Re: [Pharo-project] [Moose-dev] How to export multiple Pharo packages to VW
Stephan, You should be able to use FileTree[1] to export data from Pharo and then use STIG[2] to import the data into VW ... I would use git to manage the repository and create a VW branch to manage your VW-specific changes ... you will likely need to hand massage the code base to get it to load into VW, but given that you're dealing with text files, that's doable ... I haven't had time to experiment directly with this path, but it is intended to work and you should file issues with both projects if you run into issues ... at ESUG this year we talked about some new features of the Cypress format[3] that would make porting easier but they haven't been implemented yet ... Dale [1] https://github.com/dalehenrich/filetree [2] https://github.com/CampSmalltalk/STIG [3] https://github.com/CampSmalltalk/Cypress ----- Original Message ----- | From: "Stephan Eggermont" <stephane@xs4all.nl> | To: "Moose-related development" <moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch>, "Pharo Development" <pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr> | Sent: Monday, October 15, 2012 7:50:18 AM | Subject: [Moose-dev] How to export multiple Pharo packages to VW | | The VW5PackageExporter allows the exporting of a package to the VW | xml based fileout format. | I've adapted the code to be less Seaside-specific, and am now able to | export one package (Parasol-Core). | If I try to export another package (Parasol-Tests), which depends on | the earlier one, it fails to load. | It can't resolve the dependency to a superclass defined in | Parasol-Core. | I've seen that Roassal puts all Pharo packages into one VW package. | That would work, but is not very | nice. A package in VW doesn't seem to register its dependencies in a | fileout. Would creating a parcel | help, or should I try something on basis of RPackage? | | Stephan | | | _______________________________________________ | Moose-dev mailing list | Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch | https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev |
Hi guys, all comparisons are unfair I know but this is only to make you guy aware of this (please ignore if you're already). Here is the thing: The Jeff Bezos' Electricity Metaphor: http://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_bezos_on_the_next_web_innovation.html Makes (probably) any smalltalker remember the Alan Kay's talk about having in the internet an IP for every object and spectacular computer science ideas like that. The js everywhere trend makes a lot of sense. Once it achieves critical mass it might tempt intel and friends to do some hardware accelerator for js VM's. Who knows. We have a long way to go but, in the meantime, all js staked frameworks make a lot of sense and WILL get traction because of that. Example: http://www.wakanda.org/ A talk here: https://vimeo.com/31603156 So.. the unfair question here would be: What we'll have to match that competitiveness? sebastian o/ PS: Pharo + WebSockets + Amber sounds in that line doesn't?
well everything that beats js fsucked up semantics... I just hear I voice in my head Array(16).join("lol" - 2) + " Batman!"; so in that matter, yes Amber good, and no javascript bad! On 2012-10-15, at 22:02, sebastian@flowingconcept.com wrote:
Hi guys,
all comparisons are unfair I know but this is only to make you guy aware of this (please ignore if you're already).
Here is the thing:
The Jeff Bezos' Electricity Metaphor: http://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_bezos_on_the_next_web_innovation.html
Makes (probably) any smalltalker remember the Alan Kay's talk about having in the internet an IP for every object and spectacular computer science ideas like that.
The js everywhere trend makes a lot of sense. Once it achieves critical mass it might tempt intel and friends to do some hardware accelerator for js VM's. Who knows. We have a long way to go but, in the meantime, all js staked frameworks make a lot of sense and WILL get traction because of that. Example:
A talk here: https://vimeo.com/31603156
So.. the unfair question here would be:
What we'll have to match that competitiveness?
sebastian
o/
PS: Pharo + WebSockets + Amber sounds in that line doesn't?
So.. the unfair question here would be:
What we'll have to match that competitiveness?
Aida/Web :) Watch few more months for Smalltalk MVC revival on the web app front-end with Aida, as so many JavaScript frameworks are doing right now (Backbone, Ember, Knockout, Angular, etc. etc.). And in real-time (WebSocket enabled)... A big plus over JS: component based! Janko Dne 15. 10. 2012 22:02, piše sebastian@flowingconcept.com:
Hi guys,
all comparisons are unfair I know but this is only to make you guy aware of this (please ignore if you're already).
