411–420 of 467 posts
Does anyone know how the server-side story is? Is there a CRUD-heaven like Django or Rails for Dart which can share the types with a Flutter client? IMHO Google should focus on that too, if not. I passionately hate re-typing same REST-entities over and over again, and that's one of the reasons why I love TypeScript.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is flash. You can't do anything in it that fills like the web - no copy paste Whereas you would have that in a Canvas or OpenGL equivalent web game? > right clicking causes things to happen. That's already the case for tons of websites, there's support for that in web standards. > There's a reason why flash died out, and it's not only apple. Yes. It was controlled by a single company, IDEs were paid for, it wa…
> It was controlled by a single company, IDEs were paid for, it was more marketed to designer types, and it was frequently slow and used for apps and annoying stuff. So aside from the IDE cost and marketing, there's no difference.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which bit was fast? My wife's MacBook sounded like a jet engine whenever she would play the Facebook flash-based Scrabble. Eventually the machine died of fan failure and I had to spend an entire afternoon doing brain surgery on it. I wasn't surprised when Jobs subsequently banned it from the iPhone!
>Which bit was fast? Code execution and 2D rendering. What else could I mean? But there's more. You know how people are excited to see native applications running in the browser? Flash did it in 2008[1]. You think you could run Quake2 with 2008-era JS engines? You think you could run all those 2D games in 2002-era JS engines (even if had access to a Canvas element - which you didn't)? >My wife's MacBook sounded like…
> Care to guess why it was a flash-based game and not an HTML5 based game?
Anything would have been better, even bare HTML tables with no animations. The user experience of Facebook Flash Scrabble was awful (at least on OSX).
Can someone from the Google team comment on what's going on - https://techcrunch.com/2019/05/07/kotlin-is-now-googles-pref... > Android development will become increasingly Kotlin-first,” Google writes in today’s announcement https://techcrunch.com/2019/05/07/google-launches-jetpack-co... > Google today announced the first preview of Jetpack Compose, a new open-source UI toolkit for Kotlin developers who want to use…
>This is massively confusing. Do we invest in Kotlin ...or do we invest in Dart ? Oh come on. Pick one. That's what you do for every other platform. Hell, even for web development, you'll have to make framework and transpilation decisions. This is no different. >These guys can't afford 10$ courses on udacity and Coursera. Yeah, too bad there are no free ways to learn programming languages on the internet. But there i…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Internal politic wars at Google, with management having popcorns to see who wins at the end. If you are confortable with Qt, JavaFX, Xamarin, there is hardly anything to see with Flutter, plus they are based on programming languages that you actually want to have on your CV, instead of one that was dropped from Chrome and rescued at last minute by AdWords team. Plus, even Fuchsia is not so focused on Flutter anylonge…
For embedded devices the only good toolkit is Qt and the licensing costs are pretty high. Flutter for embedded is interesting in this regard.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is flash. You can't do anything in it that fills like the web - no copy paste Whereas you would have that in a Canvas or OpenGL equivalent web game? > right clicking causes things to happen. That's already the case for tons of websites, there's support for that in web standards. > There's a reason why flash died out, and it's not only apple. Yes. It was controlled by a single company, IDEs were paid for, it wa…
> It was controlled by a single company, IDEs were paid for, it was more marketed to designer types, and it was frequently slow and used for apps and annoying stuff. So aside from the IDE cost and marketing, there's no difference.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If you don't want your customers create security problems, you don't allow them to modify the software in your hardware. How do you do that, while said software depends on LGPL3 licensed Qt?
from GPL v3 > But this requirement does not apply if neither you nor any third party retains the ability to install modified object code on the User Product (for example, the work has been installed in ROM). Also, anti-tivoizaton clauses does not apply to devices sold to business.
From what I see, only a tiny part of the potential market for embedded Qt and things like that can get away with "no updates possible", but still, applies for some.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Plus, even Fuchsia is not so focused on Flutter anylonger. Android userspace is being ported to Fuchsia, and now they have a UI Framework agnostic layer, Scenic, with examples in C++ and Rust. I highly doubt that. See here https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/topaz/+/bd4464d6b8d586d74b6...
Yes, Flutter is still there. I didn't say it was removed, only that it is being downgraded to one among many options.
[1] https://fuchsia.googlesource.com/topaz/+/refs/heads/master/s...
[2] https://fuchsia-review.googlesource.com/c/topaz/+/184430
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Which bit was fast? Code execution and 2D rendering. What else could I mean? But there's more. You know how people are excited to see native applications running in the browser? Flash did it in 2008[1]. You think you could run Quake2 with 2008-era JS engines? You think you could run all those 2D games in 2002-era JS engines (even if had access to a Canvas element - which you didn't)? >My wife's MacBook sounded like…
I was not comparing Flash to the JavaScript of the era, just pointing out that, as an end user, Flash didn't seem "fast" to me (on Linux, Android and OSX). Performance on a desktop-class CPU is also only one metric. Flash was clearly inefficient, it didn't use multicore, GPUs or hardware decoders. Was your Quake2 demo above using even OpenGL? Java applets could do that since well before 2008. The original Quake2 coul…
But that's the entire point!!! People didn't use Flash because they felt like it. People used Flash because there were things you could do with Flash that you could not do with HTML/JS. Remember there was a time that Flash was the best way to do video.
>Flash didn't seem "fast" to me (on Linux, Android and OSX).
Let's leave subjectivity out of it. If you ran a standard benchmarks and compare to JavaScript of the day, Flash would beat it. That's what I meant by fast.
Here's some metrics for a FlasCC compiled AS3 compared to C++: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1PjMDwh4ZbJMMoo-G8vdK...
>Flash was clearly inefficient, it didn't use multicore
Neither does JavaScript (without WebWorkers). Neither does Node.js. Then again, Flash did get Worker support around 2012. And though your code was executed in a single thread, the actual rendering was delegated to the runtime, which was multi-threaded or backed by GPU.
>GPUs or hardware decoders
It sure did. Stage3D (think WebGL equivalent) was introduced in 2011. Video decoding delegated to hardware decoders since forever. Alchemy/FlaCC (WebAssembly equivalent) was released around 2009/2010. In many ways Flash was the vanguard of where HTML5 ended up going.
>The user experience of Facebook Flash Scrabble was awful (at least on OSX).
To be fair, Flash never ran well on OSX. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't as good as on Windows.
>Java applets could do that since well before 2008.
Java applets were an alternative to Flash, but Flash was lighter and had much broader support. It was better for video, better for vector graphics and 2D animations. But yes, Java applets were used to gain functionality that wasn't available in the web just like Flash.