5 ms·

argh people here are so negative. You get a lot of the content you consume over the web. You can stream videos over the web and that is more convenient that usi

by soapdog 13y ago

argh people here are so negative. You get a lot of the content you consume over the web. You can stream videos over the web and that is more convenient that using DVDs. you get "facts" from wikipedia and similar resources and thats easier than picking dead tree encyclopedia. This is about convenience. When games start being playable on browsers you won't need a local install or different ports for different platforms. You will need just a browser. It won't matter if you're on windows, mac or linux. It will just work. That means reduced cost for the studio. That means less support calls. That means easier setup. That will also mean that people will be able to experience with less mainstream stuff. Sharing stuff on the web doesn't require Apple, Google, whatever company approval. It becomes easier to create content and users have less resistance to opening a web page when compared to installing a game. Also its safer since JS language is pretty safe regarding exploits and viruses and general malware when compared with something built with native code on your machine.

stoptalkingshit 13y ago
Clueless. Just clueless. None of these benefits are tied to the crap browser platform that's been foisted on us. The stewards of the browser did a terrible job of designing it, as proven by shoddy hacks like asm.js. Did you know that it took WebGL to get them to introduce typed arrays? They weren't smart enough to see the usefulness of this, they had to bumble into it. Same with async HTTP requests. So woopty-doo you've caught up to where the JVM was over a decade ago. Semantic HTML has been destroyed by this mindset also.
- stcredzero 13y ago
  None of these benefits are tied to the crap browser platform that's been foisted on us. No, but they are tied to the web, for which browsers and JavaScript are an incumbent technology. You are right, in the same way that Windows has nothing in particular to do with games, outside of a fortunate adoption of DirectX. It's just that it's the way the world turned out. Admittedly, there are downsides.
  - stoptalkingshit 13y ago
    The popularity of DirectX doesn't vindicate Windows either. So what's your point? It's shit but, eh, that's the way the world turned out? People have every right to be annoyed because the people who were entrusted with the concept of the web implemented it very badly. At least on Windows there's a serious effort to give me as much of the machine's power as possible. I had a better programming experience with Java applets more than a decade ago. It is a joke.
    - pcwalton 13y ago
      > At least on Windows there's a serious effort to give me as much of the machine's power as possible. What is asm.js (and WebGL, for that matter) if not that?
      - stoptalkingshit 13y ago
        A decade-late attempt to catch up with the JVM. Notice how there's no design here? It's because the web people had no idea this would be necessary and it got bolted on as a reaction to competitors. That is to say, the innovation belongs to plugin vendors, not the web people.
        kybernetikos 13y ago
        I would have been perfectly happy to be working with the JVM here, except that the JVM as a platform for web-type client stuff died because the user experience was implemented so shoddily. There was no conspiracy against it. It had its chance. It used to have high install rates. It was placed about as perfectly for success as you could hope to be. If it hadn't failed so miserably at what it set out to do and be (and instead succeeded in a different area), we would be using it now, and living in the utopia you wish for. As an aside, a lot of your complaints against web technologies make it sound as if there is a cohesive group of people designing something and doing it wrong. Actually it's a much more chaotic process involving a diverse group of people and companies and competing interests. It doesn't guarantee that we end up with the best designs, but such a process has benefits too, and since it's happening in the open, you could actually take part too (assuming you aren't already).
- soapdog 13y ago
  WTF? You simply go around calling people clueless without knowing their background? What is wrong with you? The browser platform is not perfect, its not close to perfect, its evolving to do something that it was not originally designed to but it still the best shot at cross platform software. You can pick the JVM for all elegance it had, it never achieved what simple servers with bad markup languages did. There is a reason why you are typing on a browser right now and not using a java applet. The reason is that even with all the drawbacks of web technology, it works, it is easy to implement, it is easy to learn. Its not about über programmers in ivory towers, its about empowering everyone with a technology that is easy to grasp. It takes a very good professional to craft a good web app but it still easy enough that people from non-technical backgrounds can share knowledge. Its a platform for sharing stuff. Yes they added typed arrays just now. The engines evolved a lot during the last two years. Lots of things are being ironed out. Instead of just seeing deficiencies, see how progress is being made with something that is open, free and common.
  - stoptalkingshit 13y ago
    So what you're saying is it's lowest-common-denominator crap? Then we agree!
pjmlp 13y ago
You can do all of that with TCP/IP or any other network stack, no need for HTTP.

