      There is a special place in hell for the people on social media with followers who use that leverage to shame companies into priority customer support. "@TimeWarner! My connection is down! Help me NOW!" Get in line, you privileged twit.
adm_ 3y ago
This episode of corecursive https://corecursive.com/json-vs-xml-douglas-crockford/ https://corecursive.com/json-vs-xml-douglas-crockford/ makes a nice presentation about the landscape at the time and why it was called javascript.
revskill 3y ago
I love to see React-WASM renderer .
giamma 3y ago
Imagine if time travel was possible and we could go back in time and avoid this :-)
- erokar 3y ago
  ... and we could all be writing Java applets today.
  - tralarpa 3y ago
    No, no, Java is old and slow. Let's compile typescript to javascript, write the user interface in React and HTML (with some parts hidden in CSS files with some selector and expression magic to make it more fun), and WebAssembly for the performance critical stuff. Easy-peasy.
    - chrisandchris 3y ago
      You forgot the small configuration file required with Webpack 4 just to bundle your stuff. It's a close call to being a bit smaller than the bible.
      - tralarpa 3y ago
        Why would you not want to make your application's build process dependent on a dozen plugins that will no longer be compatible with each other in the next version? Are you even a real programmer? /s
- pavlov 3y ago
  If Netscape hadn’t introduced and managed to establish their scripting language before Microsoft steamrolled them, then the standard language on the web would be Microsoft’s contemporary alternative which was VBScript — in other words, BASIC. Be careful what you ask for.
  - yen223 3y ago
    Yeah, people here seem to forget that Javascript had actual competition in the browser space back in the day. It was very likely the winning browser-side language would have been a proprietary one, which isn't the world I want to live in.
renegade-otter 3y ago
This reminds me. Co-Recursive episode: JSON vs XML With Douglas Crockford https://corecursive.com/json-vs-xml-douglas-crockford/ https://corecursive.com/json-vs-xml-douglas-crockford/ Some really wild stuff about the genesis of JavaScript. I've never heard about HyperCard until now.
- gjvc 3y ago
  Some really wild stuff about the genesis of JavaScript. I've never heard about HyperCard until now. Great example of why it's so important to understand computer "innovations" with as much historical context as possible, so as not to fall into the pop-culture mindset, which completely ignores that which went before, and thus is extremely unlikely to create something new without that understanding.
  - renegade-otter 3y ago
    I started with the Internet in the late 90s, so you could say I've been here most of the way, and I am still always fascinated by the stories and movies about the early days. Not only does it stir up the memories of the craziness, but it reminds me that most of the things we do today are not that ground-breaking. The young generation of engineers is just relearning the lessons we did - with faster CPUs and bigger screens. P.S.: I could not stop watching Valley of the Boom: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valley_of_the_Boom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valley_of_the_Boom
    - gjvc 3y ago
      You might like this * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mother_of_All_Demos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mother_of_All_Demos * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJDv-zdhzMY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJDv-zdhzMY
3cats-in-a-coat 3y ago
I'm not sure about this. The web is first and foremost a document platform. Adding scripting to it could cause security problems, hurt usability and destroy the reliability of this new approach some startups are trying called "web search" which promises to automate index directories. I also wonder what's the difference between Java and JavaScript, at first glance, they look very similar.
- fnordpiglet 3y ago
  That’s exactly what marketing said and tried to kill mocha in the crib. Engineering snuck it in anyways then they’re all about damage control. Source: I was there
- bitlad 3y ago
  You can basically do this in Java or Lisp or Smalltalk right? This is not going to work. No one will use this ever.
- hutzlibu 3y ago
  But the web can change, to allow all kinds of online applications, running in a sandbox, so no one has to install anything, but can play games, write emails, share and edit images or whatever - all in the browser in one language. Ok, we might have to tweak js a bit, to get there ..
  - WhackyIdeas 3y ago
    Ground control to hutzlibu
- osener 3y ago
  Clearly the right approach is to embed a native plugin into webpages so that an actually responsible company can be put in charge of building high performance and secure runtime for this. Let's call it FutureSplash.
- belter 3y ago
  It's not like this will affect a lot these companies bottom line. Sounds like they just spent 5 or 10 days of R&D on it...
Semaphor 3y ago
Submitted a few times, but only got traction once before on December 4, 2020 with 455 comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25301437 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25301437 A lot of similar comments, too ;)
trizoza 3y ago
Who knew back then.
shanghaikid 3y ago
I remember the IE3.0 or maybe 4.0 crashes every time.
Ramage43 3y ago
[flagged]
roonyh 3y ago
> available for downloading from Netscape's web site. There were no hyperlinks?
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
5350-uiop-1130 3y ago
then 1 year later MS brought IE 3.0 with "JScript" to "embrace, extend and extinguish" JavaScript https://news.microsoft.com/1996/05/29/microsoft-internet-explorer-3-0-beta-now-available/ https://news.microsoft.com/1996/05/29/microsoft-internet-exp... it was a real pita debugging JScript compatibility issues before the days of jQuery. i guess we did get XMLHttpRequest later in IE 5.0. strange how things turned out.
