create new account | forgot password


posted by dsk on November 23rd, 2011 at 8:04PM

>Would you stop with the bullshit fictional narratives

It's not a narrative. It's a fact. I don't know if you completely lack imagination, simply dense, or stuck in 1998 where you had your golden age.

>You can even write an OS in PHP

Yes. And it would be an interesting exercise. And it would be completely useless. And you notice that it hasn't been done and nobody is pushing for it, or funding it, or excited by the prospect?

It's almost like you're proving my point.

>I know full well what it is

Clearly you don't, because you don't understand it.

>come on, for fuck's sake, is installing programs normally really such a pain in the ass for you

It's stuff like this that shows you don't really understand it. YOU tell me why. Try.

Tell me why it's better for you to host this blog as a web application that all of us can enter simply by typing in a url address, as opposed to you writing the whole thing in C and forcing all of us to install it so that we can read, post and comment via that app only?

Tell me why an IT administrator at a hospital, who manages 5000 workstations, would prefer that an application be browser based, as opposed to one that needs to be installed? Would he prefer to have his weekend free or oversee a security update rollout to 5000 users, and deal with dependency conflicts that may arise on 5% workstations?

Are you an imbecile?
Link | Parent


 
 

posted by dsk on November 23rd, 2011 at 8:29PM

Check out this gorgeous workflow.

Working on a paper with two other people.

Of course I want to use docs.google.com because it is a gorgeous document creator, browser based and let's me do really really cool stuff. Like what?

Well, as I'm writing it all out, I can share the document with two of my collaborators. I don't have to email them drafts. They don't need to install anything. They can use Linux, Windows, Mac, I don't care. They don't care.

As I'm editing, they can see exactly what I'm changing in real-time. They, themselves can edit the document with minimal contention ( as google docs is smart enough to manage all that ) and I can see their edits and their notes.

What if the internet goes down, or wifi isn't available? Good thing, google docs implements an html5 open standard called "Web Storage", which means my changes, in addition to being synced with the server, are synced to local store and if I choose, also my filesystem, so I can keep working on the file, and still have a local version available.

posted by dennisn on November 23rd, 2011 at 8:40PM

Clearly you haven't done much writing in your life. Cool as all that crap sounds, it's pretty fucking useless IMHO. I sure as fuck wouldn't want you changing my shit as I'm writing.

Nevertheless, have you checked if a multi-user document editor/whiteboard already exists? I'm going to go out on a limb and say that many already do. And the only reason they're not popular is cuz they're kinda pointless. (But, slap JS into it, and BAM -- NEW SHINY THING THAT PROMISES TO FILL MY INNER VOID!)

SVN/git would be cool to do shared (writing, etc) projects with, too.

But hey, we're desperately trying to validate this new thing!!1! So forget all that old archaic dinosaur stuff! Let's invent a JS-wheel!

posted by dsk on November 23rd, 2011 at 8:49PM

>Clearly you haven't done much writing in your life.

That's all I do while doing my Masters. Write Papers.

>I sure as fuck wouldn't want you changing my shit as I'm writing.

Because you haven't used it. I didn't realize how fuckin useful it is, until I tried it. You work in different sections of the documents and it's seamless. No contention. No annoyance. Or you have one guy write, while the rest observe and suggest idea and review the additions, either remotely or together in a room, or a combination (one guy remote, two guys in a room).

Trust me, I didn't get it, until I tried it. You haven't.

>have you checked if a multi-user document editor/whiteboard already exists

And you still wouldn't get the benefits of a browser-based solution. I can bring in any number of collaborators and never worry about whether or not they have a particular piece of software installed, and if they don't, that they are competent enough to install it, that they are running the proper OS, and proper dependencies.

>SVN/git would be cool to do shared (writing, etc) projects with, too.

github frontend is heavy on JS too. Are they retards? Obtuse fuck.

posted by dennisn on November 23rd, 2011 at 9:02PM

Lol. I wonder if you believe your own crap. So, you gonna write your thesis collaboratively with your JS-fuck-buddies? When do you think you'll use it next? Or is the JS-orgy already waning, and the novelty already worn off?

I said *git*, moron -- not github. You and your gay stramen. And I browse github (painfully) without JS as well. (But yes, whoever designed the UI for github was partly retarded, yes.)

>So, you gonna write your thes by dsk on November 23rd, 2011 at 9:13PM.
For the last time, I don't vie by dennisn on November 23rd, 2011 at 9:21PM.

posted by dennisn on November 23rd, 2011 at 8:26PM

Webpages were designed for blogs and information -- that is why browsers were written, in C, and people forced to install them. (Although NNTP is still great and going strong. I'm toying with the idea of switching this site to NNTP, since that's all it really is.) Nobody ever brought the value of webpages into dispute. Why are you using strawman arguments?

