251–260 of 318 posts
So the web browser is pretty much a mini operating system. Firefox and Chromium seriously feel like they have the longest compile time out of any package in Gentoo, except maybe Libreoffice. It has tons of embedded packages that it doesn't pull from the system/native (jpeg and png decoders and such). So with a lot of these neat things where we compile stuff or run a Linux kernel in the browser, we've pretty much come…
Yes. I hope more people understand this: the browser is a Inner Platform- it's just a portability layer over OS, so that app developers can deliver the same thing to multiple OSes, without making the app portable. These days, you can compile a Qt app with a web view with a single source for all three major platforms.
C and C++ are the exception as they were tied to nothing more that a basic POSIX like compatibility.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Replace “WebAssembly VM” with “JVM” and you will see how it’s already available, and why it won’t catch on.
Webassembly doesn't require you to install Oracle software, or lag your computer for 30 seconds while it starts up... And it doesn't require Swing or AWT. So, there are those minor improvements.
Having some random thoughts about the comments here, some of which talk about having a "browser" drive large parts of what we consider today an "operating system". I agree that certain aspects of what most modern operating systems do today can be abstracted away behind a unified, convenient (and perhaps browser-accessible) API. The entire user-experience stack comes to mind immediately, but there are counter examples…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Browsers do a whole lot better than the status quo for apps in the '90s and early 2000s, which was "offer a Windows .EXE to download, and monetize with spyware".
Web apps are already spyware by default, as everything gets done on a computer I don't have access to. Just plain pretty TTYs.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Flash Player had something like 97% penetration, so for all intents and purposes it was something that you could always consider as being "there" - and users didn't mind having to install it. I think a lot of techies underestimate people's willingness to install stuff on their PCs, especially when that stuff is needed to do tasks they really want and are a couple of clicks away.
People use the "average user" as a strawman. He is simultaneously too stupid not to install malware that claims to be a fax, and yet unwilling to exert even the slightest effort to install software he needs to get things done.
Enterprises often disabled (or heavily whitelisted) both Flash and Java in the browser due to malware concerns as they were (and still are) an effective vector for malware.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But they often don't perform like native apps, both when it comes to size, speed, and look and feel.
Most users are not so discerning. Once Windows ships with a native JS engine (perhaps Chakra), will streaming Electron-based apps without traditional "installation" be possible?
Thankfully it has been largely ignored until web devs decided to start using Electron.
Cool! Now I just need the JVM as a clang target, and then I'll never have to use anything other than C++ ever again!! :D Webassembly has a tad more promise than ActiveX.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Replace “WebAssembly VM” with “JVM” and you will see how it’s already available, and why it won’t catch on.
Webassembly doesn't require you to install Oracle software, or lag your computer for 30 seconds while it starts up... And it doesn't require Swing or AWT. So, there are those minor improvements.