Live data from Hacker News

Web Starter Kit

developers.google.com

151–160 of 218 posts

Re: Web Starter Kit

#151
post #132

Is it just me, or do the fonts on that page look terrible on Windows? /edit: looks like it's just "Roboto Condensed"

No it's not just you, it's everyone using chrome windows, it a bug in their rendering engine that has been unfixed for years.

There are multiple easy ways to fix this (load order, re-rendering font, server config)..you would think a web starter kit would get the basics of fonts right...

The layout is also broken for the icon rows...

Example: http://i.imgur.com/8DCIsLw.jpg

Re: Web Starter Kit

#152

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…

downvoters might have been too busy to actually consider the depth of the concept.

I would just suggest that it sounds like what Win7 does underneath the surface with the thousands of real-time Registry operations.

That sounds bad, but I'm sure it's chaos because the operations all grew by accretion, not by selection, as your suggestion to backport good web concepts indicates.

so.... What are the most likely candidates? What's ready? JSON? WebGL? A SQL interface to the Registry?

Re: Web Starter Kit

#153

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…

downvoters might have been too busy to actually consider the depth of the concept. I would just suggest that it sounds like what Win7 does underneath the surface with the thousands of real-time Registry operations. That sounds bad, but I'm sure it's chaos because the operations all grew by accretion, not by selection, as your suggestion to backport good web concepts indicates. so.... What are the most likely candidat…

It is a very interesting question to ponder. If you see the web as a logical progression from email->newsgroups->gopher->www then clearly what was missing were the missing links. Once we had those everything else grew exponentially. But the web was clearly not intended to become an application platform. At the same time now that it has become an application platform we are facing a difficult choice: stick to incremental improvements and all kinds of hacks to shoehorn application interfaces into a document model (an awkward fit at best) or, alternatively to see where that progression could go next. How to preserve the 'link' feature and the advantages of the web while addressing the gap between native apps and web apps, improved user privacy and security, less reliance on verticals.

That's a very tough nut to crack.

Re: Web Starter Kit

#154
Some people hate the idea of shifting everything to Web. Other people hate how unsuitable HTML5/CSS3 is for replicating native appearance.

But I think overall, it's a good middle ground. There will never be a perfect solution in the real world (where resources are limited, and companies are motivated to lock-in).

Web is not a perfect medium, it has it's disadvantages. Web apps were definitely not in mind when developing and designing Web. But on other hand, it works and it's proven, it's been here for a while. There are solid technologies supporting it (nginx, apache, programming languages with their frameworks). Some say why not native? For the reasons we shifted away from native. Could we improve current situation with native applications? Maybe. But it requires a major player to get involved (read: money and skill). Would they be motivated in pursuing something philosophically right and all, while current technologies generate a lot of money? Doubt so.

Yes, HTML and CSS were not meant to be used for mobile apps, mimicking native appearance. As an alternative, we can stick to vendor, and learn vendor specific stuff which doesn't share much in common, not even programming languages. Meanwhile HTML/CSS is something much more developers are familiar. It allows more developers to develop iOS/Android apps. Maybe we should just make it DRYier like we were doing with so many problems? At first, grid frameworks came for CSS layout, then Bootstrap. And in future bootstrap-which-gives-native-iOS/Android look will come? There must be something like that already. We could throw it all away and create some new API (some suggest JS + WebGL). But again. It requires major effort, major resources and current technologies are money machines. So why to stop?

Not everything can be perfect and correct in real world, with real constraints. Some people prove that wrong from time to time. Will someone do this time?

Re: Web Starter Kit

#155
post #118

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?

So understand I've got a bit of history here, back in the old days I was working on Java/HotJava and the whole applet thing. Netscape was doing their own thing with what would become known as Javascript. Our vision was "Gee everything that runs in Java can run anywhere, regardless of OS or device etc etc." its a great vision. In the nearly 20 years since since Java pushed out the door (March '95, best of times and worst of times :-) this has never worked. Not for Java, not for Javascript, not for C#, not anything. Certain browsers work, some don't, there are quirks everywhere.

The default defensive strategy is to pick one browser you know work and select that as the 'standard.'

Not complaining just noting the lock in is an emergent property.

Re: Web Starter Kit

#156

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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).

That is a very interesting idea.

As usually with interesting ideas someone beat you to it:

http://www.appcelerator.com/blog/2014/01/browser-based-emula...

Re: Web Starter Kit

#158
post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

So understand I've got a bit of history here, back in the old days I was working on Java/HotJava and the whole applet thing. Netscape was doing their own thing with what would become known as Javascript. Our vision was "Gee everything that runs in Java can run anywhere, regardless of OS or device etc etc." its a great vision. In the nearly 20 years since since Java pushed out the door (March '95, best of times and wo…

I think that to some degree the lack of certification for browsers (and ditto for Java runtimes back in the days) is what is causing this. Write-once-run-anywhere became Write-once-debug-everywhere.

Java seems to finally start to deliver on this promise though, the last few years have seen quite a bit of improvement. (Still far from perfect though, just the other day I was fighting some corporate website that insisted I install a certain version of Java in a certain browser in order to be allowed access, and it crashed in terrible ways when I finally did gain access).

Imagine that your browser simply wouldn't be allowed on the web until it conformed to a standard. Just like cars aren't allowed to go on the road if they do not conform.

This is unlikely to ever happen for various reasons and I don't think it would be a good thing but the number of broken implementations and hacks-that-became-standards is too large to even count by now.

Re: Web Starter Kit

#159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's both good and bad in theory and both good and bad in practice. Certainly most of the things you list are major downsides, but none of them keep the upside from being (IMO more) major. I'm you're right that the experience is "almost always" sub-par. I would say "often", but not even "usually". I guess YMMV.

> I'm you're right that the experience is "almost always" sub-par. I would say "often", but not even "usually". I guess YMMV. There aren't actually many fair/accurate comparisons around since most companies have either a shrink-wrapped product or a webapp. Rarely do you see both, and when there are I agree with jacquesm that the experience is almost always sub-par on the webapp [in comparison to the desktop app]. You…

Google does in fact make a non-web version of Gmail. Gmail.app for iOS and the Android port of gmail. Both of which are a MUCH better experience them the comparable mobile web apps.

Re: Web Starter Kit

#160

I was really hoping "Delete key friendly" meant that they weren't forcing Chrome to bind delete to the back function any longer.

Removing that has been attempted a few times and failed. I would love to see that shortcut removed myself too. :/
Post reply on HN