Apparently this discussion bores you so I'll keep i short and (hopefully) relatively sweet.
Research before you post, always a wise choice. And the relevance is explained below.
I usually do that, but your point is irrelevant as nobody is talking about serverside JS.
Because that is what you implied when you said improving Javascript speed will make up for a slow network and "mainframe" when you replied to ZedRuhlen's post. It won't, by the way.
I implied no such thing. You may THINK I implied it. It is usually more reasonable to ask questions instead of assuming that the other person implies something.
Incidentally, my point was that all major software companies see a potential in RIAs. That has nothing to do with the OS except that it renders the specific OS unimportant as long as it does what an OS should do.
I got such an idea when you implied that JS would make up for any shortcomings of the network or server, and it sounded like you were implying the OS was going to be built in JS. It won't be.
I implied no such thing. See above.
You're right, Flash and JS are different beasts. Compiled code is always faster, and JS is object-based, not object-oriented, a lot less robust for programmers. JS is also less capable of processing tasks that C/C++ and even Java are far superior in.
Actually, compiled code is not always faster than code running on a VM. I'll spare you the theoretical details.
In any case, it may be fast enough. VMs are widely used for applications. Java VM, Adobe VM, .NET etc.
Why do you think Apple didn't just settle for HTML5/JS/CSS for all of their iPhone apps? For many reasons, really, but suffice it to say that they would be slower, less robust web-applications that wouldn't be able to take full advantage of their platform. Remember iPhone web-applications? They seem to be taking up residence with server-side JS in their popularity...
iPhones is a different device with severe CPU restrictions. Google are looking towards the future with their OS. Apple is looking at the present.
When you post things like what you did about the trend being to make JS faster in response to ZedRuhlen's post about mainframes (servers) and networks being slow, please try to understand that RIAs and JS won't speed that up. His point was that the network, "mainframes" (servers), and the connection to your ISP are too slow to make this "OS" feasible. I agree with him. This sure ain't the first (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_operating_system).
Again, I have written no such thing.
You said JS was going to make this "faster" by implying the current trend of speeding up JS is going to fix that. My point is that it won't, because you can only make JS so fast and it will never compete with OS-level speeds or make up for the network and server sluggishness.
Imply again. See above.
This OS is essentially just a browser with the OS ripped out.
No it isn't. The GUI is essentially a browser. the OS is something else.
[... imply imply imply ...]
I get what you're saying about RIAs being fast and all that, but they will never be OS-fast. Why not just save copies of your data to the server from an OS-native networked-enabled application?
Check out Google Gears.
That's all IMAP email is already, for example, but you can use any client, or a web-based one. The fact that Google Docs is a browser-based app doesn't necessarily make it a killer app. It is the server-based portability of it. I've often wished I could download a better word-processing app than what Google has provided in a browser to manage all my files I have there. And wtf can't I edit a Google Docs document on the iPhone yet? All they need is an app in the App Store. I'd love that.
I'm told there's a Google Docs plugin for OpenOffice.
Don't bog down the user experience with a real-time RIA and JS/network calls getting in the way. An OS-based application such as a text editor in a network-centric OS (like Chrome OS is trying to be) should save your changes elegantly and push stuff to the server when it can, when there is a network connection available, but don't penalize the user if there is no net connection. And it should give you a great user experience (aka, written in fast, compiled code, not RIAs) Believe it or not but it was Microsoft who tried that back in 2000 with their SOAP services, attempting to integrate them into Office. They kinda dropped the ball on that, but at least it turned into "Ajax/RIAs". Apple has MobileMe and iDisk. Whether you use a browser or an OS-native "app", the thing that really matters is the user experience and, ultimately, where your data goes. Why is it a bad thing to have my files on my computer? Why do I need to use a browser-based Rich Internet App instead of a fast, stable, robust, OS-native application? I'm very happy using a document editor of my own choosing, but sure, it can go ahead and optionally save my files to the server when it can. RIAs on Google OS as a killer app? Not really... But yeah, have an RIA, too, for when I'm traveling and at a coffee shop in Ireland or Hawaii, but force me to use browser RIAs for everything and not save anything locally? No thanks.
I'm not really forcing you to do anything. I don't think Google is either.
Macsmurf, We may inherently agree on the same thing and are probably saying similar things in different ways, but perhaps with the fundamental difference of disagreeing on Javascript being the core processing language for Google OS "RIA" (browser) apps. I think it is silly, frankly. And certainly not an "OS".
The V8 guys don't think it is silly. In fact, the lead is a rather big name in the VM world.
Bottom line for me:
Google now has two OSes and one is just a browser. Beyond the hype because it is Google, I just don't get it.
I agree. You don't get it
Maybe there is nothing to get. Google's approach may or may not work but I think it has potential.
