> For the first time, a meaningful number of developers are openly questioning the web platform. Lost me in the opening paragraph. " For the first time "? Please, people have been openly questioning the web platform for a decade now. Ever since mobile (and their native apps) starting "killing off the desktop". Ever since people downloaded their first PhoneGap/Cordova app, and saw how badly it looks and behaves compar…
Are there any alternatives to Phonegapp? Ever used Flutter or Kotlin?
It’s time to kill the web app
341–350 of 717 posts
Re: It’s time to kill the web app
#342How does this fix anything? When you compose length prefixed data (in e.g. arrays, nested stucts) you still have to check if these length and offset fields are coherent. If these length fields get passed over the wire from the user, you still can't trust their values.
Binary protocols don't solve this problem, they just make doing the validation less CPU hungry.
Re: It’s time to kill the web app
#343Fun fact: The colorful Windows 98 explorer sidebar that is shown in the first screenshot was implemented as HTML (and Javascript), along with the desktop background (called active desktop).
Actually the folders themselves were too. You could edit the actual CSS and HTML behind them – changing the colors, putting in backgrounds – by placing specially named files in the directory. Windows 98 was a glorious thing.
Re: It’s time to kill the web app
#344This article is so naive. It completely negates all the benefits of the open web while presenting problems along with non-sensical "fixes"...
Re: It’s time to kill the web app
#345annoying clickbait title and irrelevant trolltastic comparison to '90s windows garbage designed to incite anger. 1) yes, large webapps are hard to secure. but they're also infinitely easier to patch. 2) yes, the fact that google just shits out random things so people can get promotions (SPDY, NaCL, whatever) and it becomes a thing is a problem. this was not how the decentralized web was designed... but that doesn't m…
Re: It’s time to kill the web app
#346The web sucking is a symptom of its success, not an indication of some intrinsic inadequacy. HTML is fault-tolerant. JavaScript is an add-on, not a runtime requirement. CSS degrades gracefully. The web is resilient, forgiving, and accessible. And yeah, a little slow and broken, but so?
Re: It’s time to kill the web app
#347The rest can basically be summed up as "the web is a mess," and I agree with that. Can it be otherwise? I have often thought the coercion of HTML+CSS into a platform for complex interactive applications has been pretty terrible. Some of the links to other blog posts that supposedly support Mike's argument are actually criticisms of "JavaScript development." Yet JavaScript is just a programming language, like any other; it isn't limited to web development and the flaws it has are being addressed. JavaScript is the baby in the bathwater and there is no reason it shouldn't be a big part of whatever comes next.
Show us something small, powerful, clean, open and that unifies desktop and mobile and maybe you'll get somewhere. I am not one who believes the current paradigm is immortal; if this blog post contributed anything of value I think it is the observation that the web stack has effectively failed mobile; native tool sets work better in almost every way and are indeed the first choice when you need to make high fidelity mobile applications. That shows the limitations of the web stack and provides and opportunity for a competing solution.
Re: It’s time to kill the web app
#348Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Any time I think I'd like to do something with the web and sit down to learn, it's completely overwhelming. I've never been able to put together a coherent mental model of the architecture of a web application or figure out what the best practices are for web development." If it makes you feel any better, that's because there isn't a coherent mental model. If you've ever heard of the ORM/Relational impedance mismatc…
>If you've ever heard of the ORM/Relational impedance mismatch, it's got nothing on the set of impedance mismatches between the way servers like to work, the HTTP protocol (and its still very page-based orientation in a world of streams), the browser's DOM model, and how Javascript works, especially if you want to get excellent performance out of it. Mapping objects to tables is a solved problem. The only noteworthy…
Sure, but that's just the standard solution that hides the mismatch. The mismatch is still there. Which is why when performance becomes an issue, there's a whole bag of tricks for tuning the ORM or just sidestepping it and writing a sane query. It's also part of why the SQL database went from the only thing people could conceive of using to one tool among many for data persistence.
As 1970s paradigms go, SQL has had a good run. But the main problem it solves, easily finding and changing your data somewhere on a small number of spinning metal disks, is just not the central problem of computing that it was for a few decades.
Re: It’s time to kill the web app
#349Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm having a hard time seeing how having separate control and data streams would have an effect here. Using FTP to retrieve a document isn't more secure than HTTP... the problem is in how the document itself is parsed. If you added a separate side channel for requesting data (a la FTP), you'd still have the issue of parsing the HTML on the other side. Granted, if you made that control channel stateful, you'd make a l…
It makes sure that all your code is yours and that no matter what stuff makes it into the data stream it will never be able to do anything because it is just meant to be rendered. So abc would go as where datum 1 would refer to the first datum in the data stream, being 'abc' and no matter what trickery you'd pull to try to put another tag or executable bit or other such nonsense in the datum it would never be interpr…
I could easily see making and resources required to be separately requested (like images are now -- ignoring data/base64 resources), but we're back to redefining HTML.
I'm not arguing against that...
It's really hard to have these types of debates though, because everyone focuses on different problems of the HTTP/HTML webapp request/response cycle. Like you said, adding separate control/data channels would help, but that doesn't solve SQL injection attacks (which is a whole other class, but that's not really an HTTP/HTML issue, it's a backend issue and I don't see how you'd avoid that with a simple protocol change). Simply making HTTP stateful could potentially solve a different class of session highjacking, etc...
There are so many attack vectors that I think it does make sense to think about what a replacement for HTTP/HTML would look like. Most of these problems arise from trying to re-engineer a document format (HTML) to support interactive webapps. We should think about how to do this better... (without recreating ActiveX -- shudder).
Re: It’s time to kill the web app
#350Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is that if you present an average web user with the interface you can design (quickly and efficiently) in VB6, they'll spit in your face. Much of the complexity of web design is not in the tools; it's in the fact that users don't expect a standard whatsoever, they just expect their UIs to be as slick and customly designed as magazines. If every website was written using the same standard, predefined set o…
This is pure illusion. Otherwise reddit, 4chan, hn, google (until 2010), craigslist, and even amazon would suffocate and go away. The fact is that what makes a web app / web site / whatever be liked by the users is the content and the value; and often times a 2005 porn pop-under is better at that than a today's chic, pedantically over-designed website with grey huge lettering, multi-MB graphics, and tonnes of wasted…