4 ms·

The universal reply to "get over it" is "if it's a problem for me, then it's a problem". Are you sure there's no grain of truth in the complaints about today's

The universal reply to "get over it" is "if it's a problem for me, then it's a problem". Are you sure there's no grain of truth in the complaints about today's dynamic Web? How about this critique, which is hopefully more articulate? http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2011-November/033914.html http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/2011-Nov...

untog 13y ago
Are you sure there's no grain of truth in the complaints about today's dynamic Web? Of course there are. But no-one has really articulated an alternative vision. That post certainly doesn't.
- cousin_it 13y ago
  That post's alternative vision is something that already existed not so long ago, you can learn about it in as much detail as you want...
  - untog 13y ago
    So we throw away all scripting? No more Google Maps? Doesn't sound very realistic to me.
    - cousin_it 13y ago
      IMO, browser plugins were the way forward. You can have all the fancy stuff that modern computers can do, like Google Maps or even Quake Live, and at the same time most of the web can stay simple.
      - untog 13y ago
        Well, that's a terrible idea. Why do you think so many plugins are being phased out?
        cousin_it 13y ago
        Well, the Flash plugin has become less popular because many developers disliked it and decided to bet on the open web instead. IMO that was for shortsighted ideological reasons. As far as I know, browser plugins are the only way to have truly decentralized innovation on the Web. Anyone can make a plugin and offer it to users. If plugins are discouraged, then a handful of browser makers become gatekeepers of all new functionality. It may seem okay now because some browser makers are seen as good guys, like Mozilla and Google, but we all remember the time when the biggest browser maker wasn't seen as a good guy, and that can happen again. What are your arguments against plugins? I'm curious.
        untog 13y ago
        Primary argument against plugins is that they have to be remade for every platform. See: the iPhone not having Flash.
        cousin_it 13y ago
        What? If you want to expose new rich functionality to web apps, you need to do it separately on each platform anyway, whether it's in a plugin or in the core browser. Plugin developers seem to be okay with paying that price. The iPhone doesn't have Flash because Apple doesn't want web developers to make rich apps and divert users from the app store, not because of implementation difficulties.

untog 13y ago

Are you sure there's no grain of truth in the complaints about today's dynamic Web? Of course there are. But no-one has really articulated an alternative vision. That post certainly doesn't.

cousin_it 13y ago
That post's alternative vision is something that already existed not so long ago, you can learn about it in as much detail as you want...
- untog 13y ago
  So we throw away all scripting? No more Google Maps? Doesn't sound very realistic to me.
  - cousin_it 13y ago
    IMO, browser plugins were the way forward. You can have all the fancy stuff that modern computers can do, like Google Maps or even Quake Live, and at the same time most of the web can stay simple.
    - untog 13y ago
      Well, that's a terrible idea. Why do you think so many plugins are being phased out?
      - cousin_it 13y ago
        Well, the Flash plugin has become less popular because many developers disliked it and decided to bet on the open web instead. IMO that was for shortsighted ideological reasons. As far as I know, browser plugins are the only way to have truly decentralized innovation on the Web. Anyone can make a plugin and offer it to users. If plugins are discouraged, then a handful of browser makers become gatekeepers of all new functionality. It may seem okay now because some browser makers are seen as good guys, like Mozilla and Google, but we all remember the time when the biggest browser maker wasn't seen as a good guy, and that can happen again. What are your arguments against plugins? I'm curious.
        untog 13y ago
        Primary argument against plugins is that they have to be remade for every platform. See: the iPhone not having Flash.
        cousin_it 13y ago
        What? If you want to expose new rich functionality to web apps, you need to do it separately on each platform anyway, whether it's in a plugin or in the core browser. Plugin developers seem to be okay with paying that price. The iPhone doesn't have Flash because Apple doesn't want web developers to make rich apps and divert users from the app store, not because of implementation difficulties.