- ttfkam 3y ago
  That and the DOM. We dump on it today, but compared to Netscape's <layer> tags, it was mana from Heaven. IE 4's early stabs at CSS were also already superior to the existing: <font face="arial" color="red" size="8"> The web back then was wild in all senses of the term.
  - joeframbach 3y ago
    I don't know, that looks a lot like Tailwind to me.
    - ttfkam 3y ago
      So you're saying we've regressed then? ;-)
ilamont 3y ago
Did Microsoft champion a different scripting language around the time? An Ecmascript fork or something similar? ETA: I saw @mouzogu mentioned "JScript" ... that's what I remembered.
wslh 3y ago
It is good to remember that that JavaScript is not the JavaScript of today even if the programming languge is the same (taking away the evolution). For years JavaScript was only used for very small stuff like changing the color of a button in a mouse over. The inflection point began lately with the inclusion of XMLHttpRequest [1] which enabled to have web apps instead of static pages with basic transaction forms. Then obviously another inflection point was NodeJS (and Google Chrome launch with the V8 engine). My point is that the launch of JavaScript in 1985 is independent from it success later. Beyond this, my personal opinion is that launching a VM specification would be better than announcing a specific programming language. WebAssembly comes very late to the game. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XMLHttpRequest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XMLHttpRequest
- Joeri 3y ago
  The inflection point was later. Significant client-side logic in javascript was not a thing until gmail and google maps showed the way in 2004/2005. Even then it wasn’t until jquery in 2006 that the ball really started rolling. The browser could do it in 2001, but it took half a decade for web development to catch up. What can today’s browsers do that web development hasn’t caught up to?
  - wslh 3y ago
    I agree. GMail and Google Maps showed a complete different web but XMLHttpRequest was needed for that and was a milestone even if there was no web app to show at that time. We should also take into account that Flash [1] was the technology that ate the limitations of the web. Flash was really powerful. More in a moment with low bandwidths around the world. For example this late 90 animation would be impossible to stream [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Flash https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Flash [2] http://swain.webframe.org/zeek.html http://swain.webframe.org/zeek.html (SWF files) available for streaming in YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=zeek+locomotion https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=zeek+locomotion
    - kagevf 3y ago
log101 3y ago
That explains the Java part.
gordian-not 3y ago
> multimedia application development haven't heard that word in a while
brudgers 3y ago
What a complete waste of time. Everyone uses gopher, not the world wide web.
hoofhearted 3y ago
"JavaScript is an easy-to-use object scripting language designed for creating live online applications that link together objects and resources on both clients and servers." Interesting to note the mention of servers! I actually forsee a wave of JavaScript innovation within the concept of a traditional backend server coming soon, and it's interesting to see them mention a server here. I've forever been from the school of "Rule number 404: thou shall never use JavaScript on the server side.". But with React 18 and the serverless wave, I can totally see myself writing backend controller code in TypeScript that gets deployed by Vercel in the near future.
- nojvek 3y ago
  We migrated our api server from flask Python to node-express-typescript. The gains of async, stricter typing and being able to share api schema types with frontend were totally worth it. We got a nice boost on performance as well. Love js for api server.
stevefan1999 3y ago
I rather want to have something like WebAssembly today back in 1995. Javascript simply sucks.
- zero_shift 3y ago
  I mean, that's what Java applets tried to do. You downloaded programs as bytecode.
olalonde 3y ago
Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25301437 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25301437
hnrodey 3y ago
If this is exciting for you then you'll love this podcast with Brendan Eich. Brendan Eich is the creator of JavaScript and co-founder of Mozilla and Brave. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krB0enBeSiE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krB0enBeSiE
alcover 3y ago
Imagine the amount of GWh saved if JS had been static-typed with inference.. For decades billions of processors have been burning watts to dereference JSValue *val, then switch() on the union tag (or something like that).
- panick21_ 3y ago
  Static typing doesn't make everything fast by itself. In fact once your static typing is sufficiently advanced, you run into many of the same problems in terms of optimizing. What is actually baffling is that Sun had Self with super advanced compilation, the highest performant dynamic language and instead of using that, JS happened. And the people who did Self, then went off did Strongtalk HotSpot, then Java HotSpot then were bought by Sun again. And then eventually Google hired the exact same team to do the same thing for Chrome (and then later Dart). So really just using Self would have saved a solid 10+ years of detours only to end up with what Sun had in its labs in 1992.
xeckr 3y ago
Incredible how far it has come. I use JavaScript for everything these days.
sbrady12345 3y ago
