3 ms·
If you look at the browser makers who primarily target operating systems other than their own (Safari doesn't count, as Safari for Windows is mainly a developer
by cwyers 13y ago
If you look at the browser makers who primarily target operating systems other than their own (Safari doesn't count, as Safari for Windows is mainly a developer tool, not a product; and Opera doesn't count, as it's now based on Chrome, rather than being its own), they're pushing heavily for the browser to be the userspace, both in terms of shipping an OS based around their browsers (ChromeOS/FirefoxOS) and shipping apps to current OSes using their browsers rather than native code.
This demo may focus on the high-end graphics, but I doubt that's the reason anyone is investing effort into this. Mozilla wants cross-platform mobile games on Firefox OS, and Epic (I'm guessing) wants to be able to run games on Firefox OS/Chrome OS/Sailfish/Tizen/Ubuntu Touch/flavor-of-the-month that supports HTML 5, as a long-term hedging of bets. Not all of those explicitly support asm.js, but Chrome is going to get better at supporting asm.js even if it never gets to feature parity with Firefox, and the non-iOS world is likely to be running a derivative of Chrome or Firefox.
- taeric 13y agoSo, if you look at the four main browser vendors... Well, two of the four browser vendors, you will find that browser vendors would like to extend the reach of the browser. Not sure how that is surprising. The argument for wanting to target all of the platforms seems nice. Except the major tooling companies that want to target multiple platforms have already learned how. Seeing games come out on PC, Xbox, and Playstation is proof enough of that. So, again, what does this buy that the tooling does not already support? Especially if you simply design things such that they can be cross compiled with C.