Hilarious, we are back at square one when they start to install complete executable assemblies on your PC to run their software. Fat client, thin client, fat client thin client. Seen this many times happen over the decades. Nothing new is invented, just running in circles over and over again.
Oh, yes. My fascination has that we run around with virtual supercomputers in our pockets but use them like they are the dumb terminals of yore. If I want a dumb terminal, Wyse is still in business.
We are also heading back to DOS console commands. Every modern web site has changed onto some glorified console application. If you need something then you have to type in the commands. Gone are the days of the button presses.
I'd kind of welcome that, but I've just recently decided to join the Mobile Revolution and do a fair portion of my computing on a tablet. I've been at it for almost a year. It's actually kind of horrible - but I told myself I'd try to join the mobile world and so I've gone through four tablets and finally settled on an iPad. I am considering getting a Surface and slapping Lubuntu on it. I'd get a bluetooth keyboard, but that kind of defeats the point of having a tablet.
Another pattern that is starting to emerge is centralisation- decentralisation- centralisation- decantralisation...
Applications on Mainframes, Applications on local hard disk PCs, Application one the Novell server, Applications on the local hard disk, Applications on the web server, Applications on the local hard disk, Applications in the cloud, Web assembly on your local hard disk....
Yeah, the cloud isn't much different than the mainframes I used to work with. It is different, but not fundamentally so very different. What's old is new again, I suppose.
As an older person, it amuses me to see them make the same mistakes the generation before them made. Surely, it'll work this time!
I see it over and over again... They always think that the other side will solve all problems. And every single time they end up having the exact same failure, just slightly different problems. There is no one single solution that fits all. It always comes down to that one developer in your team that has enough creativity to bring your project home.
I like this Webassembly, because it means that the learning curve is very steep and it increases my demand. It is a path script kiddies can't reach :-)
Isn't part of the advantage of WebAssembly that you can write your program in most popular languages and then it is compiled to the WA byte code for execution? How will this make it a tougher learning curve? Debugging will probably be a bitch if you're not used to it, I suppose.
So is everyone going to hate on it like they did with Microsoft's ActiveX technology? It's tragically funny to me to see everything MS did back in the early days of the web and were ridiculed for have come back in some new fashion and embraced as the "next big thing". MS gave us IE specific CSS and people freaked out. Webkit and Mozilla did it too and it was cheered on. MS gave us the Structured Graphics Control to display vector graphics in the browser. Everyone hated it. SVG in the browser and suddenly it's okay. Nothing is new and this "innovation" is just as bad as anything before it, but hey, let's be hypocrites and embrace it when it's no better than ActiveX, JAVA or Flash.
The difference is that these technologies and standards are open. These don't need a proprietary browser. These can be implemented by anyone who has the means to do so. These are specs that are open for everyone.
Therein lies the difference.
Well, so I understand the complaints. I don't have a nickel invested.
They claim to be open, but the reality is they are still controlled by the original developer/company. It's like the whole HTML5 video in the browser thing. Do you have the ability to go and change the source of Chrome or Firefox to replace the codecs with ones of your choosing? Sure you could fork it, but is that really any different than just making another competing browser? Open Source has proven to be anything but open. It's become a term that has lost its original intended meaning and the FOSS community is a ragtag mess of competing ports, distros and dead end projects. The idea of Open Source was grand and noble and I was a big proponent of it. The idealism gave way to the stark reality where we sacrificed innovation and forward thinking for "stop complaining it's free and if you don't like it, go fork it yourself". Now we have bloated browsers, shitty office apps that haven't improved in 10 years and the Gimp which is still crap. Linux has endless distros that compete for popularity points but always wait to see what MS does next instead of blazing trails. I'm no MS fan these days but fuck the FOSS world has made me wish we had strong closed source competition again. There was real innovation when money was on the line. We need that again.
I can't reason you out of a position you didn't reason yourself into. I'm not actually sure why you feel qualified to opine? You appear to not even understand the basics.
I've been good in software for 30 years but there's no way for one programmer to topple Mount Open Source with its misguided proponents and megacorporations funneling money into bad technologies. The momentum and entrenchment for this bullshit is too great and the problem really begins with the OS and hardware platforms so I would have to create a new unfucked processor, a new OS, a new OS API, a new compiler, a new language, a new set of protocols and finally a new browser with new programming interfaces. What you're saying is equivalent to making your own new government and nation that no one will recognize as sovereign or emigrate to because you have nothing substantial to work with and no army to force your ways. If you can pull all of this off, well I'll gladly do those other things and give your nation a better alternative to WebASM.
19 comments
0 u/TheBuddha [OP] 13 Dec 2017 16:34
Better than I expected.
0 u/roznak 13 Dec 2017 20:58
Hilarious, we are back at square one when they start to install complete executable assemblies on your PC to run their software. Fat client, thin client, fat client thin client. Seen this many times happen over the decades. Nothing new is invented, just running in circles over and over again.
0 u/TheBuddha [OP] 13 Dec 2017 21:01
Oh, yes. My fascination has that we run around with virtual supercomputers in our pockets but use them like they are the dumb terminals of yore. If I want a dumb terminal, Wyse is still in business.
0 u/roznak 13 Dec 2017 21:15
We are also heading back to DOS console commands. Every modern web site has changed onto some glorified console application. If you need something then you have to type in the commands. Gone are the days of the button presses.