The comments here are the best
UnixSchizoid 3y ago
Eh, this will never replace my beloved perl
panick21_ 3y ago
What really funny here are few things. First, Sun should really have implemented its own browser. They basically already had something that shared most of what a modern browser can do when they did NeWS. Basically NeWS that loads postscript over the internet is most of what a modern browser does. Sun should really have done its own browser, rather then do the deal with Netscape. Second, Sun had developed Self and made it really fast. It shares a lot with Java Script and would have served perfectly fine in that roll. But instead it took 15-20 years until some of the same people who worked on Self and later Strongtalk to make JS fast at Google. Java Script could have been fast as soon as it came out if it was based on Self, rather then scripted together in a few weeks by Netscape. I think Sun systematically messed up with the whole software division staring in the 80s and got worse in the 90s. Amazing things like NeWS were kill, tons of bad ideas were adopted that around Java/Corba that were clunky.
- lizknope 3y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HotJava https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HotJava > HotJava (later called HotJava Browser to distinguish it from HotJava Views) was a modular, extensible web browser from Sun Microsystems implemented in Java. Are you saying they should have added JavaScript to their Java based browser?
  - _ea1k 3y ago
    I remember that and also remember them releasing a new version that literally didn't work on yahoo.com. I complained and they said some snarky comment about not complaining about things that were given for free. That browser didn't last long, and was terrible.
    - lizknope 3y ago
      I only remember running it and rotating some 3D model of a helicopter or something within the browser.
    - panick21_ 3y ago
      It really was a demo, never a serious product.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
bloopernova 3y ago
I just want to say that I absolutely adore all of you making comments like it's Usenet back in the day. Now do the Netscape open sources Mozilla announcement on /. You're all making me remember what it was like to delve into the weird and wonderful world of httpd, perl cgi-bin, and Slackware 3. (My first Linux!! I kept wondering why the system was so aggressive because it said it wanted to bash me for making mistakes: "bash: syntax error"!) I have fond memories of working on Sony Broadcast's Linux-based digital interactive TV servers in London. Then packing everything up and transporting it to Amsterdam for IBC 1999 (I think?). Setting everything up was a real slog, but I got to see a trade show spring up from a bare floor into an amazing variety of booths. The construction was crazy complex and I'm astounded that it came together in time. Thank you all, from this old dude, for the huge nostalgia trip :)
- klvino 3y ago
  Going through the comments and felt the same nostalgia. Everyone is pitch perfect with the tone of the conversation 30 years ago. Camps of "leave well enough alone", "not another language", "big corporations trying to cash in on this internet trend". Back in the day, some of us were programming snobs. Personally guilty of making comments downplaying the value of HTML and JavaScript.
- cmrdporcupine 3y ago
  As I read it and it took me back to the start of my career, I just thought to myself: "Can I retire now? Have I not earned that?" Quick look at bank account says no.
tibbydudeza 3y ago
And the web is far worse off I reckon after this weekend hack job - currently busy with React JS project using Bootstrap - so much effort for merely displaying stuff. A Visual Basic for the Web is needed.
mproud 3y ago
I always thought it was a gimmick to call it JavaScript when Java was out, when I’m reality they had almost nothing in common.
Zelphyr 3y ago
Much thanks to everyone involved with JavaScript over these 28 years! I've enjoyed using it from the beginning.
- leptons 3y ago
  I remember using Lynx browser in around 1990, and telling a friend "this thing really needs a scripting language". Then I started using Netscape and kept saying "This thing really needs a scripting language". When Javascript was introduced, I was immediately a fan, dove right in, and never stopped. Knowing Javascript has been paying my bills for decades.
- oblio 3y ago
  > I've enjoyed using it from the beginning. You monster!
kazinator 3y ago
Javascript gets let for block scoped variables in ES6 (2015 - 1995 = 20).
sproketboy 3y ago
[dead]
warrenski 3y ago
> "JavaScript is also a promising core technology for the new multimedia publishing tool that Macromedia is building." I believe Bud Colligan may have been speaking about ActionScript in this quote, the scripting language found in their yet to be launched Macromedia Flash product. Of course, Flash is no more... and neither is Macromedia. Time flies!
no_wizard 3y ago
I know there many tongue and cheek comments here on this, but what a time to be alive back then. Can you imagine these same corporations agreeing on anything today to be an open standard used by all, documented in the open and working on collaboratively? This was a watershed moment in technology for that alone
rbrown 3y ago
"And on the 4th day, Marc said let their be java-script"
pfarrell 3y ago
At the bottom, in the company contacts section... Oracle Corporation Mark Benioff: (415) 506-7000 Maybe I should take that guy out to lunch.
kentbrew 3y ago
Wow, look at all those pre-650 Mountain View contact phone numbers. Reading this in 2023 it looks like Silicon Valley really is in San Francisco....
vogon_laureate 3y ago
Why do we even need this? If I want to animate text I can just use <blink> tags. Also, not everyone has high-speed dialup yet. Phone bills are going to go through the roof!!