Here is the thing:
The Jeff Bezos' Electricity Metaphor: http://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_bezos_on_the_next_web_innovation.html
Makes (probably) any smalltalker remember the Alan Kay's talk about having in the internet an IP for every object and spectacular computer science ideas like that.
The js everywhere trend makes a lot of sense. Once it achieves critical mass it might tempt intel and friends to do some hardware accelerator for js VM's. Who knows. We have a long way to go but, in the meantime, all js staked frameworks make a lot of sense and WILL get traction because of that. Example:
A talk here: https://vimeo.com/31603156
So.. the unfair question here would be:
What we'll have to match that competitiveness?
sebastian
o/
PS: Pharo + WebSockets + Amber sounds in that line doesn't?
-- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si
I've used Wakanda, WaveMaker and Sencha and a number of other one-stop solutions and found them unsatisfactory for a variety of reasons. Wakanda requires you to use a particular DB (NoSQL?) and is rigid about how you can lay out the tables. I remember, with WaveMaker, all the code ended up looking like: someObject.someOtherObject.yetAnotherObject.ownedObject.property.function() = someObject.someOtherObject.yetAnotherObject.ownedObject.property.differentFunction() * 0.5 The common feature these tools tend to have, in exchange for very slick interfaces for putting together CRUD apps is a near total lack of integration for all the things you come to expect as a modern developer: version control and other collaboration tools, test suites, refactoring, etc. But they definitely have the gee-whiz factor going for them.
Here we have IMHO an advantage and opportunity with Smalltalk for the web apps: *JavaScript is very hard for complex apps*. For the reasons others already expressed: lack of version control, strange errors, inadequate debugging, etc. That's why they are all that preprocessors like CoffeeScript and new MS TypeScript out there - to ease development and specially maintenance of any bit more complex JS web app. So, Aida plan is to use Amber to *emit* JavaScript code to the client while still preserve all the power and beauty of developing in classical Smalltalk environment: browsers, debuggers, inspectors, version control etc. And specially to develop and long-term maintain very complex web apps, which is currently near to impossible in plain JavaScript. Such Aida webapp will be still deployed to the server but with emitting JS to the client the app will actually run quite autonomous on the client, with just syncing data changes back to the server, while all UI interactions will happen locally on the client. Another Aida plan is to bring to the web all that Smalltalk has in 80's already on UI front: MVC, dependency mechanism with real-time updating all views, which are dependent on some data change, etc. And how MVC GUI architecture ideas from 80's look like? Read from in this book (which is from 90's actually): Smalltalk An Introduction to Application Development using VisualWorks http://stephane.ducasse.free.fr/FreeBooks/HopkinsHoran/HopkinsHoran.pdf p.287: The Dependency Mechanism p.312: Introduction to Models, Views and Controllers Best regards Janko Dne 16. 10. 2012 02:43, piše blake:
I've used Wakanda, WaveMaker and Sencha and a number of other one-stop solutions and found them unsatisfactory for a variety of reasons.
Wakanda requires you to use a particular DB (NoSQL?) and is rigid about how you can lay out the tables.
I remember, with WaveMaker, all the code ended up looking like:
someObject.someOtherObject.yetAnotherObject.ownedObject.property.function() = someObject.someOtherObject.yetAnotherObject.ownedObject.property.differentFunction() * 0.5
The common feature these tools tend to have, in exchange for very slick interfaces for putting together CRUD apps is a near total lack of integration for all the things you come to expect as a modern developer: version control and other collaboration tools, test suites, refactoring, etc.
But they definitely have the gee-whiz factor going for them.
-- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si
On 15 October 2012 22:02, <sebastian@flowingconcept.com> wrote:
Hi guys,
all comparisons are unfair I know but this is only to make you guy aware of this (please ignore if you're already).