0 u/TheBuddha [OP] 13 Dec 2017 21:17
I'd kind of welcome that, but I've just recently decided to join the Mobile Revolution and do a fair portion of my computing on a tablet. I've been at it for almost a year. It's actually kind of horrible - but I told myself I'd try to join the mobile world and so I've gone through four tablets and finally settled on an iPad. I am considering getting a Surface and slapping Lubuntu on it. I'd get a bluetooth keyboard, but that kind of defeats the point of having a tablet.
0 u/roznak 13 Dec 2017 21:41
Sticking to a oversized gaming PC with a fixed keyboard and a fixed screen. Better ergonomics and better for the eyes.
0 u/Wowbagger 14 Dec 2017 04:04
The Surface Pro is a great PC. If it weren't for Windows 10 being a literal spyware OS I'd actually be really happy with it.
0 u/roznak 13 Dec 2017 21:18
Another pattern that is starting to emerge is centralisation- decentralisation- centralisation- decantralisation...
Applications on Mainframes, Applications on local hard disk PCs, Application one the Novell server, Applications on the local hard disk, Applications on the web server, Applications on the local hard disk, Applications in the cloud, Web assembly on your local hard disk....
0 u/TheBuddha [OP] 13 Dec 2017 21:22
Yeah, the cloud isn't much different than the mainframes I used to work with. It is different, but not fundamentally so very different. What's old is new again, I suppose.
As an older person, it amuses me to see them make the same mistakes the generation before them made. Surely, it'll work this time!
0 u/roznak 13 Dec 2017 21:48
I see it over and over again... They always think that the other side will solve all problems. And every single time they end up having the exact same failure, just slightly different problems. There is no one single solution that fits all. It always comes down to that one developer in your team that has enough creativity to bring your project home.
I like this Webassembly, because it means that the learning curve is very steep and it increases my demand. It is a path script kiddies can't reach :-)
0 u/Wowbagger 14 Dec 2017 04:08
Isn't part of the advantage of WebAssembly that you can write your program in most popular languages and then it is compiled to the WA byte code for execution? How will this make it a tougher learning curve? Debugging will probably be a bitch if you're not used to it, I suppose.
0 u/Morbo 13 Dec 2017 22:38
So is everyone going to hate on it like they did with Microsoft's ActiveX technology? It's tragically funny to me to see everything MS did back in the early days of the web and were ridiculed for have come back in some new fashion and embraced as the "next big thing". MS gave us IE specific CSS and people freaked out. Webkit and Mozilla did it too and it was cheered on. MS gave us the Structured Graphics Control to display vector graphics in the browser. Everyone hated it. SVG in the browser and suddenly it's okay. Nothing is new and this "innovation" is just as bad as anything before it, but hey, let's be hypocrites and embrace it when it's no better than ActiveX, JAVA or Flash.
MS Chrome Effects :( -> WebGL :D
Structured Graphics Control :( -> SVG :D
ActiveX :( -> WebAssembly :D
Dynamic HTML Behaviors :( -> HTML Controls :D
Customized CSS Extensions :( -> Customized CSS Extensions :D
0 u/TheBuddha [OP] 13 Dec 2017 22:42
The difference is that these technologies and standards are open. These don't need a proprietary browser. These can be implemented by anyone who has the means to do so. These are specs that are open for everyone.
Therein lies the difference.
Well, so I understand the complaints. I don't have a nickel invested.
0 u/Morbo 13 Dec 2017 23:53
They claim to be open, but the reality is they are still controlled by the original developer/company. It's like the whole HTML5 video in the browser thing. Do you have the ability to go and change the source of Chrome or Firefox to replace the codecs with ones of your choosing? Sure you could fork it, but is that really any different than just making another competing browser? Open Source has proven to be anything but open. It's become a term that has lost its original intended meaning and the FOSS community is a ragtag mess of competing ports, distros and dead end projects. The idea of Open Source was grand and noble and I was a big proponent of it. The idealism gave way to the stark reality where we sacrificed innovation and forward thinking for "stop complaining it's free and if you don't like it, go fork it yourself". Now we have bloated browsers, shitty office apps that haven't improved in 10 years and the Gimp which is still crap. Linux has endless distros that compete for popularity points but always wait to see what MS does next instead of blazing trails. I'm no MS fan these days but fuck the FOSS world has made me wish we had strong closed source competition again. There was real innovation when money was on the line. We need that again.
0 u/TheBuddha [OP] 14 Dec 2017 08:54
...
I can't reason you out of a position you didn't reason yourself into. I'm not actually sure why you feel qualified to opine? You appear to not even understand the basics.
0 u/Pawn 18 Dec 2017 04:43
so get gud in software and make your own faggot. The future is in your hands, and if you feel you can do better and cuck them, then do it.
0 u/Morbo 18 Dec 2017 04:52
I've been good in software for 30 years but there's no way for one programmer to topple Mount Open Source with its misguided proponents and megacorporations funneling money into bad technologies. The momentum and entrenchment for this bullshit is too great and the problem really begins with the OS and hardware platforms so I would have to create a new unfucked processor, a new OS, a new OS API, a new compiler, a new language, a new set of protocols and finally a new browser with new programming interfaces. What you're saying is equivalent to making your own new government and nation that no one will recognize as sovereign or emigrate to because you have nothing substantial to work with and no army to force your ways. If you can pull all of this off, well I'll gladly do those other things and give your nation a better alternative to WebASM.
0 u/Pawn 18 Dec 2017 05:03
hey I'll help you out. Two people can make a kingdom. I'll put this on my to-do stack and talk to you in 2050!!
1 u/hereonachair 22 Dec 2017 19:27
agreed 100%.