4 ms·
That's a bit oversimplified. I had this thought too and tried to figure out why this is different, and I think there are some major points. The biggest one is i
by iforgotpassword 2y ago
That's a bit oversimplified. I had this thought too and tried to figure out why this is different, and I think there are some major points. The biggest one is in which order they were built and designed. If we take Java and ask why applets didn't take off since they could do everything WASM offers and more, two things come to mind: it was fucking slow on contemporary machines, and the gui framework sucked. WASM is the complete opposite. The gui framework is HTML/CSS, which despite its idiocy in many places had a long time to mature and we've generally came to accept the way it works. Now we just tacked a powerful VM onto it so we don't need to target slow Javascript. There isn't even a new language to learn, just compile whatever you want to WASM, which means you can use a familiar and mature dev environment.
The other point is that WASM is way more open than any of the mentioned predecessors were. They were mostly proprietary crap by vendors who didn't give a shit (flash: security, Microsoft: other platforms) so inevitably someone else would throw their weight around (Apple) to kill them, and with good reason. WASM is part of the browser, so as a vendor you're actually in control regarding security and other things, and are not at the mercy of some lazy entity who doesn't give a damn because they think their product is irreplaceable.
- singularity2001 2y agoAny reasonable interaction between WASM and JS/DOM gets postponed seemingly indefinitely though.
- pjmlp 2y agoSame premise of many other bytecode formats since 1958, a matter of implementation and marketing.
- kaba0 2y agoWasm is more open, because we effectively have 1.5 browsers left, and whatever google decides will be the de facto “web standard” everyone should follow. If google were pushing for a slightly revamped jvm/applet model, that would be the standard (as the JVM is as open/standardized as it gets)
- pjmlp 2y agoIronically if it was today instead of 2010, Mozilla refusing to adopt PNaCL would hardly matter.
- iforgotpassword 2y agoI don't buy it. WAS is still open from the start, and incredibly more simple and thus easier to implement securely. And no, for reasons stated before an applet model would never become the standard again. You'd rather have to integrate Java with the browser so it's entirely under your control, and considering how massive it is and how hard it was to properly sandbox it, nobody in their right mind would decide on this. WASM reuses a lot of infrastructure already there, it's simply the best solution from a technical standpoint.