Live data from Hacker News

I’m done with the web

randyluecke.tumblr.com

221–230 of 291 posts

Re: I’m done with the web

#221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The web won. It fought a battle against many foes, and it came out on top. It won what , exactly? The war against Gopher for presentation of hypertext documents and information display? There's more to heaven and earth than data presentation and consumption. The examples of genuinely great web applications are few and far between, if not near non-existent. Are Google Apps really the best the web has to offer? Cappu…

> The examples of genuinely great web applications are few and far between, if not near non-existent. Are Google Apps really the best the web has to offer? Every good web application beats its desktop rivals simply by being ubiquitious. People who dismiss the web typically ignore this simple fact completely. But it's always been true, you can look back to 1997 when Yahoo Mail killed the desktop email client business…

(Apologies for the big rant, these are some ideas that have been rattling about in my head recently and your post made some things clearer in my mind. It's not meant to be a post of factual 'truths', but an explanation for my (and perhaps others) reaction against the web as the one platform to rule them all. So it's as much an emotional gut reaction as a logical one. )

I think this (desire for ubiquity/multi-platform) is the main reason I don't see eye-to-eye with the people who are pushing for web apps for everything. Web apps everywhere is great for large corporations that want to provide their service on as many platforms as possible. It's great for venture capital funded startups where the name of the game is to get as many users as possible and get bought out before your money runs out.

I'm a small indie dev though, I produce software (not software as a front end to a non-software business), and I'm not looking to become a billionaire (really!). I want to develop software because I enjoy it: to solve problems for real people, to solve my own problems. So really I don't care too much about being able to target every platform at once. I want to target the platforms I like, using the tools that I like, and as long as the platform has enough users to make it viable then I can do that with native software on open platforms (the latter is important and why I don't write iOS software, for example). There is the risk that the platform I target gets killed, but if a lot of people use it then that's generally going to be a slow process, and there is plenty of churn in web tech and standards anyway so it's not like it provides immunity to technological change. Additionally, I just have a hard time working with web technologies. I find them much harder to use, to the extent that if using html/css was the only way to write software I wouldn't be writing software at all and I'd go stack shelves in the supermarket instead. Maybe I'm just not smart enough to use them effectively, I don't know.

I guess this is partly the old 'software as craft'/'lifestyle business' argument, but it saddens me slightly that the big industry players are moving us away from the kind of industry where you can write software that interacts with some arbitrary bit of hardware in unsupported or unintended ways towards a much more controlled and profit orientated one (i.e. your software running everywhere being the most important criterion of all). Web people are not the only offenders here of course, but arguments against things like iOS have been well explored over the years.

Some people seem to view the web as some kind of beacon of freedom, the little guy fighting the big bad industry giants of Microsoft, Apple, Adobe and so on. But from where I am, the web is the big bad industry giants. Writing web software means being restricted to a very limited sandbox. The APIs available to me are decided by what a small cabal of powerful companies (Apple, Microsoft, Google, Mozilla, Nokia and maybe a few others) can agree on. None of their interests align with mine (why would they?).

If Gopher had taken off and supplanted native development to the extent that people were using platforms that could only run Gopher apps, would the current web even exist? All user facing software being written to a single standard and API has good things about it, but it also limits new ideas tremendously ("sure you can add X feature you just need to get it through this committee of industry heavyweights first and get them all to agree, and then wait for them to ship it").

What is important to me is that data uses open standards, whether at rest or in motion. If people control their data, and it is in open formats, then there is little companies can do to lock them in. Which is good for me as a dev since I can write software to help users work with that data. Web technologies don't do much to help me there, in-fact for the most part they have made it easier for companies to keep users data locked away on their server in unknown formats or behind proprietary APIs that I don't feel confident building software against. More concisely: email good, Facebook bad; FLAC good, Spotify bad.

