Comment Re:Ooh, I Have An Idea! (Score 1) 194
HTML is only widely used because it's widely used.
HTML is only widely used because there is no other way to get your content to a large audience.
HTML is only widely used because it's widely used.
HTML is only widely used because there is no other way to get your content to a large audience.
Of course it is.
Even "sed" (the text filtering utility) is a programming language.
If you have mechanisms for comparison, branching and buffering, you are dealing with a programming language.
Simply contact the account manager that has been assigned to you. It's no problem at all to contact Google if you're actually bringing in revenue for them.
The last thing Apple wants is for any tablet to be identified as and referred to as an iPad.
Unless people will go to the store and ask for "an iPad" even when they don't specifically mean the tablet by Apple.
I like the old fashion network cables that is stable, secured, and fast. Wireless is only for portable devices and far away.
You say "only for portable devices" like that isn't 80% of computing these days.
I honestly don't understand why people would buy a "smart" TV instead of a monitor, surround sound speakers, and plug it in to a laptop or computer. How many people really use OTA broadcasts nowadays?
Yeah, because computers aren't susceptible to attacks at all. Everyone knows there's nothing more secure than keeping an internet-connected computer running 24/7 in your house.
I can turn off HbbTV support on my Smart TV, no problem. In fact I had disabled it even before I realized it could be a security hazard, as it also slows down booting and channel switching, while providing no benefit to me whatsoever.
The geographical limitations of me buying an app from the iStore killed it for me.
Geographical? What? You do know the App Store isn't an actual store in the mall, right?
It's funny how little difference there is between what Facebook's servers are doing and the NSA's. I wonder who has more info on you.
That's why the iphone flopped when Apple decided it wouldn't support flash in an era where flash was pretty important.
But you see, it really wasn't that important at all. Flash was mainly used for 3 things: ads, video and games. Video and games the iPhone could do fine and ads nobody wants anyway.
It would be very different for real web stuff, as people can just install another browser on their devices. I think there would be quite a backlash amongst both developers and the general public if a vendor suddenly decides to artificially limit the capabilities of their web browser. In a way, that is what Microsoft is doing by adopting new features so slowly and their market share is but a fraction of what it used to be. People want to be on the platform that works.
But the larger view is its a catch-22; most developers won't use features that aren't widely available cross-platform -- so any major closed platform that sees those features as a threat simply can refuse to implement them, and most developers will in turn avoid using those features.
When I'm developing for the web, I don't even bother to look at what new-fangled nonsense Chrome has just released. My baseline is to only use features that are widely supported.
The difference between what's widely supported and what's new-fangled is fading with IE's decreasing popularity though. The world in which non of the new stuff was actually usable is long gone. Can you release a web app that uses Web Audio right now and you would serve about 80% of the market, including iPhones and iPads.
Your desire that you want the browser to be a 'platform for applications' is fine, but is not related to the release schedule at all. How come your long term desire can't be accomplished in slower bigger steps?
Because that makes it harder to correct mistakes. The current model of releasing small, frequent updates is a really powerful mechanism for developers to explore what works and what doesn't. The things that make it are adopted and become the standard, the rest is discarded. Google and Mozilla are really pushing the web forward doing this, but Microsoft isn't playing ball.
Windows, iOS, Debian Stable, and OS X Mavericks are all "platforms for applications" and none of them need 25 feature updates a year, but fixes yes... but not whole new releases with new features every couple weeks.
Not anymore they don't. But that's because those platforms are actually quite feature complete and have been for a long time, if not from the beginning. The web however is just barely starting to be able to render graphics and play sound. They've got a long way to go, that's why it would be nice if things didn't take another decade to mature.
The 'web' is no more going to bring about that future than Java did. Especially in a world where hardware vendors are actively seeking to prevent it. (ie Expect Apple to limit the functionality of its iOS browser the minute it starts to threaten app store revenue in a credible way.)
I highly doubt that. I think the moment a vendor starts shipping a lesser web experience in a world where the web is increasingly more important, they will see a drop in adoption and sales.
I don't really give a shit about new bleeding edge features though, I just want to see the standards met.
That's well and nice if you just want to make a document available through the web. But I want to web to more than just delivering documents, I want it to be a platform for applications. I want games in my browser, write code in my browser, image editing in my browser, audio processing my browser, everything I do in my browser. Why? Because *every single device out there* has a browser. I want a future where any applications runs on any device, running any operating system, any browser. That's when we can really use the best device for the job, instead of having to resort to the stuff that happens to run the software we need.
What are you talking about? Care to share an example?
The point is that Microsoft doesn't include new features in those patches, they only put new stuff in major releases. There are simply too little of those to keep up with the competition and therefore Microsoft is still stalling the development of the web.
It isn't very well made for Firefox, but after some initial hiccups, it's quite responsive on my system. Definately good enough for games.
Say "twenty-three-skiddoo" to logout.
