9 ms·

Cookies are a historical band-aid. The implementation is a mess, cross-domain cookies require all sorts of hacks, and there's nothing you can do with a cookie t

by debacle 12y ago

Cookies are a historical band-aid. The implementation is a mess, cross-domain cookies require all sorts of hacks, and there's nothing you can do with a cookie that you can't do with a session identifier. Also, SSL gets way more complicated when you are using a CDN.

icedchai 12y ago
You could say that most of the modern web is a historical band-aid. Here we are, 20+ years later, building "apps" on top of a document delivery system.
- angersock 12y ago
  It's worked pretty well though, just sayin'.
  - nilved 12y ago
    No, it hasn't. The web is a terrible, hacked-together mess. Things break often and catastrophically. HTTP 2.0 is layering on more hacks instead of trimming the fat.
  - icedchai 12y ago
    It works, yes, but with great effort. Think of all the development time spent grafting applications on top of what is fundamentally a document delivery system. It's hack upon hack, kluge upon kluge. Example: Do you think HTML/CSS/JS is the right way to develop a user interface for an application? I don't.
    - angersock 12y ago
      It's a damned sight better than tk, wxWigets, Swing, SWT, AWT, MFC, or any of a bajillion other things we've tried in the desktop.
      - icedchai 12y ago
        Yeah, you're right, all those things are terrible, too. Can't we do better than what we have?
  - Shorel 12y ago
    Yeah, with AngularJS and REST I can finally approach the level of productivity that Visual Basic 4.0 had 20 years ago.
- tracker1 12y ago
  Remembering the later BBS days and their own GUI protocols for applications, I don't consider web applications really any worse... Realistically today, you can use WebSockets (or a safer abstraction, shoe/sock, socket.io, SignalR or otherwise) to act as an application channel, with static resources grabbed via HTTP(S). In such a way, your application channel can maintain all the state it needs in that websocket... no cookies needed. The downside of the web today is the lack of a standard display interface/size... you have to work from a phone all the way to a 1080p or larger desktop or big screen display. These abilities to use the web and enhance things is exactly why the web is as pervasive as it is... if it weren't for such open, broadspread ability we'd all be stuck with a natural monopoly (windows) everywhere.

by debacle 12y ago

icedchai 12y ago

You could say that most of the modern web is a historical band-aid. Here we are, 20+ years later, building "apps" on top of a document delivery system.

angersock 12y ago
It's worked pretty well though, just sayin'.
- nilved 12y ago
  No, it hasn't. The web is a terrible, hacked-together mess. Things break often and catastrophically. HTTP 2.0 is layering on more hacks instead of trimming the fat.
- icedchai 12y ago
  It works, yes, but with great effort. Think of all the development time spent grafting applications on top of what is fundamentally a document delivery system. It's hack upon hack, kluge upon kluge. Example: Do you think HTML/CSS/JS is the right way to develop a user interface for an application? I don't.
  - angersock 12y ago
    It's a damned sight better than tk, wxWigets, Swing, SWT, AWT, MFC, or any of a bajillion other things we've tried in the desktop.
    - icedchai 12y ago
      Yeah, you're right, all those things are terrible, too. Can't we do better than what we have?
- Shorel 12y ago
  Yeah, with AngularJS and REST I can finally approach the level of productivity that Visual Basic 4.0 had 20 years ago.
tracker1 12y ago
Remembering the later BBS days and their own GUI protocols for applications, I don't consider web applications really any worse... Realistically today, you can use WebSockets (or a safer abstraction, shoe/sock, socket.io, SignalR or otherwise) to act as an application channel, with static resources grabbed via HTTP(S). In such a way, your application channel can maintain all the state it needs in that websocket... no cookies needed. The downside of the web today is the lack of a standard display interface/size... you have to work from a phone all the way to a 1080p or larger desktop or big screen display. These abilities to use the web and enhance things is exactly why the web is as pervasive as it is... if it weren't for such open, broadspread ability we'd all be stuck with a natural monopoly (windows) everywhere.