337 points by damethos 3y ago

flangola7 3y ago

[flagged]

suction 3y ago
I admire your ability to maintain a rational view on this.
amedvednikov 3y ago
They said: "I admire your ability to maintain a rational view on this." Really sad that comments with opposing views can be so easily removed by downvoting.
- jve 3y ago
  Actually it is a very low quality comment. Per guidelines: > Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. I, personally, would like to know how dynamic web is a disaster for human race.

dingi 3y ago

worst thing ever happened to web

phatskat 3y ago
How so?
- mihaic 3y ago
  It's the generic HN snark that pushes for no JS websites for everything, without considering the benefits of users having such a powerful VM that probably protected them from running random executables.
  - flangola7 3y ago
    You shouldn't be running random executables period. At one time people still had the common sense not to run code they wasn't vetted and that they trusted.
    - quickthrower2 3y ago
      You run random executables via RPC when you use the web anyway, and that code runs on the server. The problem with JS in browser has been security, specifically cross origin not that JS is code
    - zweifuss 3y ago
      Your definition of common sense is not really common. Flash, for example, was one of the very early use cases of an ActiveX control. This unsafe technology was supported by Internet Explorer until the end. The IE11 engine is still an installable part of Windows 11. Netscape Navigator plug-ins also were binary code modules. NPAPI was supported by Google Chrome until 2015. There were warnings from the beginning (both with ActiveX and NPAPI), but for most engineers, getting things done took precedence over trust issues. Youtube, for example, would not have been possible until much later without Flash.
      - flangola7 3y ago
        Flash is one example of the problems of this new attitude, yes.
    - foul 3y ago
      In Windows-land and seldom elsewhere, it was more like "don't run random executables and don't open attachments and ask a sysadmin about the site/flash page/applet you're about to visit". I dare you to ask your grandma what is a .vbs file, without googling...
    - mihaic 3y ago
      We both know that, but then came the users that opened CoolPic.jpeg.exe and installed wallpaper packages from .ru domains. I honestly can't see a much better compromise than JS to include the common users.
- anticodon 3y ago
  Javascript is a constant reinvent of the wheel. Sites had become much bigger and much slower contrary to JS crowd promises. Development is a devilish entanglement of tens of thousands of tiny libraries, and almost every one of them is changing several times a day. I do not do frontend programming now, but I see how slow it became compared to the old good Web 1.0. Monster frameworks that require changing hundreds of files daily, sometimes front development is behind backend development because of this burden and cognitive load. And one fact which annoys me the most: in all other areas we are free to choose any language to do the job. But in the web we're forever stuck with one language which was quickly concocted in a few days and still to this day many of the original flaws remain.
  - zogrodea 3y ago
    I'm not a fan of JS myself in all honesty (just not my favourite language to code in), but I think your first point is more about front-end dev culture than flaws inherent to the language itself. An alternative world could have existed where we have the same exact Javascript, without the culture of using "tens of thousands of tiny libraries" which change "several times a day". It was possible to avoid these faults while still keeping the language itself. So I think it's unfair to say (as the comment you agreed with said) that Javascript is the worst thing to happen to the web, because all the cognitive load being pointed to comes from widespread human usage of the language rather than the language itself. That's on us.
    - Dalewyn 3y ago
      Personally, I distinguish the culture of using tens of thousands of frameworks from JavaScript the scripting language by calling it all collectively JavaShit. JavaScript is fine, but JavaShit and everyone who partakes in it are a plague.
  - patates 3y ago
    > Sites had become much bigger and much slower contrary to JS crowd promises Where are those people promising slimmer and faster websites compared to absolute no JS? > Development is a devilish entanglement of tens of thousands of tiny libraries, and almost every one of them is changing several times a day Nothing to do with JS. Many libraries is a symptom of popularity and them being tiny is caused by trying (unsuccessfully though) to send the absolute minimum over the wire. > I see how slow it became compared to the old good Web 1.0. Monster frameworks that require changing hundreds of files daily What web 1.0 was doing is completely different to what the current JS apps are doing. Good luck implementing Figma with the good old web 1.0. I'd even say good luck implementing it anything other than the current web-app dev stack or some custom native UI library which would take a millennia to develop. > sometimes front development is behind backend development because of this burden and cognitive load backend and frontend dev have completely different constraints. Doing frontend dev for a native app is also cognitively nearly completely different monster. > in all other areas we are free to choose any language to do the job. But in the web we're forever stuck with one language I mean you could always compile to JS and these days there are many good webassembly frameworks. > still to this day many of the original flaws remain But also almost always easy to avoid. It's a necessary evil for backward compatibility.
- skeletal88 3y ago
  The language is only popular because it has a monopoly in the browser, there are no alternatives to JS. We are all held hostage by it.
  - phatskat 3y ago
    There was a time when there were options and they died out because they weren’t as popular. VBScript and JScript to name a couple. Java is still around but I haven’t seen an applet in probably over a decade. Flash was a thing.
    - mcpar-land 3y ago
      Never forget that the killshot to the back of Flash's head wasn't the technology itself being bad, but Apple's total refusal to support it on iPhones. Now the only thing keeping an entire generation worth of games alive is the Flashpoint Archive.
      - phatskat 3y ago
        As much as I miss Newgrounds and grew up with Flash games, and used Flash for lots of art projects, it needed to go. The list of high score CVEs for Flash is 74 with a CVE score of 9 or higher. A decent number were exploits that made use of being able to execute code. I don’t blame Apple for that decision, honestly. And I’m sure security wasn’t apple’s only reason of course, I’m not going to be naive about that. All around, we may be better off without it. It will also be missed - both can be true.
  - b3n 3y ago
    But there's plenty of transpilers: ClojureScript, Nim, etc.
intelVISA 3y ago
SWE in general too!

