Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Web Starter Kit

developers.google.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 218 posts

Re: Web Starter Kit

#121

Post by wldcordeiro »

nacs wrote: post #63
ceejayoz wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see Google Code being in the same spot as Google Reader on Google's roadmap.

@hobofan: I think it's because they don't have any other choice when it comes to a public repo they can throw things up on. I agree with @ceejayoz -- Google Code will be killed off ala Google Reader.

Which is a real shame because if they updated it properly they could be a real competitor to Github or Bitbucket and there's plenty of opportunities to add really simple integration to GAE or Compute.

Re: Web Starter Kit

#122

Post by jacquesm »

malandrew wrote: post #115
jacquesm wrote: post #103

This somehow reminds me of Inception. We have a perfectly functional computer, then we run a browser on it, we download a bunch of HTML, which in turn will download a whole slew of JavaScript in order to create the illusion of an application running natively that offers a subset of what the computer could offer. The only difference is that this web application supposedly runs on 'all devices' except that every web ap…

Exactly. This all leads me to wonder if work can't be done to take the good web concepts and back port them to the operating system level, per the ideas I've briefly touched on in these two prior comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7917921 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7891913 edit: the two drive-by downvoters are invited to elaborate on how this comment could be improved or what they disagree with…

That almost reads as a re-invention of the java applet.

Re: Web Starter Kit

#124

Post by addyo »

esolyt wrote: post #118
ChuckMcM wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You trade browser lock-in for OS lock-in. The original Internet Explorer strategy. Fundamentally it is a rent seeking strategy. When I noticed that Google was up to paying a billion dollars a quarter for traffic I realized that in some ways the gold leaf was falling off the piazza and revealing the the ugly plaster behind it. My guess is that the rent seeking here is in the form of directing search traffic in some wa…

Browser lock-in? What makes you think web applications made with this kit work only in Chrome?

One of the core values behind this project is that it should work extremely well cross-device and that most definitely means on devices where Chrome isn't the primary browser. During development we've ensured that we test on Firefox OS, Windows phone, iOS and browsers other than Chrome which run on Android. I want to give people something that they can rely on. Chrome isn't the only browser in the world for sure :)

Re: Web Starter Kit

#125

Post by malandrew »

jacquesm wrote: post #122
malandrew wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. This all leads me to wonder if work can't be done to take the good web concepts and back port them to the operating system level, per the ideas I've briefly touched on in these two prior comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7917921 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7891913 edit: the two drive-by downvoters are invited to elaborate on how this comment could be improved or what they disagree with…

That almost reads as a re-invention of the java applet.

Like they say, there are no original ideas. At some point the W3C needs to give some serious thought as to how to do applications on the web the right way. That's roughly my wishlist for the future.

Re: Web Starter Kit

#126

Post by alain94040 »

jacquesm wrote: post #122
malandrew wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. This all leads me to wonder if work can't be done to take the good web concepts and back port them to the operating system level, per the ideas I've briefly touched on in these two prior comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7917921 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7891913 edit: the two drive-by downvoters are invited to elaborate on how this comment could be improved or what they disagree with…

That almost reads as a re-invention of the java applet.

What prevents Chrome from running a simulator of Android, and web pages to embed an Android app that will execute, replacing the web page it came from?

That would be exactly like the Java applet, except with a much better API (and touchscreen laptops would finally make sense).

Re: Web Starter Kit

#127

Post by kinlan »

nlh wrote: post #97
smrtinsert wrote: post #68

I suppose you could go this route. More realistic is to produce different server side files for each client type and keep it simple. There are tons of business reasons to make them physically separate as well, special promotions, advertising requirements, conditional scripts, etc.

One reason not to use your method: Google's own guidelines. See: https://developers.google.com/webmasters/smartphone-sites/de... "Sites that use responsive web design, i.e. sites that serve all devices on the same set of URLs, with each URL serving the same HTML to all devices and using just CSS to change how the page is rendered on the device. This is Google's recommended configuration." Generally I've found that wh…

It's an interesting one. Adaptive serving is a reasonable solution when you are a large site and you can't wholesale merge your site in one go into a fully responsive solution. We find that Adaptive (i.e, server side detection of "mobile") leads to way more problems in the long term with maintenance, keeping up with new devices and also ensuring that you have all the correct canonical links etc in place to ensure that your "SEO" is still good.

Our guidance is responsive all the things...

Re: Web Starter Kit

#128

Post by ender7 »

jacquesm wrote: post #103

This somehow reminds me of Inception. We have a perfectly functional computer, then we run a browser on it, we download a bunch of HTML, which in turn will download a whole slew of JavaScript in order to create the illusion of an application running natively that offers a subset of what the computer could offer. The only difference is that this web application supposedly runs on 'all devices' except that every web ap…

The shocking, unprecedented, world-changing difference that the web brings is that on the web all you have to do is click a link and your computer downloads, "installs", and runs a program. No manual installation necessary, no upgrades, no installers or wizards. No delay. This process is safe -- the page is sandboxed and can't interfere with the rest of your machine. And these things can be instantly shared! All I have to do is paste a bit of text to my friends and it turns into another clickable link that's only a touch away.

Engineers frequently undervalue this feature, especially considering the things that the web give up in order to achieve it. So yes, it's a pain in the ass to get that div to align correctly but in exchange you get to run instantly and almost everywhere [1].

Relevant: http://xkcd.com/1367/

[1] Depending on your target audience, old browsers might be a major problem (China), but the browser landscape is rapidly improving in terms of a minimum expected set of features.

Re: Web Starter Kit

#129

Post by kinlan »

dwd wrote: post #120
kinlan wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. that is a very good summary. If you want build process and tooling to help then we have that based on the tools that we think are the best, however we don't force workflow on people if they don't want it.

Noticed Paul Irish is no longer active on H5BP, is he now on team Web Starter Kit or working on the broader Web Fundamentals?

Paul Irish has given us guidance, input and feedback and is on the same team as me, but Addy Osmani is the main driver of starter kit, with me leading Web Fundamentals.

Re: Web Starter Kit

#130

Post by lukifer »

_broody wrote: post #81
lukifer wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In particular, the broken implementation of CSS position:fixed on all mobile platforms is probably the major stumbling block preventing app-like interfaces for the mobile web. I have been frequently tempted to try to build a canvas-based interface from scratch, but I suspect even that would run into the same problems.

I think app-like interfaces on the web are a pipe dream at this point, anyways. Attempts to emulate native interfaces inevitably get stuck in a java-like uncanny valley that's nearly as hard to get out of as it would be rewriting native apps for each platform from scratch. For all the talk of web apps as credible alternative to native ones, the fact is the current toolchain is unlikely to ever be good for anything mo…

Agreed that a richer component library is badly needed. However, native apps can and do frequently invent new UI paradigms outside native (games in particular like to invent their own UIs, to varying degrees of success). Rather than poor imitations of native, I think web apps UIs would do well to draw their own cross-platform custom UI elements.

I don't believe that interoperable and usable web apps are a mere pipe dream, on desktop or mobile; can you imagine a world in which the open web never took root, and we were all stuck on AOL, Compuserve, and Prodigy? That's the current app ecosystem in a nutshell, and it's deeply suboptimal for both users and developers.

Post reply on HN