What we need is updates that only include security patches.... FEATURE CHANGES SHOULD BE OPTIONAL. Because all software tend to decrease in quality overtime.
What if serverless meant no backend servers?
61–70 of 138 posts
Re: What if serverless meant no backend servers?
#62I'm always glad to see people experimenting with different approaches to building and deploying apps. That said, the general idea of this Serverfree approach doesn't appeal to me. On any given day, I'll use 4 different devices. I need my data to synchronize seamlessly. I wouldn't use a program (in-browser or traditionally installed application) unless I can synchronize that data either by storing files in a Dropbox-l…
Same here, Every single product or service I pay for, needs to work on Linux and on Android. Like Spotify. I love that the music plays on Linux with the big speakers, but I am choosing the songs on the Android pocket device.
Re: What if serverless meant no backend servers?
#63Like, just … a program?
Re: What if serverless meant no backend servers?
#64"It depends". On one hand, if I were to have the goal to make a bunch of money, and software just happens to be the means to an end, making a gated software portal where I control everything would suit me very well. You get nothing until I get the money, and I only maintain what I want to maintain. (pretty much the model every SaaS has) On the other hand, if I know I have a very small customer base, and everyone is m…
> (third hand?) You might like https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/392/what-is-the-or... - it's like "grok" tho, only (certain) other nerds will get it. But, it's a nice phrase; IMHO it's less "third hand" and more "third option/perspective that renders the prior two moot".
Re: What if serverless meant no backend servers?
#65These ideas are some of the founding principles of "local-first software": https://www.inkandswitch.com/local-first/ As I like to put it - Local-first is the real serverless. Your user's device is the real edge. I think the future of the web needs to be that the server is optional, we need our data (albeit personal or our companies) to be on our own devices. We are all carrying around these massively powerful devices…
I read your post some time back and feel it's been an organizing force for developers in this space — great job and thanks for the work you put into it.
I often wonder about terminology. What was the reason you chose "local-first" over "offline-first" (or even "serverfree" as in this case)?
Re: What if serverless meant no backend servers?
#66I've done user support with users in the mountains who don't have a reliable internet connection.
Being able to say 'don't worry, the app works offline, you can (optionally) sync when you're next in the city' is extremely rewarding, and vital for software to work for these people.
----
Offline-only is not enough either. Ideally users should be able to sync between devices when offline, and have the option to sync to the cloud when online
Re: What if serverless meant no backend servers?
#67These ideas are some of the founding principles of "local-first software": https://www.inkandswitch.com/local-first/ As I like to put it - Local-first is the real serverless. Your user's device is the real edge. I think the future of the web needs to be that the server is optional, we need our data (albeit personal or our companies) to be on our own devices. We are all carrying around these massively powerful devices…
Clarification: I'm not the author of the linked post. I read your post some time back and feel it's been an organizing force for developers in this space — great job and thanks for the work you put into it. I often wonder about terminology. What was the reason you chose "local-first" over "offline-first" (or even "serverfree" as in this case)?
Re: What if serverless meant no backend servers?
#68These ideas are some of the founding principles of "local-first software": https://www.inkandswitch.com/local-first/ As I like to put it - Local-first is the real serverless. Your user's device is the real edge. I think the future of the web needs to be that the server is optional, we need our data (albeit personal or our companies) to be on our own devices. We are all carrying around these massively powerful devices…
Clarification: I'm not the author of the linked post. I read your post some time back and feel it's been an organizing force for developers in this space — great job and thanks for the work you put into it. I often wonder about terminology. What was the reason you chose "local-first" over "offline-first" (or even "serverfree" as in this case)?
They are an incredible bunch, as are so many people in the local-first / CRDT space, many I have had the opportunity to meet and collaborate with.
Re: What if serverless meant no backend servers?
#69Tldr: Ship the entire app in the browser. This may sound a bit snarky, but here is a serverfree app for your enjoyment as well: serverfree