gregjw 3y ago

Unforeseen consequences

shmde 3y ago
Canon Event

sgammon 3y ago

1995: javascript is deeply integrated with java 2023: java is to javascript like car is to carpet

foota 3y ago
Funny enough they've more gone from being integrated with each other to being in some sense parallels of each other, if you're willing to stretch the definitions a little bit, as one of several languages executing on top of a VM (V8 and friends and the JVM).
- sgammon 3y ago
  very true

ars 3y ago

Who remembers when it was called LiveScript? Then they got excited about Java and renamed it which confused generations of programmers. No one understood the power of JavaScript when it first came out. For example at first hardly anyone understood Closures, and the full power of JavaScript being a functional language. And when Google made Google Maps which was dynamic unlike MapQuest it was a revelation and influenced so many people in what JavaScript (and the web) could do.

gleenn 3y ago
Maps was amazing but I remember being blown away by xmlHttpRequest and the dynamic search that autocompleted. It had hilariously little to do with XML.
- toyg 3y ago
  > It had hilariously little to do with XML Er, it had everything to do with XML. It was introduced to give pages the possibility to fetch XML (typically feeds) and render their content dynamically; which is basically what it ended up being used for, except XML feeds were then replaced by simpler files.
  - cabalamat 3y ago
    > except XML feeds were then replaced by simpler files Yes. XML was basically superceded by JSON, which was far less verbose and clunky.
    - oaiey 3y ago
      XML in XMLHttpRequest was first superseded by HTML and then by JSON. And JSON only because the JavaScript API for XML (aka. the DOM API) is the worst thing imaginable compared to the simplicity offered by JSON.parse and then the JS native representation of it as objects. The same ugly DOM API let to the advent and rule of jQuery. The success of JSON has less to do with verbose/clunkiness but a lot with the available APIs in the JavaScript frontend.

barosl 3y ago

> A server-side JavaScript script might pull data out of a relational database and format it in HTML on the fly. A page might contain JavaScript scripts that run on both the client and the server. This is exactly what we do with server-side rendering today, huh. So the originally intended uses of JavaScript included servers too. > Java programs and JavaScript scripts are designed to run on both clients and servers, with JavaScript scripts used to modify the properties and behavior of Java objects This, not quite so.

gleenn 3y ago
Java Applets were a thing for a long time though. Interesting but very dead tech.
- cabalamat 3y ago
  They were essentially the same idea as WASM -- a portable machine code that runs on web browsers -- but a quarter of a century earlier. I suspect Java applets fell out of fashion because they could only manipulate a rectangular area of the screen and not the DOM. Did the DOM even exist in 1995?
  - nohuck13 3y ago
    Nope, at least not as a standard. The original DOM spec is dated 1 October 1998. https://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-DOM-Level-1-19981001/ https://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-DOM-Level-1-19981001/
    - shiomiru 3y ago
      Notably though, in 1997 Netscape 4 already had document.layers and IE4 document.all, two incompatible precursors to the DOM. Some info about the LAYER API (which Netscape eventually killed, as the MS/W3C DOM prevailed): http://web.archive.org/web/19971015223701/http://developer.netscape.com/library/documentation/communicator/dynhtml/index.htm http://web.archive.org/web/19971015223701/http://developer.n... Also, a DOM compatibility guide can be found here: http://www.dannyg.com/dl/JSB4RefPoster.pdf http://www.dannyg.com/dl/JSB4RefPoster.pdf

graypegg 3y ago

> … with JavaScript scripts used to modify the properties and behavior of Java objects Something I didn’t know was a consideration in the original spec of JavaScript: some sort of Java applet interop. I really thought the name was just a nod to it being a curly-brace object-y language! Does anyone know what that looked like? I know of <object> to embed applets into the document, which you could pass arguments to via attributes set by JavaScript, but the wording in this doc sounds like JavaScript could somehow use Java object instances?

skrebbel 3y ago
It was quite a direct and ergonomic interface iirc. The magic term was LiveConnect, do I googled that and got to this amazing piece of history: https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/javase/liveconnect-docs.html https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/javase/liveconnect-... The first example is quite illustrative I think. You’d call custom methods on a Java applet the way you call DOM methods on a div.
cyberax 3y ago
Oh wow. A blast from the past. It was called "LiveConnect" and allowed JavaScript to call applet's methods, via reflection on the Java side. Here you go: https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/deployment/applet/invokingAppletMethodsFromJavaScript.html https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/deployment/applet/in... I remember using it to implement hardware key security for a website. A Java Applet loaded a JNI library, after exploiting a JRE security bug to escape confinement, which interacted with the hardware key. The JavaScript then handled all the "browsery" stuff like setting cookies. That was in 2001...
- andirk 3y ago
  > Reflections on the Java side. Am I reading this correctly meaning you send a "some_variable_that_i_know_about=deleteAll()" via Javascript and it will just run `deleteAll()` method on a Java applet that has god knows what access it has to things on your machine?
  - 3y ago

tarsinge 3y ago

So this is the infamous communication that followed the move to add Java in the name just for marketing? Crazy how I still occasionally hear the confusion. Also interesting to see how strong was the object-oriented fad.