I'm not arguing against all web sites/apps (or any hypothetical tech stack that offers a similar standard sandboxed environment). For some things it can be appropriate: wikipedia or hacker news or other inherently networked activities for example. I'd prefer something less byzantine of course, but I expect that if the web apps model does take off then ways of targeting it that mean you don't have to think about CSS or Javascript will get more traction, in the same way that I can write native code without having to worry about assembly (most of the time). Javascript as a compilation target will become "fast enough" on most hardware for general purpose things (not for absolutely everything, but that is just another manifestation of the problem of not being able to break outside the sandbox when needed). So the technical issues of css/javascript being horrible are not the main problem.

I come from a social science background, which perhaps taints my view here. I look for the power dynamics that limit my real world ability to do things, and don't really care so much about theoretical ideas about a perfect world where everybody works together in harmony to make the web a platform that does everything you could ever need in a timely way. My issue is about power: who controls the APIs that ultimately lets software control your hardware and data? With open native platforms the answer to that is anybody. With the web it's the tech giants alone.

Re: I’m done with the web

#222
All this careful superior engineering and all the sophisticated desktop UX libs and I can't name one desktop app that is nice to use (except SketchUp but that's thanks to innovative 3D tools not the UX which is ugly).

While many webapps written with crap tech thats only advantage is fairly flat learning curve look marvelous, responsive and are perfect in what they do.

Re: I’m done with the web

#223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read the post differently. I think he was simply pointing out the fact that we've stagnated at the same level of abstraction in the web space for a long time. Cappuccino is just the example he's using to point out where we were relative to where we are and in that light it's almost a regression. For the purposes of his larger argument, the way that Cappuccino delivered its abstractions (Objective-J) isn't as import…

Have we stagnated? Or has the rise of lower powered web-enabled devices forced us to re-think the classic rule of programming (ie that applications can progressively increase their system requirements as PCs are progressively becoming more powerful to handle the load). Let's remember that even as recently as 2-3 years ago, top end phones and tablets were single core ARM processors clocked at ~1GHz. And devices of tha…

This trend is likely to continue as the billion or so potential customers in emerging markets start getting their hands on affordable smartphones.

The idea right now for telecoms and device manufacturers is more about getting their stuff in as many people's hands as possible, not about whether they can replace a screaming desktop with a handheld.

Re: I’m done with the web

#224
post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have to learn Objective-J. Objective-J is a Javascript superset, so everything you know about Javascript is still available to you. It will take minutes to learn the additions. The language is not really the problem. Its the framework that will take quite some time to learn. There are a ton of interfaces to work with. I suspect that is why you feel more comfortable with something like Backbone, because it basical…

You're right. I'm not an Apple dev so I don't see much of the utility but I'm sure there are many who do. Certainly, if I were a native iOS programmer looking to do a rich web app, Cappuccino would be my first choice. All of these frameworks fulfill a need (otherwise they wouldn't exist). I think the author expected that, because Cappuccino filled his needs so well, that it would fill everyone else's. He is now venti…

My takeaway from it was not him venting about nobody using Cappuccino, it was that developers wouldn't spend even a small amount of time to evaluate it in the first place.

"if it's going to take me at least a day or two before I begin to understand, how long is it going to take the rest of my team?" (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5411474)

If you have not spent that day or two to understand, how can you know it does not fill your needs?

I actually do not think Cappuccino is a good fit for a lot of the places Backbone and the like are being used. The unfortunate part comes when people will still use Backbone where Cappuccino is the right tool just because Objective-J "looks scary", or some other non-technical reason of emotion.

Re: I’m done with the web

#225
you are done with the web community because its developers cant take the time to learn something difficult:

the web has produced as gateway to see programming work with little code. This will produce creators that do not have very much in depth experience/desire for hard problems. It also allows projects to ramp up and see results really fast. This is the trade off of the web ... deal with it or get out. You can be a teacher to these noobs or a nah sayer ... seems you picked the latter.

It sounds like you are surrounding yourself with poor programmers.

Google Now is not a framework its a product. Im sure youll be working with some web guys soon that will be implementing the web version of the product. Dont be surprised if they dont use the best tool ... things need to get done ... the most precious resource is time ... other things can be wasted before we let that one go.