by soapdog 13y ago

stoptalkingshit 13y ago

Clueless. Just clueless. None of these benefits are tied to the crap browser platform that's been foisted on us. The stewards of the browser did a terrible job of designing it, as proven by shoddy hacks like asm.js. Did you know that it took WebGL to get them to introduce typed arrays? They weren't smart enough to see the usefulness of this, they had to bumble into it. Same with async HTTP requests. So woopty-doo you've caught up to where the JVM was over a decade ago. Semantic HTML has been destroyed by this mindset also.

stcredzero 13y ago
None of these benefits are tied to the crap browser platform that's been foisted on us. No, but they are tied to the web, for which browsers and JavaScript are an incumbent technology. You are right, in the same way that Windows has nothing in particular to do with games, outside of a fortunate adoption of DirectX. It's just that it's the way the world turned out. Admittedly, there are downsides.
- stoptalkingshit 13y ago
  The popularity of DirectX doesn't vindicate Windows either. So what's your point? It's shit but, eh, that's the way the world turned out? People have every right to be annoyed because the people who were entrusted with the concept of the web implemented it very badly. At least on Windows there's a serious effort to give me as much of the machine's power as possible. I had a better programming experience with Java applets more than a decade ago. It is a joke.
  - pcwalton 13y ago
    > At least on Windows there's a serious effort to give me as much of the machine's power as possible. What is asm.js (and WebGL, for that matter) if not that?
    - stoptalkingshit 13y ago
      A decade-late attempt to catch up with the JVM. Notice how there's no design here? It's because the web people had no idea this would be necessary and it got bolted on as a reaction to competitors. That is to say, the innovation belongs to plugin vendors, not the web people.
      - kybernetikos 13y ago
        I would have been perfectly happy to be working with the JVM here, except that the JVM as a platform for web-type client stuff died because the user experience was implemented so shoddily. There was no conspiracy against it. It had its chance. It used to have high install rates. It was placed about as perfectly for success as you could hope to be. If it hadn't failed so miserably at what it set out to do and be (and instead succeeded in a different area), we would be using it now, and living in the utopia you wish for. As an aside, a lot of your complaints against web technologies make it sound as if there is a cohesive group of people designing something and doing it wrong. Actually it's a much more chaotic process involving a diverse group of people and companies and competing interests. It doesn't guarantee that we end up with the best designs, but such a process has benefits too, and since it's happening in the open, you could actually take part too (assuming you aren't already).
soapdog 13y ago
WTF? You simply go around calling people clueless without knowing their background? What is wrong with you? The browser platform is not perfect, its not close to perfect, its evolving to do something that it was not originally designed to but it still the best shot at cross platform software. You can pick the JVM for all elegance it had, it never achieved what simple servers with bad markup languages did. There is a reason why you are typing on a browser right now and not using a java applet. The reason is that even with all the drawbacks of web technology, it works, it is easy to implement, it is easy to learn. Its not about über programmers in ivory towers, its about empowering everyone with a technology that is easy to grasp. It takes a very good professional to craft a good web app but it still easy enough that people from non-technical backgrounds can share knowledge. Its a platform for sharing stuff. Yes they added typed arrays just now. The engines evolved a lot during the last two years. Lots of things are being ironed out. Instead of just seeing deficiencies, see how progress is being made with something that is open, free and common.
- stoptalkingshit 13y ago
  So what you're saying is it's lowest-common-denominator crap? Then we agree!

pjmlp 13y ago

You can do all of that with TCP/IP or any other network stack, no need for HTTP.