sebstefan 3y ago
Tech recruiters to this day still ask me to work on Java projects based on my previous Javascript experience

mixxit 3y ago

i am become death the destroyer of the internet

eXpl0it3r 3y ago

> Company Contacts: Imagine if companies provided contact information on software releases today. You know, where you could call and a human being would pick up. Maybe you could even get some customer support!

tinus_hn 3y ago
I doubt you would get customer support from a press contact. Companies still provide phone numbers in these kinds of statements and just like then they don’t deliver support.
- afandian 3y ago
  Au contraire. Post on twitter and, if you've got enough social capital, you'll get fast-tracked.
  - renegade-otter 3y ago
    There is a special place in hell for the people on social media with followers who use that leverage to shame companies into priority customer support. "@TimeWarner! My connection is down! Help me NOW!" Get in line, you privileged twit.

adm_ 3y ago

This episode of corecursive https://corecursive.com/json-vs-xml-douglas-crockford/ https://corecursive.com/json-vs-xml-douglas-crockford/ makes a nice presentation about the landscape at the time and why it was called javascript.

revskill 3y ago

I love to see React-WASM renderer .

giamma 3y ago

Imagine if time travel was possible and we could go back in time and avoid this :-)

erokar 3y ago
... and we could all be writing Java applets today.
- tralarpa 3y ago
  No, no, Java is old and slow. Let's compile typescript to javascript, write the user interface in React and HTML (with some parts hidden in CSS files with some selector and expression magic to make it more fun), and WebAssembly for the performance critical stuff. Easy-peasy.
  - chrisandchris 3y ago
    You forgot the small configuration file required with Webpack 4 just to bundle your stuff. It's a close call to being a bit smaller than the bible.
    - tralarpa 3y ago
      Why would you not want to make your application's build process dependent on a dozen plugins that will no longer be compatible with each other in the next version? Are you even a real programmer? /s
pavlov 3y ago
If Netscape hadn’t introduced and managed to establish their scripting language before Microsoft steamrolled them, then the standard language on the web would be Microsoft’s contemporary alternative which was VBScript — in other words, BASIC. Be careful what you ask for.
- yen223 3y ago
  Yeah, people here seem to forget that Javascript had actual competition in the browser space back in the day. It was very likely the winning browser-side language would have been a proprietary one, which isn't the world I want to live in.

renegade-otter 3y ago

This reminds me. Co-Recursive episode: JSON vs XML With Douglas Crockford https://corecursive.com/json-vs-xml-douglas-crockford/ https://corecursive.com/json-vs-xml-douglas-crockford/ Some really wild stuff about the genesis of JavaScript. I've never heard about HyperCard until now.

gjvc 3y ago
Some really wild stuff about the genesis of JavaScript. I've never heard about HyperCard until now. Great example of why it's so important to understand computer "innovations" with as much historical context as possible, so as not to fall into the pop-culture mindset, which completely ignores that which went before, and thus is extremely unlikely to create something new without that understanding.
- renegade-otter 3y ago
  I started with the Internet in the late 90s, so you could say I've been here most of the way, and I am still always fascinated by the stories and movies about the early days. Not only does it stir up the memories of the craziness, but it reminds me that most of the things we do today are not that ground-breaking. The young generation of engineers is just relearning the lessons we did - with faster CPUs and bigger screens. P.S.: I could not stop watching Valley of the Boom: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valley_of_the_Boom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valley_of_the_Boom
  - gjvc 3y ago
    You might like this * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mother_of_All_Demos https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mother_of_All_Demos * https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJDv-zdhzMY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJDv-zdhzMY

3cats-in-a-coat 3y ago

I'm not sure about this. The web is first and foremost a document platform. Adding scripting to it could cause security problems, hurt usability and destroy the reliability of this new approach some startups are trying called "web search" which promises to automate index directories. I also wonder what's the difference between Java and JavaScript, at first glance, they look very similar.

fnordpiglet 3y ago
That’s exactly what marketing said and tried to kill mocha in the crib. Engineering snuck it in anyways then they’re all about damage control. Source: I was there
bitlad 3y ago
You can basically do this in Java or Lisp or Smalltalk right? This is not going to work. No one will use this ever.
hutzlibu 3y ago
But the web can change, to allow all kinds of online applications, running in a sandbox, so no one has to install anything, but can play games, write emails, share and edit images or whatever - all in the browser in one language. Ok, we might have to tweak js a bit, to get there ..
- WhackyIdeas 3y ago
  Ground control to hutzlibu
osener 3y ago
Clearly the right approach is to embed a native plugin into webpages so that an actually responsible company can be put in charge of building high performance and secure runtime for this. Let's call it FutureSplash.
belter 3y ago
It's not like this will affect a lot these companies bottom line. Sounds like they just spent 5 or 10 days of R&D on it...

Semaphor 3y ago

Submitted a few times, but only got traction once before on December 4, 2020 with 455 comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25301437 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25301437 A lot of similar comments, too ;)

trizoza 3y ago

Who knew back then.

shanghaikid 3y ago

I remember the IE3.0 or maybe 4.0 crashes every time.

