World: r3wp
[Tech News] Interesting technology
older newer | first last |
Pekr 18-Feb-2009 [3703] | How new WebOS (Palm Pre) is going to work - http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2009/02/palm-pulls-back-the-curtain-on-webos-technical-details.ars# |
Henrik 24-Feb-2009 [3704] | http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/02/24/apple_releases_public_beta_of_safari_4_browser.html New Safari beta with some eyepopping features. |
Geomol 24-Feb-2009 [3705] | Dubbed Nitro," the engine in Safari 4 is said to run JavaScript 4.2 times faster than Safari 3." 4.2 times. That's a lot! I'm wondering, why they did it so bad at first? |
Henrik 24-Feb-2009 [3706x2] | Safari 3's javascript engine is supposed to only be a bit slower than Chrome's V8, so I think it's only in extreme cases that it's faster. |
wow, it's pretty slick. just installed it. | |
Geomol 24-Feb-2009 [3708] | Btw. that link make my Safari eat all CPU. |
Henrik 24-Feb-2009 [3709] | http://rebol.hmkdesign.dk/files/safari4.png |
Robert 24-Feb-2009 [3710] | Beware if you publish which sites you read... |
Henrik 24-Feb-2009 [3711] | interestingly, the URL bar looks _exactly_ like one of my earlier skin attempts for the R3 GUI :-) |
Gabriele 25-Feb-2009 [3712] | why they did it so bad at first? - they didn't, it's just that the WHOLE world has been up to optimizing JS interpreters in the last two years. |
Henrik 25-Feb-2009 [3713] | except Microsoft. It was more important for them to get Songsmith out on time. |
Gabriele 25-Feb-2009 [3714] | well, the faster JS gets, and the easier creating web apps gets, the more MS loses "dominance". so it's obvious they don't want to help ;) but they have to keep IE from losing market share, so they can't do nothing either. |
Henrik 25-Feb-2009 [3715] | and now this: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/02/24/microsoft_gazelle_browser/ The Gazelle technology would be slower than the current IE, holds an entire operating system for sandboxing. Could things possible be going in a more wrong direction for webbrowsing? |
Gabriele 25-Feb-2009 [3716] | they should probably realize, that like IBM, their time is up. (but like IBM, they're going to be around and profitable. just give up the world domination thing.) |
Henrik 25-Feb-2009 [3717] | If all goes well, they'll fizzle out and the world quietly moves on, i.e. back on track. |
Geomol 25-Feb-2009 [3718] | One day people will realize, that it's a bad idea to build applications within a browser, and then all this browser war is over. :-) (And I at the same time have a feeling, there's a slight chance, I'm wrong, and everything will end up in browsers. I hope, it's not become that.) |
Henrik 25-Feb-2009 [3719] | Geomol, without ReBrowser to lead the way, in 5 years we will be doing 10% better webapps, just by using 8 times more CPU. :-) |
Geomol 25-Feb-2009 [3720] | or 40% worse, if we use MS technology. ;-) |
Henrik 25-Feb-2009 [3721x2] | Gabriele, as painful as it is to us, the easiest way for MS to maintain dominance is to slowly move away from W3C even further than now. For IE8 and IE9 that could grow. That could get them back to their old dream of their own internet. As hard as I would want them to, I don't think they would crash and burn on that. Since it's unfair to compare IE to other browsers, we could risk MS creating their own terms now, while IE still has dominance. |
So for an evil corp perspective, MS is doing the wrong thing. That's good for us. :-) | |
Robert 25-Feb-2009 [3723] | Geomol, I agree. And I think it will happen. The first company breaking out of the stupid "web-app" path, delivering a product that adds so much more value for customers that they use, gaining market momentum will win the game. |
Pekr 25-Feb-2009 [3724] | Robert, Geomol - I am not sure you are right, even if I do understand your message. The thing is, that the browser is not just html interpreter. It is nowadays a container for native technologies. JS is a glue. So, if HTML 5 adds video, it is done in native level, hence there is no reason why it should be slow, etc. It is just that so far guys did not agree upon media formats. |
Robert 25-Feb-2009 [3725] | I think they will never get all the different technologies playing together in such a smooth way. It's just to complex, hence to expensive. If you can provide a solution in 1/5 of time and budget, showing everyone it works as good or even better, youwill win. |
Pekr 25-Feb-2009 [3726] | I think, that for the sake of the world, it is a bad news, that JS is getting better and better. Guys trying to claim web-apps can be real-time, are almost true. However - hopefully no matter how they try, JS (web) based app will be crappy stuff even for few years coming, no matter how fast they get it running, as the problem is overall complexity of the whole web aproach ... |
BrianH 25-Feb-2009 [3727] | See, Graham, this is why there wasn't a JavaScript group before and there isn't much discussion in it now: People will discuss JavaScript everywhere else, regardless of group topic :) |
Pekr 25-Feb-2009 [3728] | I can imagine JS group used for real development efforts, JS framework chat, and as such :-) |
Geomol 25-Feb-2009 [3729] | The thing is, that the browser is not just html interpreter. It is nowadays a container for native technologies. And The Gazelle technology would be slower than the current IE, holds an entire operating system for sandboxing. See, the browser is becoming the OS. I just hope, people will someday realize, this is a bad idea. It's better to run the application in the OS than running the application in an "OS" on top of a browser within an OS. |
