What realistic proposal? Most of what I said is already done and has been done for a long time.
Every game requires a good graphics card? You need to expand your horizons.
I'm done feeding the troll now.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
A Webkit-based Platform?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What realistic proposal? Most of what I said is already done and has been done for a long time.
Every game requires a good graphics card? You need to expand your horizons.
I'm done feeding the troll now.
Sure Web Apps have lots of limitations and won't suit all functions.
But wouldn't this new "Save as Web App" remove this limitiation?
If the site specific cache files and user local data is store on your hard drive even if it's inside a bundle spotlight should still index that information. Depends how they set up the bundle but i would have thought a major point to doing it would be to integrate with OS feature like adding quicklook support and a spotlight exporter.
It should be pretty easy on any given website to pick out what is formating layout and advertising and what is user specific info to key-value pair in the spotlight database. The fact you've saved the app not just bookmarked or passed though would then be the clue the computer needs to add this info.
I can't tell if you're being disingenuous or are just a troll but the casual game market is quite lucrative, with less fanfare and of course less pushing the computer envelope than the big known titles, and they rarely need much if any GPU power.
So just because "you" don't play 1994 games, many do play games that don't take much graphics power, maybe you need to see the bigger picture, though judging by your comments that doesn't seem too likely in this thread.
Same, this might actually bring in the golden age of web standards (probably not but would be nice).
nothing new
Dojo's been doing most everything sproutcore does for awhile... looks like what sproutcore brings to the table is ease of use, and a whole lot less functionality. but then ... right tool for the job, ya know.
as far as the javascript sucks debate goes. javascript is the right tool for a heck of a lot of jobs but not all. most of the posts I've read on the subject here a just FUD.
Dojo's been doing most everything sproutcore does for awhile... looks like what sproutcore brings to the table is ease of use, and a whole lot less functionality. but then ... right tool for the job, ya know.
as far as the javascript sucks debate goes. javascript is the right tool for a heck of a lot of jobs but not all. most of the posts I've read on the subject here a just FUD.
I guess it's a way for Javascript developers to write stand-alone apps, personally I think it would not be as good a user experience as Cocoa.
It would be cross platform though, the dream of Java. But then in this age of Parallels and VMWare cross-platform is not such a priority as it once was.
It would be cross platform though, the dream of Java. But then in this age of Parallels and VMWare cross-platform is not such a priority as it once was.
this is strange, did you read your previous post yourself?
tell me how web app sync my palm
tell me how web app defrag my HDD. so your proposal of stop using HDD is the realistic answer for the question?
Who is trolling here? making wild imaginary statement that has no realistic assessment of the topic is not trolling?
yeah, Im done feeding the troll now too.
The whole argument being I think web-app is limited in what it can do, and in its performance. You have an argument against that? bring it on with facts backing your opinion. Is that so difficult for you guys to accept such a simple conclusion? or you just have to think there is nothing is impossible here?
Calling people trolling rather than presenting legit argument? what type of style is that?
I was simply saying web-app is limited, whoever claim webpapp is unlimited, are you honestly believe so?
Do you, Mr. ImageWrangler? or do you actually not understand what I was saying? I don't remember ever arguing web-app being useless, did I?
Web apps will eventually do most stuff on that list, and some. In the future your main data storage will be online.
RPG rendered on a server and streamed to your computer.
A spotlight search would need to search your online files (as thats where most stuff will be stored), and so a web app would be more appropriate.
bla bla
You are looking at things as if all the excitement is about today. Luckily for apple they guessed what today was gonna be like yesterday. And today they are guessing tomorrow.
My bets they are right and your wrong.
How about you don't make a grossly over broad generalization and lump all of us in with that one guyamazing, you call this web-app (which is a direct copy of prism from mozilla lab) innovation?
mac users need to learn more facts first.
I'd also like to point out that this idea is just a logical extension of widgets (which are neither Apple's nor Mozilla's invention). Most good ideas don't come from one place entirely. I don't understand the urge people have to create a world where they do. Prism, by the way, isn't all that great. Have you tested Apple's implementation? Unless you have I think calling it a "direct copy" might be premature. I obviously haven't tested Apples take on the technology, but if it is a direct copy I'll be equally uninterested.
innovation != invention
Apple may be innovating here. If they make something better than Prism then they have innovated the idea. They didn't invent the technology though, and I'll just point to what I said above for my thoughts on invention.
