3 ms·

FTA: "Throughout this article I reference HTML5, but I’m actually talking about most of the suite of relevant standards..." I think a lot of people conversatio

by WayneDB 14y ago

FTA: "Throughout this article I reference HTML5, but I’m actually talking about most of the suite of relevant standards..." I think a lot of people conversationally use the term HTML to mean the same thing.

nkerkin 14y ago
Yeah, I agree with you on that. The comment I replied to, not so much...
- WayneDB 14y ago
  I guess I'm still wondering what specifically you disagree with. You didn't say anything about that; just the wording. I don't think the GP's argument was well stated, but the general sentiment seems clear enough. Anyway, I'm interested to know what your experience is. What kind of apps do you make and how has HTML (the royal, general HTML) worked out vs native kits?
  - nkerkin 14y ago
    I'm sorry, I meant that the comment I replied to didn't seem to imply that HTML meant "suite of relevant standards". HTML/JS/CSS as an application development platform is improving and covers most development needs, social, LOB, SaaS, etc. HTML turns out to be a pretty decent view rendering engine. It's still a bit rough around the edges and won't replace native code in all situations, though, it is a much easier way of targeting and deploying to users across a multitude of platforms. Edit: As for experience, I spent 5 years on native apps, deployed to strictly controlled government Windows environments. Nightmare. Rebuilt same apps in a quarter of the time in HTML/JS/CSS, with far fewer issues. Work on various other Web apps now, couldn't be happier especially with all the tools/libraries/services springing up.
    - WayneDB 14y ago
      It's so funny how people can have similar experience and opposite results. I don't doubt that you build them quickly, but there are a lot of variables to take into account I think. I actually deploy desktop apps to a lightly controlled HIPAA environment that is mostly Windows. We use ClickOnce to get as close to zero-deployment as possible. We also do web applications private and public (for our clients). Personally - I'm not sure how I could build HTML apps faster and still retain the same quality. I'm betting that your HTML apps, like ours, aren't as "rich" as the desktop counterparts. Another variable is that rewriting any product as a minimum-viable-product often goes quicker. Not saying that's how it went out for you, but it's worth mentioning.

by WayneDB 14y ago

nkerkin 14y ago

Yeah, I agree with you on that. The comment I replied to, not so much...

WayneDB 14y ago
I guess I'm still wondering what specifically you disagree with. You didn't say anything about that; just the wording. I don't think the GP's argument was well stated, but the general sentiment seems clear enough. Anyway, I'm interested to know what your experience is. What kind of apps do you make and how has HTML (the royal, general HTML) worked out vs native kits?
- nkerkin 14y ago
  I'm sorry, I meant that the comment I replied to didn't seem to imply that HTML meant "suite of relevant standards". HTML/JS/CSS as an application development platform is improving and covers most development needs, social, LOB, SaaS, etc. HTML turns out to be a pretty decent view rendering engine. It's still a bit rough around the edges and won't replace native code in all situations, though, it is a much easier way of targeting and deploying to users across a multitude of platforms. Edit: As for experience, I spent 5 years on native apps, deployed to strictly controlled government Windows environments. Nightmare. Rebuilt same apps in a quarter of the time in HTML/JS/CSS, with far fewer issues. Work on various other Web apps now, couldn't be happier especially with all the tools/libraries/services springing up.
  - WayneDB 14y ago
    It's so funny how people can have similar experience and opposite results. I don't doubt that you build them quickly, but there are a lot of variables to take into account I think. I actually deploy desktop apps to a lightly controlled HIPAA environment that is mostly Windows. We use ClickOnce to get as close to zero-deployment as possible. We also do web applications private and public (for our clients). Personally - I'm not sure how I could build HTML apps faster and still retain the same quality. I'm betting that your HTML apps, like ours, aren't as "rich" as the desktop counterparts. Another variable is that rewriting any product as a minimum-viable-product often goes quicker. Not saying that's how it went out for you, but it's worth mentioning.