Here is the thing:
The Jeff Bezos' Electricity Metaphor: http://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_bezos_on_the_next_web_innovation.html
after watching this vid, i want to paraphrase his last sentence: your your brain for more than js :)
Makes (probably) any smalltalker remember the Alan Kay's talk about having in the internet an IP for every object and spectacular computer science ideas like that.
The js everywhere trend makes a lot of sense. Once it achieves critical mass it might tempt intel and friends to do some hardware accelerator for js VM's. Who knows. We have a long way to go but, in the meantime, all js staked frameworks make a lot of sense and WILL get traction because of that. Example:
A talk here: https://vimeo.com/31603156
So.. the unfair question here would be:
What we'll have to match that competitiveness?
sebastian
o/
PS: Pharo + WebSockets + Amber sounds in that line doesn't?
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
Frankly , I don't find web development that much useful and certainly don't believe that web is the future. My money is on the desktop. The very fact that the most popular web app, by far nowdays is facebook and the very fact that if you took facebook out today people would lose nothing in practicality tells so much about what web is all about. Web is not all bad of course, its still without any doubt the library of Alexandria but most of it , its just pointless way of killing your free time. The trend is to push web to the desktop and I think that has been proven a very bad idea. Web technology is based on some very bad design decisions and it makes me laugh when technologies like node.js take the web world by storm when desktop has similar technologies for far too long. If you looks carefully you will also see that Desktop is more and more pushing to the web, so for me it looks like web development is not going to have much of a chance. Many existing programming languages are already compiling to js, but even in that case why even bother ? IT makes sense for mobile devices , but what will happen if for example pharo and squeak start making ports for those mobile devices . Why bother with JS at all ? I try to make a visual coding project and I did consider amber and some js libraries and to my surprise the only dynamic graphic library I found of some serious usefulness was processing.js and its just too slow for what I want to achieve. And if you think about all those so called web technologies are really sandboxed , limited and slow desktop technologies. I still find the fact that a browser can run anywhere extremely tempting but in the end I dont think its really worth it. And yes I disagree with the video of trying to say that web is like electricity. When electricity came out there was nothing like it, with the web its very diffirent because not only desktop can do many of the things that web can , all web technologies are practically desktop technologies. Also even if you take a look at how much Desktop has progressed 10 years and how much the web , even though the web is super hyped those past 10 years you will get a very clear picture of how things really are. I dont think squeak or pharo should turn their backs to the web technologies , js and all others (and I love the fact that projects like amber do exist) but I would prefer if more effort is spent on making sure that they work on all platforms equally good.
From where I am standing there is no competitiveness in usefulness when it comes to JS and web technology there is just competitiveness in popularity and hype. And I would rather prefer if pharo and squeak dont play that game and continue being actually useful , innovative , easy to use , technologies. Web is certainly tempting but in the end its an empty promise. Â
________________________________ From: "sebastian@flowingconcept.com" <sebastian@flowingconcept.com> To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Sent: Monday, 15 October 2012, 23:02 Subject: [Pharo-project] A trend and an unfair comparison about js everywhere Hi guys, all comparisons are unfair I know but this is only to make you guy aware of this (please ignore if you're already). Here is the thing: The Jeff Bezos' Electricity Metaphor: http://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_bezos_on_the_next_web_innovation.html Makes (probably) any smalltalker remember the Alan Kay's talk about having in the internet an IP for every object and spectacular computer science ideas like that. The js everywhere trend makes a lot of sense. Once it achieves critical mass it might tempt intel and friends to do some hardware accelerator for js VM's. Who knows. We have a long way to go but, in the meantime, all js staked frameworks make a lot of sense and WILL get traction because of that. Example: http://www.wakanda.org/ A talk here: https://vimeo.com/31603156 So.. the unfair question here would be: What we'll have to match that competitiveness? sebastian o/ PS: Pharo + WebSockets + Amber sounds in that line doesn't?
