4 ms·

May be an unpopular opinion, but: I do not want LibreOffice in my browser, my browser is already slow enough as it is for me. What next? Blender in the browser

May be an unpopular opinion, but: I do not want LibreOffice in my browser, my browser is already slow enough as it is for me. What next? Blender in the browser? OS inside the browser? (Oh yeah, we already have that!)

doubled112 2y ago
The browser is the OS now. Everything underneath is just a hardware abstraction layer.
- johnisgood 2y ago
  I really do not want it to be the future. :( Just because some people use the browser all the time, it does not mean that it should be the "OS". It is silly.
  - samuelstros 2y ago
    What makes you think the browser as OS is silly?
    - johnisgood 2y ago
      The browser is for browsing the Internet, it is a tool specialized for that, it has nothing to do with being an operating system. Being able to boot an OS within it does not make it an OS either. It just adds an unnecessary and potentially detrimental (to both performance and security) layer: OS -> browser -> OS, which is just silly. If you do not see the absurdity, let us consider this: OS -> browser -> OS -> browser -> OS, ad infinitum. :P
    - lurking_swe 2y ago
      simple - performance is often garbage. web apps use more cpu and memory than a native app. people should not need an M1 MacBook or better just to edit a document. (see top comment) The only reason people build “apps” in the browser to begin with is because it simplifies the development for the engineering team. Easier to ship, easier to update, write once, etc. Sometimes the user benefits, but rarely. The other problem I have is it blurs the lines between data on your machine (private) and data that is in the cloud. not everybody wants all their data in the cloud. When you’re working with a “app” in the web browser it’s not always clear.
      - johnisgood 2y ago
        Yeah, it is not clear and considering the CVEs we have seen before, or just simply the features(tm), privacy is a huge concern. And for what? A slower alternative to native apps because I am too lazy to click on "Open"? Sounds silly to me.
      - samuelstros 2y ago
        > The only reason people build “apps” in the browser to begin with is because it simplifies the development for the engineering team. Easier to ship, easier to update, write once, etc. Sometimes the user benefits, but rarely. Interesting take. Usually web apps lower friction for users. - no installations - no large binaries - collaborative - easy to adopt I can't think of any (desktop) app that came out in recent years that specifically pitched "because native, we are better" and won. Sketch is a glaring example of a web app (figma) killing native (sketch)
        lurking_swe 2y ago
        searching on the ios or mac app store, or sharing a link to the app download page, is not exactly hard to adopt most of the time. Gen Z might think so but that’s because we’ve conditioned them to expect everything in a browser IMO, not because it’s actually complicated. “no large binaries”, i agree browsers have an advantage here - somewhat. Most apps have large binaries because software development today is lazy. Companies typically use huge libraries for EVERYTHING and then their final binary gets bloated. For example 90% of apps (excluding games) could be 30mb or less. Stuff like analytics and user tracking, advertising libs, the list goes on. Who says a native app can’t be collaborative? You can use http or websockets in a native app to push/pull data. That’s like saying social media apps aren’t collaborative. I do agree some web apps are well executed. Figma is pretty good. Google docs and google maps are excellent. I have a few more that i genuinely enjoy using. That’s the _exception_ though.
  - kolAflash 2y ago
    If "the browser" != [Chromium], but [Chromium, Firefox, Safari, Ladybird, ...], then I'm pretty happy with that. I consider it's much better then having Windows, iOS or GApps-Libraries-For-Android as de facto standard OS. Surely, my beloved Debian would be the much more perfect OS for everyone ;-)
bigstrat2003 2y ago
Agreed. Shoving things into the browser is utterly stupid. Native apps are just plain better, stop ruining things by putting them in the browser please.
techwizrd 2y ago
I disagree, it's useful to be able to click a document link and quickly preview it in your browser. At work, I have native apps for Word, Excel, PowerPoint, etc. and I still find myself using the browser version for quickly responding to a comment left in a document. It's also useful to be able to quickly send someone a link to collaborate on the document without needing them to install anything. Installing a separate app may not be possible for aging parents, people using shared computers (e.g., library or school computer), or organizations with restricted IT systems.
- johnisgood 2y ago
  Previews are different from native apps though, and when you click on a link to a document, you only have to click "Open" to open a native app. How is this an issue? For quick edits I can see the appeal, however. > Installing a separate app may not be possible for aging parents, people using shared computers (e.g., library or school computer), or organizations with restricted IT systems This seems like a non-issue, too. If my grandma were to use the PC, I would be the one installing programs (or the OS) on it, and if I knew she wanted to open and edit documents, I would install LibreOffice. It is one of the programs I install on my parent's computer. You (or the IT staff) ensure tools are available; you install LibreOffice, similarly to how you would install a browser to begin with. For example IT staff are already responsible for installing and maintaining browsers. Adding productivity software to their responsibilities is a standard practice in professional environments. Browser-based tools are a complement, not a replacement, and the push toward browser dependence should consider the trade-offs in performance, user experience and so forth. Using browsers for productivity tools may feel more convenient in very specific edge cases, but for most users and workplaces, the effort involved in installing and using native applications is negligible in comparison. (I remember the old days when I used https://gobby.github.io https://gobby.github.io with my friend to edit code together. It is a native program for editing documents (incl. code) together. Today you would probably use an extension to VS Code unless it supports it natively (no clue).) I am pretty sure there are people on here who would be able to explain it better than I do.
- wakeupcall 2y ago
  When "quickly" means downloading 242mb of runtime, running it slower than native, on top of the document you want to preview...
EvanAnderson 2y ago
Always a good time for "The Birth and Death of Javascript": https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death-of-javascript https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death...
fithisux 2y ago
I agree. Stll for some corporate use cases it has advantages better security automatically updated

doubled112 2y ago

The browser is the OS now. Everything underneath is just a hardware abstraction layer.

