3 ms·

How are 2-4 not covered by every other applications development platform on desktop or any other platform?

• baddox 12y ago
  Because no one application framework is already supported by the vast majority of Internet-capable devices, requires no "installing," and supports a standardized and ubiquitous system to link between applications.
• dredmorbius 12y ago
  What browser-based apps offer is a uniform platform for applications development. It's a HUGE revolution in applications space, and as much as it's frustrating to me (on both the user and developer/ops side), there's no denying its impact and significance. Supporting a zero-install or minimal-install path, supporting all platforms from the same runtime, and providing instant updates to all users is tremendous. It's a large part of what's made smaller Web ISVs (SaaS) possible. Systems integration and platform support kill applications design in other contexts. But those same features are also limitations. I've had multiple horrible app upgrades, apply massive amounts of styling to Web sites and apps, and _still_ run into compatibility issues, as a Linux user. And then there's the security profile. There are a number of compromises possible, but pulling the "applications runtime environment" out of my "information delivery tool" seems an increasingly positive step. Not that we haven't had attempts to provide that runtime, e.g., Java and ActiveX. One problem is that the runtime itself cannot run as the same UID as the user invoking it. It's got to be fully sandboxed and separated, further by origin site or authoring authority. Possibly within its own VM. Trust of Web content is a real problem and one that will only grow.