4 ms·

The web ending up being controlled by Google isn't 'saving' it from proprietary platforms at all. If standards bodies are as feeble as you suggest aren't going

The web ending up being controlled by Google isn't 'saving' it from proprietary platforms at all. If standards bodies are as feeble as you suggest aren't going to be a serious custodian for Dart anyway. Ossified standards bodies or unilateral action are not the only options. Google could have engaged in cooperation with other interested parties throughout the development, so that it was a truly collaborative effort. Whilst I agree there are technical problems that Dart is solving, they have chosen an approach designed to maximize their control over the web.

FeloniousHam 13y ago
But how Google's "control" over Dart (meaning: "leading the development"), maximize their "control" over the Web (meaning: "currently providing the best suite of applications")? It's a language. If it takes off, it will be self-sustaining. Has IBM's "control" over Eclipse given IBM dominance over the Java ecosystem? I read a lot of criticism of Google's centralized incubation of Dart, that it has not been developed by some standards committee. How would this prevent the nightmare scenario of a Google overlord (it's a _language_, for Pete's sake)? What was the last successful committee designed language you've used? tl;dr Hate Google for all kinds of reasons, but judge the language on its merits.
- embolism 13y ago
  Since when was eclipse the same as the java language? That analogy seems almost like a deliberate misdirection - do you really mean it? Your TLDR says it all - you tell us to look at Dart as if it were some disembodied platonic entity independent of the goals of the corporation that controls it. But Dart isn't independent of Google, so can you explain why we should limit our thinking like this?
  - FeloniousHam 13y ago
    Eclipse is a tool that was wholly developed by IBM before it was spun off as an independent foundation. Even then, IBM was the largest contributor to its development. Regardless of the fact that IBM was using Eclipse to advance its corporate interests (to provide a tool suite to replace Visual Age and support Websphere), the IDE is still useful. You see, it's possible to separate the product from its origin. A language has even less to do with advancing corporate interests (other than Google's professed goal to "make the web faster"), since it's an agnostic platform rather than a product designed to further a specific goal.

FeloniousHam 13y ago

But how Google's "control" over Dart (meaning: "leading the development"), maximize their "control" over the Web (meaning: "currently providing the best suite of applications")? It's a language. If it takes off, it will be self-sustaining. Has IBM's "control" over Eclipse given IBM dominance over the Java ecosystem? I read a lot of criticism of Google's centralized incubation of Dart, that it has not been developed by some standards committee. How would this prevent the nightmare scenario of a Google overlord (it's a _language_, for Pete's sake)? What was the last successful committee designed language you've used? tl;dr Hate Google for all kinds of reasons, but judge the language on its merits.

embolism 13y ago
Since when was eclipse the same as the java language? That analogy seems almost like a deliberate misdirection - do you really mean it? Your TLDR says it all - you tell us to look at Dart as if it were some disembodied platonic entity independent of the goals of the corporation that controls it. But Dart isn't independent of Google, so can you explain why we should limit our thinking like this?
- FeloniousHam 13y ago
  Eclipse is a tool that was wholly developed by IBM before it was spun off as an independent foundation. Even then, IBM was the largest contributor to its development. Regardless of the fact that IBM was using Eclipse to advance its corporate interests (to provide a tool suite to replace Visual Age and support Websphere), the IDE is still useful. You see, it's possible to separate the product from its origin. A language has even less to do with advancing corporate interests (other than Google's professed goal to "make the web faster"), since it's an agnostic platform rather than a product designed to further a specific goal.