To the Java lovers out there. Every Java app I've used has shown me one thing. Java is a cumbersome, memory beast with a gross UI. I'd welcome anything that can improve on that. Though I wouldn't call this new development cross platform until it works in unix and vista.
Smartphones and most other PDA's have WiFi. You won't have to "sync". You're still thinking in the 90's.
If you're not storing your data locally, why would a hard drive get fragmented? Besides, that's an OS function, not an application function, and has zero bearing on the discussion.
Heck, you want to get into that? C is limited. Computers are frickin' limited devices by their nature. Actually, when you think about it, WebApps are all about removing more significant limitations, such as being tied to a specific location or platform.
jW
see, this guessing of the future logic is bold, and not bad, but lack facts support.
I have no problem ppl guessing about future, i dont think Mozilla created prism thinking about yesterday.
I was simply saying this webapp, maybe the future you mentioned, is useful, but are significantly limited. in what it can do, and in its performance. Are you gonna bet this webapp is unlimited in what it can do and in its performance?
mmm. that sounds reasonable, that one guy use same basis to attack and think mozilla team should "be ashamed". Im glad no all mac ppl is like that.How about you don't make a grossly over broad generalization and lump all of us in with that one guy
Im not sure to trace webapp back to widget is a reasonable assessment or not. That sounds a little bit stretch to me tho.
I obiously 100% agree with your last statement of "good ideas comes from every places". Hopefully more mac ppl agree with that.
did you even check any reference before presenting this type of false information?
wow, thats real future, unfortunately, HDD is not only for storing data, it stores local apps that are needed by most ppl, it stores your private information, it store large files ppl will need, oh im sorry, are you talking about the future when everybody has 1G cable, and everybody's data are 100% safe online? now, thats real future. sorry Im not that advanced
heck, sure I want to, just tell me webapp is unlimited, if you want to argue otherwise.
and how does apple helping the situation when there is no safari for linux? and everybody need an internet connection to use it?
C is limited? Computer is limited? sure, if you think that helps your straw man argument.
And client data storage is 100% safe? i cant remember the last time i left my server on the train, or someone stole my server, or i dropped my server down the toilet.
do you really don't know that I was talking about hacking?
You were talking about security of data of the online variety. And as we were comparing on and offline applications, it is only fair to compare equivalent offline data storage security issues.
thats reasonable, however, above people are arguing abandoning HDD and store everything online. Did you not see those words? I believe I was responding to those statement when I mentioned the problem of data security.
Yes. And my argument is, how less secure than present will your data be if and when everything is stored online?
Some said the same thing about banks in the olden days. People preferred to dig holes and bury their treasure, or hide wads of cash under their mattresses. Then one day banks were invented, the concept of someone else looking after their money seemed ludicrous. What if someone robs the bank they said? Over time the culture changed, people began trusting banks, infact having a professional organization looking after the security of their money proved a safer bet.
And everyone lived happily ever after. The End
well, your argument really is "it would be no less safe to store data online than store locally".
Obviously I can't argue with real reference since I don't have any.
But I do know users have much more confidence with local data. Less hackers, time machine or shadow copy provide additional safety.
So is it realistic to put everything online? Now, thats a question that involved more factors than security alone.
Hm. Okay guys, how about this: by the time it's feasible to use an online location for your primary storage of important data, there will probably be method of properly securing that data.
That time isn't now. But I can't see how it would be far off.
We're getting a bit off topic, no?
That time isn't now. But I can't see how it would be far off.
We're getting a bit off topic, no?
I didn't say google apps, I said Apple's MobileMe apps. You are confusing implementation issues with one set of apps with what is possible with a set of technologies.
http://www.apple.com/mobileme/features/mail.html
http://www.apple.com/mobileme/features/contacts.html
http://www.apple.com/mobileme/features/calendar.html
But the point is the potential is there - there isn't much in Outlook, say, that can't be at least approximated with a Javascript app; Outlook just processes data, after all. And with the coming improvements in JavaScript engines the revolution will be later on.
The only thing that bother me is the proprietary stuff in here. Moving away from things like Flash is great - using Apple-specific technology isn't so much.