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

Mozilla Open Web App prototype

blog.mozilla.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 48 posts

Re: Mozilla Open Web App prototype

#31

Post by kijinbear »

ShabbyDoo wrote: post #29
ShabbyDoo wrote: post #27

From the feature list: "Can request access to one or more advanced and/or privacy-sensitive capabilities" and "Can receive notifications from the cloud." GMail, etc. has already proven that the browser provides a rich enough UI experience to replace desktop apps, but the general lack of integration with the services of an operating system still forces me to either (1) use desktop apps for some things or (2) go throug…

As I re-read my submission, I thought about ActiveX controls circa 1999. They certainly could have been used to solve such problems (at least on Windows), but the ability for any old site to install native code made them a security disaster. What's different here? The entity you trust to provide you with a secure browser is the same entity providing a set of profiles, and you would opt into which sites could access t…

There's still a problem. Most users would just click "Yes" whenever a web site asked for access. Chrome addons routinely request access to "all files on your computer" and very few users complain about it. Fast-forward, and it's ActiveX all over again.

Do people know better these days? I'm not sure.

Re: Mozilla Open Web App prototype

#32

Post by kijinbear »

ESchmidtSeesYou wrote: post #3
rwhitman wrote: post #2

So is this basically Mozilla's answer to Chrome's installable web apps?

Yes, but they're pushing this as an open browser standard for all web app stores. It'll be interesting to see Google's response to this, as well as how DRM potentially works in both implementations.

DRM isn't exactly compatible with open-source...

Re: Mozilla Open Web App prototype

#33

Post by ShabbyDoo »

kijinbear wrote: post #31
ShabbyDoo wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I re-read my submission, I thought about ActiveX controls circa 1999. They certainly could have been used to solve such problems (at least on Windows), but the ability for any old site to install native code made them a security disaster. What's different here? The entity you trust to provide you with a secure browser is the same entity providing a set of profiles, and you would opt into which sites could access t…

There's still a problem. Most users would just click "Yes" whenever a web site asked for access. Chrome addons routinely request access to "all files on your computer" and very few users complain about it. Fast-forward, and it's ActiveX all over again. Do people know better these days? I'm not sure.

I wonder if the security concerns could be limited by opt-outable warnings on first use. Let's say you gave a malicious site access to the camera profile. Would it be sufficient for an implementer of the profile to show a dialog saying, "Click here to upload all your photos to XYZ.com"? [Or, even better, show thumbnails of the photos which would be uploaded] Is it more real for users to allow specific access at a specific time than just a blanket "ok" at install time?

Is there a way to have one's cake and eat it too?

Re: Mozilla Open Web App prototype

#34

Post by DjDarkman »

ShabbyDoo wrote: post #23
DjDarkman wrote: post #6

I don't really know how is this better than launching a site and using a Paypal gateway integrated into the site. I don't really know how will this solve XSS and other security problems the web has. What problems are these app stores supposed to fix?

Perhaps a standard identity/payment mechanism which reduces the marginal effort required of a user to create an account and agree to pay, say, $1/month would drive sales? Much like it's easy for Apple/Google app store users to make purchases?

I don't want no payment standard for that, heck I may not even want anyone to know how many users paid for my service.

I may find a service that charges me less than the standard service can offer.

Take a look at the Apple App store: 30% for Apple and the Carriers? for what? ain't that a little bit too much?

My main point is: mixing financial stuff with technology is simply a dead end.

Re: Mozilla Open Web App prototype

#35

Post by DjDarkman »

jasonlotito wrote: post #9
DjDarkman wrote: post #6

I don't really know how is this better than launching a site and using a Paypal gateway integrated into the site. I don't really know how will this solve XSS and other security problems the web has. What problems are these app stores supposed to fix?

> What problems are these app stores supposed to fix? You've completely missed the point. The feature isn't an app store. It's browser based applications you can download and install on your computer, and run locally. The browser is merely the engine the runs the application. They'll probably remove the chrome, and instead of acting like a browser and a web page, it will merely be the application.

