|
|
This will never end you know. We knew.
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy.
|
|
|
|
|
Who cares anymore?
The web is a burning wreckage filled with the decomposing bodies of various "seemed like a good idea at the time"-'technologies'.
Offline programs are the only way forward for anything that isn't explicitly meant to be a website. Just say no to silly web "apps".
And elephant Weight's "look at how cool this is oh wait it isn't it's just an offline webpage", too.
Yes, I mad.
|
|
|
|
|
harold aptroot wrote: Offline programs are the only way forward for anything that isn't explicitly meant to be a website. Just say no to silly web "apps".
Amen and hallelujah!
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
harold aptroot wrote: Offline programs are the only way forward for anything that isn't explicitly meant to be a website. Just say no to silly web "apps".
That is rather reassuring particularly since my work in in offline apps and I am currently training myself in WPF which incidentally I think is the bees knees 
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
Just wanted to point out that Chrome isn't banning plugins.
It's banning a plugin architecture. There are other architectures, and if Microsoft ports Silverlight to use the newer (more secure) architecture, then Silverlight will continue to work on Chrome.
|
|
|
|
|
Flash and Silverlight? This goes much further back than that. Java applets were, I think, the first general-purpose solution to the problem that every round of people seems to think we don't need a solution for and then realizes we do, after all.
|
|
|
|
|
To be fair the vast majority of standards started with a proprietary product or something else that was restricted in some way.
|
|
|
|
|
I don't see what the problem is. Google are releasing a plugin into the market and whether it becomes adopted will depend entirely on user take up, there is little they can do to force users to use it. Microsoft has added lots of extensions to IE over the years in the hope the world would all migrate to using them, this seems no different. MS mostly failed because their browser was, IMO and continues to be, very poor compared to the competition. If users move to chrome in droves, this interface will become standardised and all browsers will either support it or die.
Silverlight was introduced as a reaction by Microsoft to Flash taking over the web, with the fairly widely understood aim of killing off Flash. This fragmented the market which hurt Flash, then Apple's refusal to allow Flash on mobile devices killed it off. The job done, Microsoft IMO fairly cynically pulled Silverlight.
The point I am making is that in the sphere of web browsers, Darwinism is what decides what flourishes, with success being defined by user take up, in turn driving web developer support.
|
|
|
|
|
M Towler wrote: The point I am making is that in the sphere of web browsers, Darwinism is what decides what flourishes, with success being defined by user take up, in turn driving web developer support.
That is the point.
Why does Microsoft keep giving up on successful projects just to cater to the open source/standards crowd?
Sure, make Visual Studio pump out mounds of steaming HTML 5/JavaScript for people who carp about standards - but keep making an awesome IE plugin (Silverlight) for those who actually want to provide their users with a better experience. Microsoft has the cash to do both very well.
That way Microsoft Developers can continue to make a living providing great solutions while the rest of the world is still in a tizzy about the excrement the W3C is pumping out.
|
|
|
|
|
I know this is rough on a lot of developers but I had to chuckle. I just LAST NIGHT decided to stop trying to write web-based stuff as I really don't care for it and don't have any call for it. (Let the "kids" do it). I find HTML in general to be a real kludge when it comes to the front-end for software. It takes 3 times (if not more) effort to do EVERYTHING. (I have tried to sell myself on it it for about 13 years so it's not like I haven't tried). I write desktop apps that handle databases. My clients are small, they don't care for all their data to live out on the web anyway.
I'd much rather focus on getting my clients their problems solved than spending 70-80% of my development time maintaining all the stuff associated with trying to target all these web browsers and their kludgy implementation. Yuck.
Yes, there is a lot of really slick stuff being done on the web (and I use it ) but I've been at this for 37 years and I keep seeing developers get jerked around by stuff like this. The hell with that. I'll just spend the rest of my career writing stuff that no one else can "lower" themselves to do anymore. (and have a life) I make six-figures doing that. Just breaks my heart that Google is jerking everybody around. 
modified 26-Sep-13 6:37am.
|
|
|
|
|
Okay, but now I'm wondering - what's the difference between having a webpage just boot an offline program via a "a href" link? Skype does that if you go skype:someuserid in a href attribute iirc. And the fact that chrome is using chrome:// is kinda the point, too. Arguably, you wouldn't even need to make a custom URL prefix like that, if you forced a certain path and just did file:///... but no one sane likes forcing paths.
As a second suggestion - I know there's a lot of libraries for making webpages possible, but if people want "webapps", why doesn't someone just simply write something that can convert how a browser presents a webpage to the plugins, so the different browsers have multiplatform plugins?
I actually use the IE Tab for Chrome extension. I'm not wasting half a minute waiting for IE to start up, and the ActiveX is a good amount faster. (and does better on the Acid3 test too)
|
|
|
|
|
MehGerbil wrote: I want to program using tools by a company that isn't afraid to win.
Microsoft is not afraid of win, but every time it does it, it gets a nice letter from an antitrust regulator.
|
|
|
|
|
|
It was crazy enough to create Australia. This is nothing!
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy.
|
|
|
|
|
The lava people are going to build a base there!
They'll enslave us all!
*ahem*
I, for one, welcome our molten masters.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: The lava people
As it's not the java people, I don't worry to much...
The signature is in building process.. Please wait...
|
|
|
|
|
The lava people use {} and () but they use them the opposite way.
Also, a pair of lowercase t's is how they comment.
private void TakeOverWorld)(
}
tt: do stuff here
{
I would have thought this new programming standard wouldn't have a chance but some European based commission has decided that it is a good idea and there is talk that Microsoft is considering dropping several successful lines of business in order to embrace it.
Me?
I'm studying to be a short order cook because I'm tired of the insanity.
|
|
|
|
|
That's tiny
It's nowhere near big enough for a half-decent Secret Volcano Base...
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: That's tiny
Next week they will come out with another story that will start using a new classification for islands, a "dwarf island".
|
|
|
|
|
It's about the same size as Leshp and you know how that ended up...
speramus in juniperus
|
|
|
|
|
Check it for weathercocks, that's what I say!
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
|
|
|
|
|
Will do c**k!
speramus in juniperus
|
|
|
|
|
Mmm, burritos[^]...
[ASIDE - post the link with the trailing slash and the hamsters go FUBAR]
speramus in juniperus
|
|
|
|
|
In the soccer (football) match between Aston Villa and Tottenham, the defender Jan Vertonghen decided that this[^] was a good way to tackle Aston Villas striker Nicklas Helenius  ...
Apperantly the referee didnt think this was an illegal move, so now you can teach you kids some new way of stopping an attack... 
Although I laughed pretty hard, this seems to be a penalty...
modified 25-Sep-13 11:12am.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
