21–30 of 116 posts
This is a really promising direction to take for Mobile Apps. If I can write amazing HTML5+JavaScript apps for the Mobile then the logical extension to this is to write the Uber-app "Phone OS" using these technologies as well. Lets get this working on at least the Dual & Quad core beasts first and worry about the lesser-hardware ones as B2G evolves Good work Mozilla and keep Pushing the "Open Web". A walled garden de…
[deleted]
Would this not dramatically increase data usage? ie data fees to carriers
It's 'the Web', i.e. a set of HTML pages with some CSS and JS, with access to a few newly developed APIs, like the one for dialing the phone, but running locally on the device, not remotely.
Lots more info: https://wiki.mozilla.org/B2G
Boy, the video's constant use of " the web" really annoyed me. I know that you have to cut down the jargon to make it presentable, and "HTML, CSS and JS" gets a bit confusing. What about "web technologies" or even just "a browser"? Also: "You can run on less expensive hardware, because you've got less technology going on under the covers." You can't really call a full HTML5 stack light-weight. Sure, you save some lib…
Boy, the video's constant use of " the web" really annoyed me. I know that you have to cut down the jargon to make it presentable, and "HTML, CSS and JS" gets a bit confusing. What about "web technologies" or even just "a browser"? Also: "You can run on less expensive hardware, because you've got less technology going on under the covers." You can't really call a full HTML5 stack light-weight. Sure, you save some lib…
HTML5, or perhaps better termed "emerging web technologies" are an incredibly heavy stack. You have 3 different means of markup being parsed from the get-go: HTML/SGML, XML and JSON. HTML is a quite lightweight component, OK. But then you get CSS. CSS used to be simple, but it's getting incredibly complex with tons of new standardised features and vendor prefixes. Initially it just drew lines and boxes in colour with…
"You can run on less expensive hardware, because you've got less technology going on under the covers. You don't have to pay the penalty of a big smart phone operating system if you're running directly on the web." That's misleading. Sure, you might need fewer resources to pull something like a simple web page. But try using web apps that are the equivalent of native apps on Android or iOS, and you'll need a lot bett…
Boy, the video's constant use of " the web" really annoyed me. I know that you have to cut down the jargon to make it presentable, and "HTML, CSS and JS" gets a bit confusing. What about "web technologies" or even just "a browser"? Also: "You can run on less expensive hardware, because you've got less technology going on under the covers." You can't really call a full HTML5 stack light-weight. Sure, you save some lib…
HTML5, or perhaps better termed "emerging web technologies" are an incredibly heavy stack. You have 3 different means of markup being parsed from the get-go: HTML/SGML, XML and JSON. HTML is a quite lightweight component, OK. But then you get CSS. CSS used to be simple, but it's getting incredibly complex with tons of new standardised features and vendor prefixes. Initially it just drew lines and boxes in colour with…
So, I noticed there was no mention of multi-touch events in the video, and none of the apps demonstrated used multi-touch. I did some digging to see whether this was a gap or whether mozilla had been working on multi-touch in browser (since the consequences of such a change for JS APIs are interesting to consider). Mozilla has apparently been working on multi-touch in browser as one can see in these two links: http:/…
"You can run on less expensive hardware, because you've got less technology going on under the covers. You don't have to pay the penalty of a big smart phone operating system if you're running directly on the web." That's misleading. Sure, you might need fewer resources to pull something like a simple web page. But try using web apps that are the equivalent of native apps on Android or iOS, and you'll need a lot bett…
I think they mean that the minimum hardware requirements just got a lot smaller.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think they mean that the minimum hardware requirements just got a lot smaller.
Could you explain why? I might be looking at it a bit too naively, but how system build for running interpreted JavaScript apps can perform better than one designed for compiled ones?