Ramage43 3y ago

[flagged]

roonyh 3y ago

> available for downloading from Netscape's web site. There were no hyperlinks?

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

5350-uiop-1130 3y ago

then 1 year later MS brought IE 3.0 with "JScript" to "embrace, extend and extinguish" JavaScript https://news.microsoft.com/1996/05/29/microsoft-internet-explorer-3-0-beta-now-available/ https://news.microsoft.com/1996/05/29/microsoft-internet-exp... it was a real pita debugging JScript compatibility issues before the days of jQuery. i guess we did get XMLHttpRequest later in IE 5.0. strange how things turned out.

ttfkam 3y ago
That and the DOM. We dump on it today, but compared to Netscape's <layer> tags, it was mana from Heaven. IE 4's early stabs at CSS were also already superior to the existing: <font face="arial" color="red" size="8"> The web back then was wild in all senses of the term.
- joeframbach 3y ago
  I don't know, that looks a lot like Tailwind to me.
  - ttfkam 3y ago
    So you're saying we've regressed then? ;-)

ilamont 3y ago

Did Microsoft champion a different scripting language around the time? An Ecmascript fork or something similar? ETA: I saw @mouzogu mentioned "JScript" ... that's what I remembered.

wslh 3y ago

It is good to remember that that JavaScript is not the JavaScript of today even if the programming languge is the same (taking away the evolution). For years JavaScript was only used for very small stuff like changing the color of a button in a mouse over. The inflection point began lately with the inclusion of XMLHttpRequest [1] which enabled to have web apps instead of static pages with basic transaction forms. Then obviously another inflection point was NodeJS (and Google Chrome launch with the V8 engine). My point is that the launch of JavaScript in 1985 is independent from it success later. Beyond this, my personal opinion is that launching a VM specification would be better than announcing a specific programming language. WebAssembly comes very late to the game. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XMLHttpRequest https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XMLHttpRequest

Joeri 3y ago
The inflection point was later. Significant client-side logic in javascript was not a thing until gmail and google maps showed the way in 2004/2005. Even then it wasn’t until jquery in 2006 that the ball really started rolling. The browser could do it in 2001, but it took half a decade for web development to catch up. What can today’s browsers do that web development hasn’t caught up to?
- wslh 3y ago
  I agree. GMail and Google Maps showed a complete different web but XMLHttpRequest was needed for that and was a milestone even if there was no web app to show at that time. We should also take into account that Flash [1] was the technology that ate the limitations of the web. Flash was really powerful. More in a moment with low bandwidths around the world. For example this late 90 animation would be impossible to stream [2]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Flash https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Flash [2] http://swain.webframe.org/zeek.html http://swain.webframe.org/zeek.html (SWF files) available for streaming in YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=zeek+locomotion https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=zeek+locomotion
  - kagevf 3y ago

log101 3y ago

That explains the Java part.

gordian-not 3y ago

> multimedia application development haven't heard that word in a while

brudgers 3y ago

What a complete waste of time. Everyone uses gopher, not the world wide web.

hoofhearted 3y ago

"JavaScript is an easy-to-use object scripting language designed for creating live online applications that link together objects and resources on both clients and servers." Interesting to note the mention of servers! I actually forsee a wave of JavaScript innovation within the concept of a traditional backend server coming soon, and it's interesting to see them mention a server here. I've forever been from the school of "Rule number 404: thou shall never use JavaScript on the server side.". But with React 18 and the serverless wave, I can totally see myself writing backend controller code in TypeScript that gets deployed by Vercel in the near future.

nojvek 3y ago
We migrated our api server from flask Python to node-express-typescript. The gains of async, stricter typing and being able to share api schema types with frontend were totally worth it. We got a nice boost on performance as well. Love js for api server.

stevefan1999 3y ago

I rather want to have something like WebAssembly today back in 1995. Javascript simply sucks.

zero_shift 3y ago
I mean, that's what Java applets tried to do. You downloaded programs as bytecode.

olalonde 3y ago

Previous discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25301437 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25301437

hnrodey 3y ago

If this is exciting for you then you'll love this podcast with Brendan Eich. Brendan Eich is the creator of JavaScript and co-founder of Mozilla and Brave. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krB0enBeSiE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krB0enBeSiE

alcover 3y ago

Imagine the amount of GWh saved if JS had been static-typed with inference.. For decades billions of processors have been burning watts to dereference JSValue *val, then switch() on the union tag (or something like that).

panick21_ 3y ago
Static typing doesn't make everything fast by itself. In fact once your static typing is sufficiently advanced, you run into many of the same problems in terms of optimizing. What is actually baffling is that Sun had Self with super advanced compilation, the highest performant dynamic language and instead of using that, JS happened. And the people who did Self, then went off did Strongtalk HotSpot, then Java HotSpot then were bought by Sun again. And then eventually Google hired the exact same team to do the same thing for Chrome (and then later Dart). So really just using Self would have saved a solid 10+ years of detours only to end up with what Sun had in its labs in 1992.

