23 ms·

The fact that they mentioned that it can be installed alongside another OS is good, because unless they plan on packaging it with more than just the browser, it

The fact that they mentioned that it can be installed alongside another OS is good, because unless they plan on packaging it with more than just the browser, it always should be. I like web apps as much as the next guy, but they can never truly take the place of desktop apps 100%. There will always be situations where one is offline, so my computer better still let me word-process offline. Also, even google docs, the king of web word processors, is slow and buggy. Whether it's server or connection problems, it often takes me 2-3 tries to get gdocs to actually let me save so that I can close the document. Sometimes I change windows and come back to gdocs, and then I start typing and it's in some weird state where it has a cursor, but what I type doesn't show up. And has anyone even thought about using some kind of web development environment? No. We want our editor to be fast and reliable, and we know that both embedding in a webpage and having to talk to a remote server a lot make that impossible. Basically, all web apps still have the problem that the languages that run them are slower, anything remote is slow, and having to embed them in browsers--and have them work on all browsers--limit their functionality. Maybe when more solutions to embedding apps have come round, and the Internet really is everywhere, this will work, but for now, the browswer cannot supplant OSes.

Devilboy 18y ago
I sort of disagree with you. Sure for some people you need offline capability but these days internet access is becoming ubiquitous and personally I can't do much of anything work-related without internet access. This sort of OS would be perfect on, for example, my iPhone hardware or my Dell mini netbook. The advantages of working online easily overshadows the disadvantages especially with faster and more reliable net connections.
wmeredith 18y ago
This is the attitude people had about video before broadband was widespread. As the networks become more reliable and faster, all these problems you're talking about go away...
- bk 18y ago
  Many use cases remain (and will remain for a long time) where having a network-based application is not practical. This doesn't even necessarily depend much on technological advances, as it does on geographical and social factors. Examples: * I sit on a train that goes through valleys and tunnels - there is simply no reception (not even cell) of any kind in those areas in most cases. * I keep all my data online in Google apps, but I get locked out of my account (as reported a few weeks ago on HN). * I have huge amounts of data (HD video), my uplink sucks and will suck for a long time. It sucks even more when I travel. * I'm in China and access a European site, which is routed through North America - I get at least half a second of latency on every request. Ouch. If you ask me, I see the trend going more towards smaller devices and improved online-offline capabilities. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point you could "download" (or call it "permanently cache") google docs' actual software at and use it completely offline, with a convenient auto-update and remote data syncing option. (Evernote might be an example of "the future"). The ideal situation for most users is to have their data (and accessing software) available locally and remotely.
- jackowayed 18y ago
  I'm not saying that web apps are horrible. I'm just saying that certainly not now, and probably never, can they fully supplant traditional desktop apps. There are too many times when you're on a plane or for whatever reason can't get internet. Yes, I understand that they're toying with Internet on planes, but I don't see any time in at least 10 years that that will be as fast as current broadband, so you'd still have problems with speed. Also, Internet goes out. It happens. There's a storm. An internal network breaks. Power goes out (but laptops still work). I don't want any of the myriad ways I can lose my connection to the Internet to render my computer completely inutile.
jackowayed 18y ago
And I don't even mean to say that I would never use this OS. A fast-loading OS that will get me to my web apps easily has its place. What I am saying is that I will never--at least in the at all near future--exclusively have this on a computer. It's too limiting for me.

Devilboy 18y ago

I sort of disagree with you. Sure for some people you need offline capability but these days internet access is becoming ubiquitous and personally I can't do much of anything work-related without internet access. This sort of OS would be perfect on, for example, my iPhone hardware or my Dell mini netbook. The advantages of working online easily overshadows the disadvantages especially with faster and more reliable net connections.

wmeredith 18y ago

This is the attitude people had about video before broadband was widespread. As the networks become more reliable and faster, all these problems you're talking about go away...

bk 18y ago
Many use cases remain (and will remain for a long time) where having a network-based application is not practical. This doesn't even necessarily depend much on technological advances, as it does on geographical and social factors. Examples: * I sit on a train that goes through valleys and tunnels - there is simply no reception (not even cell) of any kind in those areas in most cases. * I keep all my data online in Google apps, but I get locked out of my account (as reported a few weeks ago on HN). * I have huge amounts of data (HD video), my uplink sucks and will suck for a long time. It sucks even more when I travel. * I'm in China and access a European site, which is routed through North America - I get at least half a second of latency on every request. Ouch. If you ask me, I see the trend going more towards smaller devices and improved online-offline capabilities. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point you could "download" (or call it "permanently cache") google docs' actual software at and use it completely offline, with a convenient auto-update and remote data syncing option. (Evernote might be an example of "the future"). The ideal situation for most users is to have their data (and accessing software) available locally and remotely.
jackowayed 18y ago
I'm not saying that web apps are horrible. I'm just saying that certainly not now, and probably never, can they fully supplant traditional desktop apps. There are too many times when you're on a plane or for whatever reason can't get internet. Yes, I understand that they're toying with Internet on planes, but I don't see any time in at least 10 years that that will be as fast as current broadband, so you'd still have problems with speed. Also, Internet goes out. It happens. There's a storm. An internal network breaks. Power goes out (but laptops still work). I don't want any of the myriad ways I can lose my connection to the Internet to render my computer completely inutile.

jackowayed 18y ago

And I don't even mean to say that I would never use this OS. A fast-loading OS that will get me to my web apps easily has its place. What I am saying is that I will never--at least in the at all near future--exclusively have this on a computer. It's too limiting for me.