61–70 of 102 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Except that ActiveX works only on Windows IE and not built on web tech. Chrome Apps run on ChromeOS, Windows, OSX, Linux, Android and IOS. And they are built using HTML and JS.
I don't think Chrome Apps work on iOS or Android. If they do, mind linking to confirmation?
http://gigaom.com/2013/10/03/newest-chrome-beta-integrates-w...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, most browser extensions relate to browsing. Google, on the other hand, is trying to turn the browser into an OS. This is a really big shift that may very well determine the future of computing, so I think there's plenty here for people to get legitimately angry about. Not really the same kind of "hate train" that occasionally shows up on project posts, I think.
What's wrong with the Chrome browser becoming an OS? What you get is a fast and secure OS. Most users spend most of the time on the browser anyways - why not leverage that to make user's lives easier?
I prefer my software to adhere to the single responsibility principle as much as possible.
EDIT: Why are you downvoting me? If you disagree, that's what the reply button is for. I'd like to think that HN is better than Reddit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, most browser extensions relate to browsing. Google, on the other hand, is trying to turn the browser into an OS. This is a really big shift that may very well determine the future of computing, so I think there's plenty here for people to get legitimately angry about. Not really the same kind of "hate train" that occasionally shows up on project posts, I think.
> What's wrong with the Chrome browser becoming an OS? What you get is a fast and secure OS. Citation very much needed. Fast? It's slower than native, and --for some tasks, like any kind involving multimedia editing-- useless. Secure? When did OS+browser became more secure than just OS?
You can't get a virus from visiting a web page.
You don't give a web page access to all your files just by visiting it.
Running a native app requires significantly more trust than running a web app. Web apps are significantly more sandboxed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What's wrong with the Chrome browser becoming an OS? What you get is a fast and secure OS. Citation very much needed. Fast? It's slower than native, and --for some tasks, like any kind involving multimedia editing-- useless. Secure? When did OS+browser became more secure than just OS?
> Secure? When did OS+browser became more secure than just OS? You can't get a virus from visiting a web page. You don't give a web page access to all your files just by visiting it. Running a native app requires significantly more trust than running a web app. Web apps are significantly more sandboxed.
You very much can.
In fact, that was one of the most common attack vector for viruses: web browser exploits, from applet bugs to native web browser code buffer overflows and other issues.
they gonna end up giving such developer access to everyone where we'd be making standalone app every other day in short more power and more apps i am super excited about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think Chrome Apps work on iOS or Android. If they do, mind linking to confirmation?
Chrome apps do work on android http://gigaom.com/2013/10/03/newest-chrome-beta-integrates-w...
I don't understand Chrome apps. They require installation and only work on Chrome, so they come with none of the benefits of the web. They are slower and uglier than native Windows/Mac/Linux apps. What's the point?
They are just apps that use the ChromeOS development library (JS, HTML, CSS and some custom APIs). Think of it like Cocoa on OS X. Except they can also run in the Chrome browser on other OSes. I don't understand why people get so riled up about this.
> Dart meanwhile is Google’s open-source Web programming language, which has an ultimate goal of replacing JavaScript. Polymer is Google’s library for the Web, built on top of Web Components, and “designed to leverage the evolving web platform on modern browsers.” Go, Dart, Angular.js and now Dart and Polymer. Am I the only one seeing the next wave of confusions?
What is the practical use case here? Before this there were Microsoft HTA's and Mozilla's XUL apps, neither of which had widespread adoption among developers.
* HTML apps potentially will work everywhere (if you will take care they will at least work on Firefox, Opera and Chrome).
* There are HTML5 tools and knowledge already in place. Plus years of experience in HTML can be used.
Long:
IMHO developers should look into the future here not into today but even today you can do quite a lot. XUL most probably failed because there were no tools, learning material and libraries (I'm not sure about HTA). In addition XUL worked only on single browser. I have managed to write XUL app 7 years ago but I had to invest quite a lot of time and the whole development process was quite slow.
HTML apps meanwhile do not require quite a lot of investment and if you already have some HTML5/CSS/JS knowledge there are only several holes of knowledge to fill. The only problem is to select good tools, find out right information and you can start right now. E.g. if you have canvas based game or static web site with useful information you can create app now: just add application cache's manifest file, add some meta information (in case of Firefox OS create *.webapp file) and you are done.
My background: I don't know HTA. I am familiar with XUL. In addition I'm familiar with QtQuick (QML + JavaScript), Firefox OS Apps, I guess I could learn developing Chrome Apps pretty quickly. I'm familiar with native development for Windows, Linux Desktop, Android and iOS.