Hi Dimitris, I wont judge the success of the web approach just by few failed attempts, (and by Facebook :). Web technologies certainly have a potential to replace GUI ones on the desktop and became an universal UI technology. Universal in the sense that it run everywhere, on all platforms, you don't need to care about native look&feel, no need to program for Android, then for iOS, then for Win mobile, etc. Universal also in sense that it covers 99% of apps, while for remaining 1% we will still develop in native environments. And this replacing is actually happening with faster and faster speed. Even Microsoft finally gave up and announce to support web trio (HTML5, CSS, JS) in Windows 8. Two years ago they even announced that web trio will remain their only technology for the client. We are yet at the beginning of that process, web app development is still in its infancy comparing to GUI ones. Adequate dev.tools are lacking. And there are always a risk that some technology goes the wrong way, as went for instance SOA (Service Oriented Arcitecture), XML also, Java, etc. HTML5 is currently such a fast growing thing that it can goes the same path and end up just too complex to use. As in case of SOA or XML. But on the other hand web browser vendors are incredible cooperative this time, they usually don't just agree on some bad and complex compromise (as it was case on SOA and XML) but are successful to find the best and specially, the simplest API at the end. This gives us a big hope that HTML5 will have a long future and to actually become an universal UI. Well, JavaScript, here the story is more complex... Best regards Janko Dne 16. 10. 2012 09:55, piše dimitris chloupis:
Frankly , I don't find web development that much useful and certainly don't believe that web is the future. My money is on the desktop.
The very fact that the most popular web app, by far nowdays is facebook and the very fact that if you took facebook out today people would lose nothing in practicality tells so much about what web is all about. Web is not all bad of course, its still without any doubt the library of Alexandria but most of it , its just pointless way of killing your free time.
The trend is to push web to the desktop and I think that has been proven a very bad idea. Web technology is based on some very bad design decisions and it makes me laugh when technologies like node.js take the web world by storm when desktop has similar technologies for far too long.
If you looks carefully you will also see that Desktop is more and more pushing to the web, so for me it looks like web development is not going to have much of a chance. Many existing programming languages are already compiling to js, but even in that case why even bother ? IT makes sense for mobile devices , but what will happen if for example pharo and squeak start making ports for those mobile devices . Why bother with JS at all ?
I try to make a visual coding project and I did consider amber and some js libraries and to my surprise the only dynamic graphic library I found of some serious usefulness was processing.js and its just too slow for what I want to achieve. And if you think about all those so called web technologies are really sandboxed , limited and slow desktop technologies.
I still find the fact that a browser can run anywhere extremely tempting but in the end I dont think its really worth it. And yes I disagree with the video of trying to say that web is like electricity. When electricity came out there was nothing like it, with the web its very diffirent because not only desktop can do many of the things that web can , all web technologies are practically desktop technologies. Also even if you take a look at how much Desktop has progressed 10 years and how much the web , even though the web is super hyped those past 10 years you will get a very clear picture of how things really are.
I dont think squeak or pharo should turn their backs to the web technologies , js and all others (and I love the fact that projects like amber do exist) but I would prefer if more effort is spent on making sure that they work on all platforms equally good.
From where I am standing there is no competitiveness in usefulness when it comes to JS and web technology there is just competitiveness in popularity and hype. And I would rather prefer if pharo and squeak dont play that game and continue being actually useful , innovative , easy to use , technologies. Web is certainly tempting but in the end its an empty promise.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* "sebastian@flowingconcept.com" <sebastian@flowingconcept.com> *To:* Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr *Sent:* Monday, 15 October 2012, 23:02 *Subject:* [Pharo-project] A trend and an unfair comparison about js everywhere
Hi guys,
all comparisons are unfair I know but this is only to make you guy aware of this (please ignore if you're already).
Here is the thing:
The Jeff Bezos' Electricity Metaphor: http://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_bezos_on_the_next_web_innovation.html
Makes (probably) any smalltalker remember the Alan Kay's talk about having in the internet an IP for every object and spectacular computer science ideas like that.
The js everywhere trend makes a lot of sense. Once it achieves critical mass it might tempt intel and friends to do some hardware accelerator for js VM's. Who knows. We have a long way to go but, in the meantime, all js staked frameworks make a lot of sense and WILL get traction because of that. Example:
A talk here: https://vimeo.com/31603156
So.. the unfair question here would be:
What we'll have to match that competitiveness?
sebastian
o/
PS: Pharo + WebSockets + Amber sounds in that line doesn't?
-- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si
With HTML and the upcoming WebSockets standard we will see a shift in web programming. Web applications are getting true client server systems in a much more difficult environment than a traditional (high-speed, low latency) company IT world. Than on the other hand - and we've seen examples in the smalltalk world already - solution will be available to produce desktop apps (using the same technology as mentioned above - but in an all-in-one-server app) and Internet based web applications. The base key technologies in this area will be how to handle the client approach and what the part of Smalltalk can be here and a way to do data exchange between internet database and local database. The server part ? Well integrate the WebSocket technology by the vendors and free Smalltalk projects and you have Smalltalk there. Marten
I dont have the habbit of making general claims or expressing general opinion when it come to coding which is a practical field. My 2 areas of interest is sound synthesis and graphics. Apple has promised html5 as the replacement to flash technology. Flash is mainly a desktop technology masked as web technology . Html5 is still extremely slow, at least some comparison I have tried. Webgl is partially supported and very much slow still. Library wise for graphics I could find maybe 4, 5 libraries to work with Javascript. Javascript is a programming language like anything else but many of the technologies I need to learn like DOM , XML , hmtl etc look weird , ugly and not that useful compared to my experience with for example morphic or desktop gui and graphic libraries. I know a few web developers they do complain a lot about the state of web technology in general and the problems that have to deal with. Especially in graphics and audio field, library wise desktop and the web are like night and day. And all that for js , which is the good case as soon as we enter php and drupal territory the horror stories just explode. I had my share of bad experiences , C++ MFC was also a nightmare to manage but back then things coding wise were not as complex they are today. I brought facebook as an example because not talking about facebook while talking about web is like talking about OS and not talking about windows. I have not any doubts that a capable coder will be able to make an exceptional good web application. Afterall I use one , dropbox , and I just would not want to live without it because it safe guards all my work documents. So my point was not that web development is not good, or that is not that future. My point is that with the state of web libraries, we will see more and more desktop languages and libraries penetrating the web (python and webgl for example) to that extend that web will be nothing more than extension of desktop development. If some choose to state that as web development , thats great for them , its not for me. When I see for example smalltalk , I see a language that is pretty much unknown yet its the language that is the most copied from by any kind of technology. Innovative products don't become popular but they do drive the future behind the curtains. Popular products tend to take all the credit but contribute almost nothing. My only concern is if we try to make smalltalk fit the style of the web, wont that mean that we compromise the quality of smalltalk libraries ? If we try to make desktop comply with web standards wont that lower the bar ? Would not be much better if we just port well proven desktop technologies to the web as it is already hapenning ( see WebGL) ? I dont have a doubt that HMTL5 will have a long future . I dont have a doubt that Web technology will improve , JS for example has come a long way. I do think already web development is overtaken by desktop development in many fields, mainly because its not prudent to just throw to the bin all those well proven desktop technologies. We just make sure they work in browser. I continue learning JS (amber too) and web technologies and I hope for the best. I only wanted to present a point of view that is rarely seen when someone talks about the web and . I Feel I am not the only one frustrated with the direction web is taking, its not an infancy problem its a problem of very bad foundation and coding style. Its something I experienced a lot while coding in C++ and Java. It may be just me and I dont mind if someone will disagree with me. I am also happy that smalltalk creates its own web libraries that do follow closely the standards set by the language itself. I only hope that continues. ________________________________ From: Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@eranova.si> To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Cc: Aida/Web general discussion list <aida@aidaweb.si> Sent: Tuesday, 16 October 2012, 12:29 Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] A trend and an unfair comparison about js everywhere Hi Dimitris, I wont judge the success of the web approach just by few failed attempts, (and by Facebook :). Web technologies certainly have a potential to replace GUI ones on the desktop and became an universal UI technology. Universal in the sense that it run everywhere, on all platforms, you don't need to care about native look&feel, no need to program for Android, then for iOS, then for Win