11–20 of 94 posts
Wait, wait, wait. Because a platform is near-native performance, is cross platform and may run in a virtual machine, they are becoming Microsoft and locking people in? WHAT? (Beyond the absurdity of leaping to that conclusion, it's an open spec and the main implementation is open source. I understand that alternative implementations are needed for "open spec" to have significant meaning, but still). That and the last…
Not to mention that NaCl is open source BSD-license, so, yeah.
"it is designed and explicitly documented to run on an as-yet nonexistent virtual machine" http://code.google.com/p/dart/wiki/Building#Building_the_sta...
They could have leveraged all of this by buying in to NaCl and putting it into IE. Hard to see how Google says no, and once Microsoft has that level of commitment to the technology, they'd get a strong say in its evolution. As a multi-vendor standard with an open source implementation, NaCl could have gotten real traction, and suddenly every C++ developer inside Microsoft and working for their customers has a path to the web for existing code that's slightly more plausible than rewriting everything in JavaScript and hoping the VMs get faster without also killing your laptop's battery (unlikely, I think).
"it is designed and explicitly documented to run on an as-yet nonexistent virtual machine" http://code.google.com/p/dart/wiki/Building#Building_the_sta...
Google is going to lock the world into it's "stewardship" with a couple open source projects and the cell phone market?
I can't help but feel that I've just been trolled. Unless someone can better explain this to me.
Wait, wait, wait. Because a platform is near-native performance, is cross platform and may run in a virtual machine, they are becoming Microsoft and locking people in? WHAT? (Beyond the absurdity of leaping to that conclusion, it's an open spec and the main implementation is open source. I understand that alternative implementations are needed for "open spec" to have significant meaning, but still). That and the last…
For the PNacl bit, I think the tech sounds great, I just think the reason this "arrow" survived Page's recent cull is because they have significant interests in it, and that's what the article is about.
"it is designed and explicitly documented to run on an as-yet nonexistent virtual machine" http://code.google.com/p/dart/wiki/Building#Building_the_sta...
I'm excited about the potential for NaCl and don't understand a lot of the conclusions that the OP article outlines... but I don't understand what this sentence means or why it would be a bad thing. Isn't LLVM the nonexistent VM? I'm confused as to the context maybe.
Wait, wait, wait. Because a platform is near-native performance, is cross platform and may run in a virtual machine, they are becoming Microsoft and locking people in? WHAT? (Beyond the absurdity of leaping to that conclusion, it's an open spec and the main implementation is open source. I understand that alternative implementations are needed for "open spec" to have significant meaning, but still). That and the last…
For the purposes of this discussion, please consider "open spec" to mean "committee and community controlled by interests ultimately subsisting of more than one share pool.", if you follow this definition the majority of Google's "open" efforts fall apart. For the PNacl bit, I think the tech sounds great, I just think the reason this "arrow" survived Page's recent cull is because they have significant interests in it…