xeckr 3y ago

Incredible how far it has come. I use JavaScript for everything these days.

sbrady12345 3y ago

The comments here are the best

UnixSchizoid 3y ago

Eh, this will never replace my beloved perl

panick21_ 3y ago

What really funny here are few things. First, Sun should really have implemented its own browser. They basically already had something that shared most of what a modern browser can do when they did NeWS. Basically NeWS that loads postscript over the internet is most of what a modern browser does. Sun should really have done its own browser, rather then do the deal with Netscape. Second, Sun had developed Self and made it really fast. It shares a lot with Java Script and would have served perfectly fine in that roll. But instead it took 15-20 years until some of the same people who worked on Self and later Strongtalk to make JS fast at Google. Java Script could have been fast as soon as it came out if it was based on Self, rather then scripted together in a few weeks by Netscape. I think Sun systematically messed up with the whole software division staring in the 80s and got worse in the 90s. Amazing things like NeWS were kill, tons of bad ideas were adopted that around Java/Corba that were clunky.

lizknope 3y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HotJava https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HotJava > HotJava (later called HotJava Browser to distinguish it from HotJava Views) was a modular, extensible web browser from Sun Microsystems implemented in Java. Are you saying they should have added JavaScript to their Java based browser?
- _ea1k 3y ago
  I remember that and also remember them releasing a new version that literally didn't work on yahoo.com. I complained and they said some snarky comment about not complaining about things that were given for free. That browser didn't last long, and was terrible.
  - lizknope 3y ago
    I only remember running it and rotating some 3D model of a helicopter or something within the browser.
  - panick21_ 3y ago
    It really was a demo, never a serious product.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

bloopernova 3y ago

I just want to say that I absolutely adore all of you making comments like it's Usenet back in the day. Now do the Netscape open sources Mozilla announcement on /. You're all making me remember what it was like to delve into the weird and wonderful world of httpd, perl cgi-bin, and Slackware 3. (My first Linux!! I kept wondering why the system was so aggressive because it said it wanted to bash me for making mistakes: "bash: syntax error"!) I have fond memories of working on Sony Broadcast's Linux-based digital interactive TV servers in London. Then packing everything up and transporting it to Amsterdam for IBC 1999 (I think?). Setting everything up was a real slog, but I got to see a trade show spring up from a bare floor into an amazing variety of booths. The construction was crazy complex and I'm astounded that it came together in time. Thank you all, from this old dude, for the huge nostalgia trip :)

klvino 3y ago
Going through the comments and felt the same nostalgia. Everyone is pitch perfect with the tone of the conversation 30 years ago. Camps of "leave well enough alone", "not another language", "big corporations trying to cash in on this internet trend". Back in the day, some of us were programming snobs. Personally guilty of making comments downplaying the value of HTML and JavaScript.
cmrdporcupine 3y ago
As I read it and it took me back to the start of my career, I just thought to myself: "Can I retire now? Have I not earned that?" Quick look at bank account says no.

tibbydudeza 3y ago

And the web is far worse off I reckon after this weekend hack job - currently busy with React JS project using Bootstrap - so much effort for merely displaying stuff. A Visual Basic for the Web is needed.

mproud 3y ago

I always thought it was a gimmick to call it JavaScript when Java was out, when I’m reality they had almost nothing in common.

Zelphyr 3y ago

Much thanks to everyone involved with JavaScript over these 28 years! I've enjoyed using it from the beginning.

leptons 3y ago
I remember using Lynx browser in around 1990, and telling a friend "this thing really needs a scripting language". Then I started using Netscape and kept saying "This thing really needs a scripting language". When Javascript was introduced, I was immediately a fan, dove right in, and never stopped. Knowing Javascript has been paying my bills for decades.
oblio 3y ago
> I've enjoyed using it from the beginning. You monster!

kazinator 3y ago

Javascript gets let for block scoped variables in ES6 (2015 - 1995 = 20).

sproketboy 3y ago

[dead]

warrenski 3y ago

> "JavaScript is also a promising core technology for the new multimedia publishing tool that Macromedia is building." I believe Bud Colligan may have been speaking about ActionScript in this quote, the scripting language found in their yet to be launched Macromedia Flash product. Of course, Flash is no more... and neither is Macromedia. Time flies!

no_wizard 3y ago

I know there many tongue and cheek comments here on this, but what a time to be alive back then. Can you imagine these same corporations agreeing on anything today to be an open standard used by all, documented in the open and working on collaboratively? This was a watershed moment in technology for that alone

rbrown 3y ago

"And on the 4th day, Marc said let their be java-script"

pfarrell 3y ago

At the bottom, in the company contacts section... Oracle Corporation Mark Benioff: (415) 506-7000 Maybe I should take that guy out to lunch.

kentbrew 3y ago

Wow, look at all those pre-650 Mountain View contact phone numbers. Reading this in 2023 it looks like Silicon Valley really is in San Francisco....

vogon_laureate 3y ago

Why do we even need this? If I want to animate text I can just use <blink> tags. Also, not everyone has high-speed dialup yet. Phone bills are going to go through the roof!!