Robert 25-Feb-2009 [3730x2] | Really? I thought that's a pretty cool idea, and than wrap it inside a VM running on a host OS. |
:-) | |
Geomol 25-Feb-2009 [3732] | :-) |
Kaj 25-Feb-2009 [3733] | It shows that nobody has thought of something useful to do with all the CPU power nowadays |
Gabriele 26-Feb-2009 [3734x3] | Geomol, can you point me to the time when people realized that Windows was a bad idea, or that MS Office was a bad idea, or that KDE or Gnome were bad ideas? |
Henrik, for IE to gain back market share, it has to make the existing sites work better than they do now; future sites do not count (FF had to make IE sites work after all). They can't do that; their exit strategy would be Silverlight (which for sure allows for better web apps), but I don't think they're going to win that war. | |
I just hope, people will someday realize, this is a bad idea. It's better to run the application in the OS than running the application in an OS" on top of a browser within an OS." - Ah, so REBOL was a bad idea after all. Who wants to run a OS (REBOL) inside another OS? Better to use the native services the OS provides. :-) | |
Pekr 26-Feb-2009 [3737x2] | REBOL was (is) designed with its primary principle in mind, from the very beginning. The web served completly different purpose, and is patched over the time. The Web WILL win. We are now facing transition era, where to cover its inefficiency, ppl are producing tonnes of JS libraries, to make day work easier. And if it gets even more complex, you will get it shielded by visual tools, which will allow you to do web stuff more easily. |
But, there is still a chance. REBOL was made for what it was made for - lightweight distributed apps. We are scrapping "the bad", and remedying situation with R3. Does web in general throws away bad ideas? Mostly not. Where situation will get more interesting is the compatibility. In the past, there was IE, then FF, and Opera. Now Apple and Google entered the game, with more significant browser market share. We will see, what headache all those new browser cause to developers - I mean - various incompatibilities between browsers. Not to mention mobile browser incarnations, which are often separate projects ... | |
Geomol 26-Feb-2009 [3739x2] | Ah, so REBOL was a bad idea after all. Who wants to run a OS (REBOL) inside another OS? As I see it, REBOL is a language with some OS-related parts. The Viewtop for example. But that never became a huge success. Maybe because it's not such a good idea with another desktop on top of the OS desktop? |
Making REBOL a real OS directly on the hardware might be a good idea at some point. | |
Gabriele 26-Feb-2009 [3741x2] | Geomol, the Viewtop has nothing to do with it. REBOL file name conventions are different from those of the host OS (%/c/file instead of C:\file), it does not give you access to the OS functions directly, and it has its own graphic rendering engine that does not use hw acceleration of anything (faces in R2, GOBs in R3). |
if it was just a language, you would be using directx, MFC, etc. on Windows, QT or the GTK or Linux, and Cocoa on OSX, regardless of whether you're writing the Viewtop or a little game. | |
Pekr 26-Feb-2009 [3743] | Gabriele - wrong - Qt is not native toolkit. You consider it being one, just because it is cross platform and widely adopted? By naming Qt, you could admit, that even View is native one, whereas VID is not. It does not matter that View uses its own UI elements, as much as GTK on Windows looked in the past (when I checked) non-native too (dunno if they changed it or not ...) |
Gabriele 27-Feb-2009 [3744x2] | So, what's the native toolkit on Linux? |
How do you define a toolkit "native"? | |
Henrik 27-Feb-2009 [3746] | I guess, one that doesn't pretend to be a toolkit :-) |
AdrianS 9-Mar-2009 [3747x2] | this seems to be a pretty huge announcement - http://blog.wolfram.com/2009/03/05/wolframalpha-is-coming/ |
Reichart, does your friend at AdaptiveAI know about any of this do you think? Is he a friend of Stephen Wolfram by chance? | |
Gabriele 10-Mar-2009 [3749] | Adrian, there was an article about it that points out how it's not really AI, but rather a system that can compute answers. it is surely a breakthrough and it's going to change our lives maybe... but that is sort of like google, in that it is a support tool for intelligence, not intelligence. that is, it is a tool that intelligent beings use. so, AI systems will find things like Google and Wolfram Alpha extremely useful, because they allow independent learning (without humans having to teach). |
AdrianS 10-Mar-2009 [3750] | I didn't mean to imply that it was AI - I don't know if what AdaptiveAI uses "real" AI despite their name (though it's hard to tell from the info on the site). I was just thinking that they might use similar approaches and was curious to know if Reichart's friend who works there was possibly an acquaintance of Stephen Wolfram's. |
Pekr 10-Mar-2009 [3751x2] | OK, I'll sit and wait for the revolution to happen :-) |
Wolfram has to have good PR - even our main Czech news portal is reporting on it :-) There was even link to already existing - http://tones.wolfram.com | |
older newer | first last |