mobile, etc. Universal also in sense that it covers 99% of apps, while for remaining 1% we will still develop in native environments. And this replacing is actually happening with faster and faster speed. Even Microsoft finally gave up and announce to support web trio (HTML5, CSS, JS) in Windows 8. Two years ago they even announced that web trio will remain their only technology for the client. We are yet at the beginning of that process, web app development is still in its infancy comparing to GUI ones. Adequate dev.tools are lacking. And there are always a risk that some technology goes the wrong way, as went for instance SOA (Service Oriented Arcitecture), XML also, Java, etc. HTML5 is currently such a fast growing thing that it can goes the same path and end up just too complex to use. As in case of SOA or XML. But on the other hand web browser vendors are incredible cooperative this time, they usually don't just agree on some bad and complex compromise (as it was case on SOA and XML) but are successful to find the best and specially, the simplest API at the end. This gives us a big hope that HTML5 will have a long future and to actually become an universal UI. Well, JavaScript, here the story is more complex... Best regards Janko Dne 16. 10. 2012 09:55, piše dimitris chloupis:
Frankly , I don't find web development that much useful and certainly don't believe that web is the future. My money is on the desktop.
The very fact that the most popular web app, by far nowdays is facebook and the very fact that if you took facebook out today people would lose nothing in practicality tells so much about what web is all about. Web is not all bad of course, its still without any doubt the library of Alexandria but most of it , its just pointless way of killing your free time.
The trend is to push web to the desktop and I think that has been proven a very bad idea. Web technology is based on some very bad design decisions and it makes me laugh when technologies like node.js take the web world by storm when desktop has similar technologies for far too long.
If you looks carefully you will also see that Desktop is more and more pushing to the web, so for me it looks like web development is not going to have much of a chance. Many existing programming languages are already compiling to js, but even in that case why even bother ? IT makes sense for mobile devices , but what will happen if for example pharo and squeak start making ports for those mobile devices . Why bother with JS at all ?
I try to make a visual coding project and I did consider amber and some js libraries and to my surprise the only dynamic graphic library I found of some serious usefulness was processing.js and its just too slow for what I want to achieve. And if you think about all those so called web technologies are really sandboxed , limited and slow desktop technologies.
I still find the fact that a browser can run anywhere extremely tempting but in the end I dont think its really worth it. And yes I disagree with the video of trying to say that web is like electricity. When electricity came out there was nothing like it, with the web its very diffirent because not only desktop can do many of the things that web can , all web technologies are practically desktop technologies. Also even if you take a look at how much Desktop has progressed 10 years and how much the web , even though the web is super hyped those past 10 years you will get a very clear picture of how things really are.
I dont think squeak or pharo should turn their backs to the web technologies , js and all others (and I love the fact that projects like amber do exist) but I would prefer if more effort is spent on making sure that they work on all platforms equally good.
From where I am standing there is no competitiveness in usefulness when it comes to JS and web technology there is just competitiveness in popularity and hype. And I would rather prefer if pharo and squeak dont play that game and continue being actually useful , innovative , easy to use , technologies. Web is certainly tempting but in the end its an empty promise.Â
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* "sebastian@flowingconcept.com" <sebastian@flowingconcept.com> *To:* Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr *Sent:* Monday, 15 October 2012, 23:02 *Subject:* [Pharo-project] A trend and an unfair comparison about js everywhere
Hi guys,
all comparisons are unfair I know but this is only to make you guy aware of this (please ignore if you're already).
Here is the thing:
The Jeff Bezos' Electricity Metaphor: http://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_bezos_on_the_next_web_innovation.html
Makes (probably) any smalltalker remember the Alan Kay's talk about having in the internet an IP for every object and spectacular computer science ideas like that.
The js everywhere trend makes a lot of sense. Once it achieves critical mass it might tempt intel and friends to do some hardware accelerator for js VM's. Who knows. We have a long way to go but, in the meantime, all js staked frameworks make a lot of sense and WILL get traction because of that. Example:
A talk here: https://vimeo.com/31603156
So.. the unfair question here would be:
What we'll have to match that competitiveness?
sebastian
o/
PS: Pharo + WebSockets + Amber sounds in that line doesn't?
-- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si
Dne 16. 10. 2012 12:10, piše dimitris chloupis:
I dont have the habbit of making general claims or expressing general opinion when it come to coding which is a practical field.
My 2 areas of interest is sound synthesis and graphics. Apple has promised html5 as the replacement to flash technology. Flash is mainly a desktop technology masked as web technology . Html5 is still extremely slow, at least some comparison I have tried. Webgl is partially supported and very much slow still. Library wise for graphics I could find maybe 4, 5 libraries to work with Javascript. Javascript is a programming language like anything else but many of the technologies I need to learn like DOM , XML , hmtl etc look weird , ugly and not that useful compared to my experience with for example morphic or desktop gui and graphic libraries. I know a few web developers they do complain a lot about the state of web technology in general and the problems that have to deal with.
Especially in graphics and audio field, library wise desktop and the web are like night and day.
And all that for js , which is the good case as soon as we enter php and drupal territory the horror stories just explode. I had my share of bad experiences , C++ MFC was also a nightmare to manage but back then things coding wise were not as complex they are today. I brought facebook as an example because not talking about facebook while talking about web is like talking about OS and not talking about windows.
I have not any doubts that a capable coder will be able to make an exceptional good web application. Afterall I use one , dropbox , and I just would not want to live without it because it safe guards all my work documents. So my point was not that web development is not good, or that is not that future. My point is that with the state of web libraries, we will see more and more desktop languages and libraries penetrating the web (python and webgl for example) to that extend that web will be nothing more than extension of desktop development. If some choose to state that as web development , thats great for them , its not for me.
When I see for example smalltalk , I see a language that is pretty much unknown yet its the language that is the most copied from by any kind of technology. Innovative products don't become popular but they do drive the future behind the curtains. Popular products tend to take all the credit but contribute almost nothing.
My only concern is if we try to make smalltalk fit the style of the web, wont that mean that we compromise the quality of smalltalk libraries ? If we try to make desktop comply with web standards wont that lower the bar ? Would not be much better if we just port well proven desktop technologies to the web as it is already hapenning ( see WebGL) ?
I dont have a doubt that HMTL5 will have a long future . I dont have a doubt that Web technology will improve , JS for example has come a long way. I do think already web development is overtaken by desktop development in many fields, mainly because its not prudent to just throw to the bin all those well proven desktop technologies. We just make sure they work in browser.
I continue learning JS (amber too) and web technologies and I hope for the best. I only wanted to present a point of view that is rarely seen when someone talks about the web and . I Feel I am not the only one frustrated with the direction web is taking, its not an infancy problem its a problem of very bad foundation and coding style. Its something I experienced a lot while coding in C++ and Java. It may be just me and I dont mind if someone will disagree with me.
I am also happy that smalltalk creates its own web libraries that do follow closely the standards set by the language itself. I only hope that continues.
This is exactly what we should IMHO continue to do. That is, to cultivate the wild web with Smalltalk elegance and beauty :) Best regards Janko
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@eranova.si> *To:* Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr *Cc:* Aida/Web general discussion list <aida@aidaweb.si> *Sent:* Tuesday, 16 October 2012, 12:29 *Subject:* Re: [Pharo-project] A trend and an unfair comparison about js everywhere
Hi Dimitris,
I wont judge the success of the web approach just by few failed attempts, (and by Facebook :). Web technologies certainly have a potential to replace GUI ones on the desktop and became an universal UI technology. Universal in the sense that it run everywhere, on all platforms, you don't need to care about native look&feel, no need to program for Android, then for iOS, then for Win mobile, etc. Universal also in sense that it covers 99% of apps, while for remaining 1% we will still develop in native environments.
And this replacing is actually happening with faster and faster speed. Even Microsoft finally gave up and announce to support web trio (HTML5, CSS, JS) in Windows 8. Two years ago they even announced that web trio will remain their only technology for the client.