Your point about a 5000 clone mono-culture is valid, somewhat. If everyone just used the same software/hardware, the world would be so much simpler. I guess this is ultimately what JS wants to do -- have everyone doing and using the exact same thing. It will never work. Although, even that is not a great argument, since if you're managing 5000 workstations, they're probably all variants of just a couple prototype/master machines -- so you would easily test the few "master/test" machines, before deploying. (Not to mention the fact that there isn't much your hypothetical admin currently has to deploy via JS in the first place. A fucking email client? A Like button? A map? Anything else I missed?)

posted by dsk on November 23rd, 2011 at 8:39PM

>Although, even that is not a great argument, since if you're managing 5000 workstations, they're probably all variants of just a couple prototype/master machines

No. Different departments have different upgrade paths. End-users may wish to access resources from outside of work. For example, they may choose to take a day off but still log in from the home machine to check on a resources. Or they may be on business in another country. Or maybe you may want to give guest privileges to a contractor whose only around for a few weeks or months, or guest privileges to a visiting client. Do you want the hassle of managing all those other workstation, when you could simply have them point their web-browser to a url containing your rich web app? Do you have to worry that they run the proper OS or force them to run one that is compatible with your application? Do you want to spend hours or days debugging an app to run on some exotic hardware when technology exists to you don't have to?

See how unimaginative you are? The kinds of problems a web solves? Should come as a shock to you.

posted by dennisn on November 23rd, 2011 at 9:19PM

You are just repeating yourself. All you said here is that it offers a "cross-platform" framework. We've been through all this before, I swear. Not only does cross-platform shit already exist (GTK/Qt for the UI, and countless libraries, etc), not only has cross-platform shit been the holy grail since computers were invented (it's not that it's technically hard to achieve -- it's that morons like you buy retarded piece-of-shit software that *deliberately* fucks you in the ass with *deliberately* non-standard proprietary crap. But, instead of addressing the real fucking problem, you shit a whole new layer of crap out of your ass to try to bandage things together. (Gentoo has no problem talking to the BSDs or Ubuntu.)), but I don't even care if you actually prefer this crap -- just don't stuff it down other people's throats, who actually have a decent operating system that respects standards. Just because your OS is an evil piece of shit, doesn't mean you can invent an entirely new abstraction layer in the first program in your start menu (they could have added this abstraction layer anywhere, but since it's geared towards morons, that's where it went), and then start jumping up like a lunatic trying to get everyone else (who already has everything you're offering) to install it too, and pretending like it's now some integral part of websites -- web 2.0!!1! (Except, as I mentioned, probably everything you're drooling and fantasizing about already exists.)

But, even if I go out on a very long and weak limb and buy your bullshit that any of the crap you're talking about is useful, you still haven't addressed any of the fundamental criticisms I raised about JS! Seems to me like you aren't here to debate -- you just want someone to validate your closed-mind.

posted by dsk on November 23rd, 2011 at 8:34PM

>Webpages were designed for blogs and information

Very early versions of the web were designed to handle only simple marked up text. THAT WAS THE STARTING POINT, NOT THE END POINT.

>Nobody ever brought the value of webpages into dispute.

You did. You still do. Because you are a retard, who doesn't know he's a retard. *THIS* isn't a webpage as originally envisioned. It doesn't just serve lightly marked up text. It's a content management system that handles user input (files and text), centrally manages and stores it and returns it specifically formatted to users (formatting that is context sensitive, allowing it, for example to correctly display links to images as images and polls). You've already went beyond the confines of what "Webpages" were originally envisioned it to be.

posted by dennisn on November 23rd, 2011 at 9:26PM

Fair enough. I am all for evolving websites, and browsers too. Having centrally-controlled, non-customizable, 100%cpu consuming, crippled apps in my webpages is not evolution, IMHO.

posted by dsk on November 23rd, 2011 at 10:02PM

>Having centrally-controlled, non-customizable, 100%cpu consuming, crippled apps in my webpages is not evolution, IMHO."

Google docs. 10 local clients editing a session. cpu usage, 5%. 0% when no editing performed. What the fuck are you talking about? 100% consuming my ass. You're a retard .. seriously, leave 1998. It was a good time for you. Your squeegee to academic pursuit ratio was at an all time low. But man, got to move on.

And what is this centrally-controlled, non-customizable? What the fuck do you call this site? Not centrally-controlled? Fully customizable?

You really have trouble readin by dennisn on November 23rd, 2011 at 10:09PM.
>You really have trouble readi by dsk on November 24th, 2011 at 1:30PM.
So, like I said, you aren't bo by dennisn on November 24th, 2011 at 11:46PM.
>GMail, on the other end, is a by dsk on November 26th, 2011 at 10:47PM.
The main reason Google so "gen by dennisn on November 27th, 2011 at 7:53AM.