johnisgood 2y ago
I really do not want it to be the future. :( Just because some people use the browser all the time, it does not mean that it should be the "OS". It is silly.
- samuelstros 2y ago
  What makes you think the browser as OS is silly?
  - johnisgood 2y ago
    The browser is for browsing the Internet, it is a tool specialized for that, it has nothing to do with being an operating system. Being able to boot an OS within it does not make it an OS either. It just adds an unnecessary and potentially detrimental (to both performance and security) layer: OS -> browser -> OS, which is just silly. If you do not see the absurdity, let us consider this: OS -> browser -> OS -> browser -> OS, ad infinitum. :P
  - lurking_swe 2y ago
    simple - performance is often garbage. web apps use more cpu and memory than a native app. people should not need an M1 MacBook or better just to edit a document. (see top comment) The only reason people build “apps” in the browser to begin with is because it simplifies the development for the engineering team. Easier to ship, easier to update, write once, etc. Sometimes the user benefits, but rarely. The other problem I have is it blurs the lines between data on your machine (private) and data that is in the cloud. not everybody wants all their data in the cloud. When you’re working with a “app” in the web browser it’s not always clear.
    - johnisgood 2y ago
      Yeah, it is not clear and considering the CVEs we have seen before, or just simply the features(tm), privacy is a huge concern. And for what? A slower alternative to native apps because I am too lazy to click on "Open"? Sounds silly to me.
    - samuelstros 2y ago
      > The only reason people build “apps” in the browser to begin with is because it simplifies the development for the engineering team. Easier to ship, easier to update, write once, etc. Sometimes the user benefits, but rarely. Interesting take. Usually web apps lower friction for users. - no installations - no large binaries - collaborative - easy to adopt I can't think of any (desktop) app that came out in recent years that specifically pitched "because native, we are better" and won. Sketch is a glaring example of a web app (figma) killing native (sketch)
      - lurking_swe 2y ago
        searching on the ios or mac app store, or sharing a link to the app download page, is not exactly hard to adopt most of the time. Gen Z might think so but that’s because we’ve conditioned them to expect everything in a browser IMO, not because it’s actually complicated. “no large binaries”, i agree browsers have an advantage here - somewhat. Most apps have large binaries because software development today is lazy. Companies typically use huge libraries for EVERYTHING and then their final binary gets bloated. For example 90% of apps (excluding games) could be 30mb or less. Stuff like analytics and user tracking, advertising libs, the list goes on. Who says a native app can’t be collaborative? You can use http or websockets in a native app to push/pull data. That’s like saying social media apps aren’t collaborative. I do agree some web apps are well executed. Figma is pretty good. Google docs and google maps are excellent. I have a few more that i genuinely enjoy using. That’s the _exception_ though.
- kolAflash 2y ago
  If "the browser" != [Chromium], but [Chromium, Firefox, Safari, Ladybird, ...], then I'm pretty happy with that. I consider it's much better then having Windows, iOS or GApps-Libraries-For-Android as de facto standard OS. Surely, my beloved Debian would be the much more perfect OS for everyone ;-)

bigstrat2003 2y ago

Agreed. Shoving things into the browser is utterly stupid. Native apps are just plain better, stop ruining things by putting them in the browser please.

techwizrd 2y ago

I disagree, it's useful to be able to click a document link and quickly preview it in your browser. At work, I have native apps for Word, Excel, PowerPoint, etc. and I still find myself using the browser version for quickly responding to a comment left in a document. It's also useful to be able to quickly send someone a link to collaborate on the document without needing them to install anything. Installing a separate app may not be possible for aging parents, people using shared computers (e.g., library or school computer), or organizations with restricted IT systems.

johnisgood 2y ago
Previews are different from native apps though, and when you click on a link to a document, you only have to click "Open" to open a native app. How is this an issue? For quick edits I can see the appeal, however. > Installing a separate app may not be possible for aging parents, people using shared computers (e.g., library or school computer), or organizations with restricted IT systems This seems like a non-issue, too. If my grandma were to use the PC, I would be the one installing programs (or the OS) on it, and if I knew she wanted to open and edit documents, I would install LibreOffice. It is one of the programs I install on my parent's computer. You (or the IT staff) ensure tools are available; you install LibreOffice, similarly to how you would install a browser to begin with. For example IT staff are already responsible for installing and maintaining browsers. Adding productivity software to their responsibilities is a standard practice in professional environments. Browser-based tools are a complement, not a replacement, and the push toward browser dependence should consider the trade-offs in performance, user experience and so forth. Using browsers for productivity tools may feel more convenient in very specific edge cases, but for most users and workplaces, the effort involved in installing and using native applications is negligible in comparison. (I remember the old days when I used https://gobby.github.io https://gobby.github.io with my friend to edit code together. It is a native program for editing documents (incl. code) together. Today you would probably use an extension to VS Code unless it supports it natively (no clue).) I am pretty sure there are people on here who would be able to explain it better than I do.
wakeupcall 2y ago
When "quickly" means downloading 242mb of runtime, running it slower than native, on top of the document you want to preview...

EvanAnderson 2y ago

Always a good time for "The Birth and Death of Javascript": https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death-of-javascript https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death...

fithisux 2y ago

I agree. Stll for some corporate use cases it has advantages better security automatically updated