World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
PeterWood 19-Sep-2008 [7084] | It sounds as though there is still a huge amount of work to be done before R3 is going to be ready. |
BrianH 19-Sep-2008 [7085x2] | Well the API wasn't finalized even then, and then would have needed to change drastically with the Unicode changes. That doesn't even include Carl's current rewrites or the unfinished tasking model. |
New blog! http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0147.html | |
Pekr 20-Sep-2008 [7087x3] | Henrik - very good POV .... |
Terry - why are you constantly demotivated? You may as well take another aproach - use rebol free technologies, you will be safe this way. Watch R3, it can only surprise you, or it can fail, but you will not be hurt ... | |
As for FF, they receive money from Google only because Google is preset as default search engine. We might do similar if R3 browser gets popular :-) At OSNews, I also suggested Google to adopt REBOL, as it is THE ONLY small RIA technology along to Flash, SilverLight., which is a complete platform ... | |
Graham 20-Sep-2008 [7090] | terry's cup is always half empty |
Pekr 20-Sep-2008 [7091x3] | It is good to have Terry here otoh, or I thought I am the most depressed person about REBOL here :-) |
After reading Henrik's post, I also think we found RT a good REBOL advocate ;-) | |
Henrik - re new name for REBOL browser. You mentioned "side" effect or so .... I think that the best so far is FireSide, even if .com domain is chosen ... it suggest Fire as in FireFox, FireBird, and we aproach it from side. Of course we could come-up with anything else ... | |
Graham 20-Sep-2008 [7094] | call it WMD browser |
Henrik 20-Sep-2008 [7095] | Graham, that won't work. USA users wouldn't find it. :-) |
Graham 20-Sep-2008 [7096] | LOL |
[unknown: 5] 20-Sep-2008 [7097] | The rest of the world would believe it wasn't real if we claimed to find it. ;-) |
Terry 20-Sep-2008 [7098x2] | Rebol as being 'half empty or half full' .. either way, is a good metaphor. |
Be serious. There's no way you can pull the necessary resources together to build anything like a browser. Just won't happen. Call that 'half-empty', if you want.. I call it 45:1 odds against it every happening.. any takers? | |
Pekr 20-Sep-2008 [7100] | Terry - you are starting to be boring with your attitude. Those naysayers like you, always claim anything like that before some product becomes eventually popular. |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7101] | If by "like a browser" you mean implement HTML rendering and styling, a JavaScript interpreter and all of that, then I agree. If you want to implement a REBOL browser, then you are dead wrong. It's not the browser part that is the hard part. |
Terry 20-Sep-2008 [7102] | I meant the former |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7103] | I don't see the point to the former. |
amacleod 20-Sep-2008 [7104] | If the html browser part is seperate from the rebol "bowser" (as a plug-in using web kit?) it would not be too tuff. |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7105x4] | That is also not what Carl is doing. |
I don't see the part to implementing an HTML browser at all - we already have those, and they suck. | |
part -> point | |
I can see the point to implementing a compiler from a REBOL dialect to HTML/CSS/JavaScript though. | |
amacleod 20-Sep-2008 [7109] | html borwser would allow rebol to infiltrate the masses...No one will use rebol only browser if they can't also access google or any of their other favorite sites. A An html plug-in could activate when an html page is requesteed...? |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7110] | No, an HTML browser would not allow REBOL to infiltrate the masses because they already have HTML browsers and most of them don't want to switch. I can see the point to making something that works in the browser that they already have, but not one that would require them to switch browsers because that would fail. |
amacleod 20-Sep-2008 [7111] | They would switch for the added benifits rebol pages would provide but they would still be able to accesshtml until those sites cought up to speed... |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7112] | It would be better to work with their existing browser because they won't switch. I may not even like Firefox but I can't switch. |
amacleod 20-Sep-2008 [7113] | It needs some good apps that force people to use it. Onec they know they can use it alos for html why would they open two browsers if one does can handle both types of web content. |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7114x2] | No, if we are going to force them to use something other than HTML/CSS/JavaScript/Flash/Silverlight? it would either have to work in their existing browser, or be something seperate that just gets installed with an app they already want, as a side effect. |
Personally, I don't want HTML browser overhead in my REBOL browser. | |
amacleod 20-Sep-2008 [7116x2] | The latter...exactly. I'm building an app that works great as a standalone app but I can see it working in this "browser" thing as the rebol "browser" I believe will be proving a framework to extend my app..things like caht, file sharing, and other things not yet thought of. If i I have a base of users and I stear them to use the browser as it will provide additional benifits to my app..that's a bunch of people nows using it that will quickly discover they can also rech the html web. Why us ie or firefox? |
proving>providing | |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7118x2] | For that matter, unless you support their existing web services that they already have their data or the data they already want in it, it won't matter. That means their existing webmail account and Flash video. If you can't play YouTube (and RedTube, ...) it won't matter. People don't care about the underlying technology unless they are techs. If you make a REBOL browser so that you can do REBOL stuff, and then try to support the old web stuff thinking that people will try the REBOL stuff and find it to be better, you will be wrong. Most people won't be able to tell the difference, because it isn't the technology that matters, it is the content. If you have the best content available in the most convenient way, people will install your software to get at it, whatever your software is written in. |
The real advantage to the REBOL browser isn't web integration, it is taking the real advantages of the web (aside from installed base) and applying those to REBOL, but better because we don't have that legacy markup crap. | |
amacleod 20-Sep-2008 [7120x2] | Agreed |
agree again | |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7122x2] | We are not going to compete with Flash directly, not unless we can provide a better source of free videos of cats running on treadmills than Youtube. The only company that can kill Flash/Silverlight video is Google, because they can add HTML 5 video to every open source browser and switch Youtube to use it. Nothing that the REBOL community can do will work on that scale. |
It is thus better for us to do something that Flash can't do, rather than to try to beat Flash at its own game (like Silverlight). | |
Rod 20-Sep-2008 [7124x2] | Agree here also, I want cross platform GUI where the rebol browser provides UI and other services to applications not just content. The value in the Google applications is not their quality (which is okay) but in the access from anywhere feature. The HTML/Browser is trying to grow into the application space but is really at a disadvantage because of the technology. |
Links, discovery via search, anywhere access these are good things that can also be done with the networking strength of REBOL, no need to saddle that with HTML/CSS and the whole mess of patchwork technologies layered on top. | |
Graham 20-Sep-2008 [7126] | anything we can build in rebol can be built with another technology |
Terry 20-Sep-2008 [7127x2] | Rebol is a niche product, and unless it reaches critical mass (of developers) will probably remain that way. |
That said, I've been discussing a new project that will probably use Rebol | |
Rod 20-Sep-2008 [7129x2] | Critical mass is a challenge for sure. I've been bouncing around all the "popular" technologies for some time while earning my keep with old fashioned database applications. Some are very interesting and have good strengths, none are making creating solutions easier or even better in most cases. |
I'm not sold reaching critical mass is what we should be chasing just yet. | |
Terry 20-Sep-2008 [7131] | The concepts behind Rebol are too left field for critical mass. Genius is not always appreciated. |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7132x2] | Everything is a niche product, even Flash. There is no general purpose product. Find your niche and go for it. |
For me, critical mass is being able to use REBOL for work and my research and not have it be career ending. I'm there already :) | |
older newer | first last |