Re: I’m done with the web

#226

There's no way yet another webapp framework, no matter how close it emulates the desktop, is going to gain lots of traction when it mandates users to use... Objective-J and JavaScript. Seriously: being on your high horses and all is fine and well but your article is an oversimplification as to how the web works and as to what devs need and want. For example lately I've been very interested in flapjax (FRP UI) and web…

There's no way yet another webapp framework, no matter how close it emulates the desktop, is going to gain lots of traction My objection is right here. No need to mix in the Objective-J at all. Microsoft's ASP.NET tried to do this thing, to a surprising amount of success. The context then ofcourse was "Web 1.0" pre-Digg internet and the only other "big thing" being PHP. Microsoft managed to take the whole "Draw a GUI…

As far as I know, Microsoft's ASP.NET was kind of a failure. It produced Frontpage-grade (e.g. dirty) html. It did the wrong thing by default and didn't help much with the right thing.

It also brought in some clueless people who had no idea how HTTP, HTML and JS work, with questions like "why my button.hover event does not work" (this was pre-ajax, the event code was on the server and had no ways of knowing the user is hovering over the button).

Maybe it was OK for CRUD and internal applications but not for ordinary websites or sophisticated web apps.

.Net MVC is seen as a success: clean HTML, predictable things under the hood, jquery.

Re: I’m done with the web

#227
post #184

There's no way yet another webapp framework, no matter how close it emulates the desktop, is going to gain lots of traction when it mandates users to use... Objective-J and JavaScript. Seriously: being on your high horses and all is fine and well but your article is an oversimplification as to how the web works and as to what devs need and want. For example lately I've been very interested in flapjax (FRP UI) and web…

although it seems to be "yet another web framework", be careful when you try to reject it only because of that. Web frameworks happen because people try to leverage their existing knowledge, skills or codebase in a web domain. i.e. GWT & Vaadin are web frameworks where you use java and there is literally no need to know JS/HTML/CSS to create some really nice web apps that perform well. I don't want to say that you do…

"you don't need JS/HTML/CSS knowlede" But what would you do when it breaks?

Or when a change of behavior asked that is not supported by the framework out of box?

Re: I’m done with the web

#228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why can't we have icons that just launch a specific URL? Because then App Stores wouldn't make any money then would they? That's what iOS 1.0 did. There were no native apps, just web apps that had cute icons that launched a specific URL. People tried very hard to make that work. It didn't. The breadth and depth of mobile applications we see today only occurred once Apple provided a native SDK. The reasons for this…

I think Palm & WebOS were on the right track by making their native apps still based on web technnologies. As far as I know there weren't any mobile inputs that those apps couldn't handle. Blaming limitations on tech seems silly. The decision was a business one. Besides that, why take away the ability to create webbased apps? Could we not have the option if I know I don't care about any of the fancy stuff. There are…

You can just write web apps for the iPhone, even today. And yes, you can create an icon in Speongboard so that it looks just like a native app. That's how I use Google Maps on my iPhone.

Re: I’m done with the web

#230
"Almost every decent developer I know has no problem spending a weekend learning some new and cool tool, but sadly, this spirit seems to be absent from the web culture."

Hrm... the majority of web developers I know are constantly trying new tech, but they aren't just limited to front-end js. They're learning JS frameworks - trying out knockout, angular, yuk, dojo, jquery, ember, handlebars, mootools, extjs, gwt, qooxdoo, zk, and more. Plus they're learning about and using server-side caching, security, performance, server admin, graphic design, version control, search technologies, mobile development, database work, in addition to any language-specific stuff they're dealing with on a day to day basis.

I'm sort of sick of this attitude of "if you can't spend 2 days learning X, you're not a real developer". Or, more precisely, "web developers" don't do this stuff. I'll tell you what - if I spent 2 days on your latest framework, then asked questions about 'how do I do XYZ?', I'm more likely to get told off by self-appointed kingmakers that I'm not worthy of using your framework because I don't have the capacity to think at your level, or I'm not willing to commit enough time to learn it, or whatever.

So..., as they say in England, get stuffed.

Post reply on HN