What are the problems with current web apps that this tries to address? Let's say I have a web app, how will this make my life easier?

Re: Mozilla Open Web App prototype

#36

Post by DjDarkman »

jasonlotito wrote: post #17
asnyder wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably because the point makes no sense. There's no reason to go back to desktop apps, we were moving away from that and making lots of progress and now all of a sudden many are eager to return back to local desktop, but this time running inside a browser, doesn't make any sense at all. We should be moving forward, rather than going backwards.

> It's probably because the point makes no sense. There's no reason to go back to desktop apps Yes, there is. Being able to install a web app locally means several things immediately: 1. Local and remote storage of data beyond what traditional web apps can accomplish. 2. Snappier applications, since everything is stored locally. 3. You'll still be capable of being connected remotely. 4. Ability to use the app even if…

> 1. Local and remote storage of data beyond what traditional web apps can accomplish.

We already have HTML5 for that, why would we need yet another method for the same thing?

> 2. Snappier applications, since everything is stored locally.

Again... this is all possible with HTML5.

> 3. You'll still be capable of being connected remotely. 4. Ability to use the app even if you aren't connected, or cannot connect remotely.

...HTML5 or Google Gears maybe.

> Also, you assert that we were moving away from desktop apps, when the opposite is true.

Show me a recent native app that has the success rate of Facebook or Twitter. A lot of native apps are just interfaces to web apps.

> Even on an iOS device, you can run web apps as if they are local applications.

With bookmarking them and making the app use HTML5 app cache.

> Being able to install an application on your phone outside the App Store.

install = bookmark

Ohhh and let's not forget the "native" applications that in reality wrapped web apps.

Re: Mozilla Open Web App prototype

#37

Post by DjDarkman »

jasonlotito wrote: post #26
boucher wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, very little of what's proposed in this project changes any of those points. You can already store data locally using localStorage APIs. You can already cache application content/scripts/resources locally using HTML Manifest files, which also let you use the application when you aren't connected to the net. And of course, you can always access remote resources when you are (even across domains using the ne…

Local storage is currently limited. On the desktop there will be means for unlimited storage. Manifest files can present more than merely what file to download (such as operating in the background). By setting the apps to a different domain, it gives them room to allow for a different permission set.

If it would become unlimited than nothing would stop my web app from filling your hard drive up with crap. So removing this limit maybe not such a good idea. Besides if Mozilla wanted to provide unlimited storage they could just remove the limit from the HTML5 storage, but they won't for the reason I already wrote.

Re: Mozilla Open Web App prototype

#38

Post by DjDarkman »

ShabbyDoo wrote: post #33
kijinbear wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's still a problem. Most users would just click "Yes" whenever a web site asked for access. Chrome addons routinely request access to "all files on your computer" and very few users complain about it. Fast-forward, and it's ActiveX all over again. Do people know better these days? I'm not sure.

I wonder if the security concerns could be limited by opt-outable warnings on first use. Let's say you gave a malicious site access to the camera profile. Would it be sufficient for an implementer of the profile to show a dialog saying, "Click here to upload all your photos to XYZ.com"? [Or, even better, show thumbnails of the photos which would be uploaded] Is it more real for users to allow specific access at a spe…

It's very hard to get these right and not having an annoying nag-ware application.

Re: Mozilla Open Web App prototype

#39

Post by DjDarkman »

bluesnowmonkey wrote: post #22

I'm a big fan of the "defer commitment" principle. It seems speculative and dangerous to try to create new standards in a field that is evolving so rapidly. We've had a lot of form factor innovation like smartphones and tablets. Other relevant areas like online payments are ripe for innovation as well. How will these new standards respond to the need for matching innovation? Who will maintain them? Will there be vers…

I personally feel that they are just wasting time. They should working on providing:

- a cross domain JSON request function(they may have already implemented this)

- a way to limit the scope of a script tag, prevent a script from accessing the global object

and other security features that people really care about.

Post reply on HN