We are yet at the beginning of that process, web app development is still in its infancy comparing to GUI ones. Adequate dev.tools are lacking. And there are always a risk that some technology goes the wrong way, as went for instance SOA (Service Oriented Arcitecture), XML also, Java, etc. HTML5 is currently such a fast growing thing that it can goes the same path and end up just too complex to use. As in case of SOA or XML.
But on the other hand web browser vendors are incredible cooperative this time, they usually don't just agree on some bad and complex compromise (as it was case on SOA and XML) but are successful to find the best and specially, the simplest API at the end. This gives us a big hope that HTML5 will have a long future and to actually become an universal UI. Well, JavaScript, here the story is more complex...
Best regards Janko
Dne 16. 10. 2012 09:55, piše dimitris chloupis:
Frankly , I don't find web development that much useful and certainly don't believe that web is the future. My money is on the desktop.
The very fact that the most popular web app, by far nowdays is facebook and the very fact that if you took facebook out today people would lose nothing in practicality tells so much about what web is all about. Web is not all bad of course, its still without any doubt the library of Alexandria but most of it , its just pointless way of killing your free time.
The trend is to push web to the desktop and I think that has been proven a very bad idea. Web technology is based on some very bad design decisions and it makes me laugh when technologies like node.js take the web world by storm when desktop has similar technologies for far too long.
If you looks carefully you will also see that Desktop is more and more pushing to the web, so for me it looks like web development is not going to have much of a chance. Many existing programming languages are already compiling to js, but even in that case why even bother ? IT makes sense for mobile devices , but what will happen if for example pharo and squeak start making ports for those mobile devices . Why bother with JS at all ?
I try to make a visual coding project and I did consider amber and some js libraries and to my surprise the only dynamic graphic library I found of some serious usefulness was processing.js and its just too slow for what I want to achieve. And if you think about all those so called web technologies are really sandboxed , limited and slow desktop technologies.
I still find the fact that a browser can run anywhere extremely tempting but in the end I dont think its really worth it. And yes I disagree with the video of trying to say that web is like electricity. When electricity came out there was nothing like it, with the web its very diffirent because not only desktop can do many of the things that web can , all web technologies are practically desktop technologies. Also even if you take a look at how much Desktop has progressed 10 years and how much the web , even though the web is super hyped those past 10 years you will get a very clear picture of how things really are.
I dont think squeak or pharo should turn their backs to the web technologies , js and all others (and I love the fact that projects like amber do exist) but I would prefer if more effort is spent on making sure that they work on all platforms equally good.
From where I am standing there is no competitiveness in usefulness when it comes to JS and web technology there is just competitiveness in popularity and hype. And I would rather prefer if pharo and squeak dont play that game and continue being actually useful , innovative , easy to use , technologies. Web is certainly tempting but in the end its an empty promise.
------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* "sebastian@flowingconcept.com <mailto:sebastian@flowingconcept.com>" <sebastian@flowingconcept.com <mailto:sebastian@flowingconcept.com>> *To:* Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr <mailto:Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr> *Sent:* Monday, 15 October 2012, 23:02 *Subject:* [Pharo-project] A trend and an unfair comparison about js everywhere
Hi guys,
all comparisons are unfair I know but this is only to make you guy aware of this (please ignore if you're already).
Here is the thing:
The Jeff Bezos' Electricity Metaphor: http://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_bezos_on_the_next_web_innovation.html
Makes (probably) any smalltalker remember the Alan Kay's talk about having in the internet an IP for every object and spectacular computer science ideas like that.
The js everywhere trend makes a lot of sense. Once it achieves critical mass it might tempt intel and friends to do some hardware accelerator for js VM's. Who knows. We have a long way to go but, in the meantime, all js staked frameworks make a lot of sense and WILL get traction because of that. Example:
A talk here: https://vimeo.com/31603156
So.. the unfair question here would be:
What we'll have to match that competitiveness?
sebastian
o/
PS: Pharo + WebSockets + Amber sounds in that line doesn't?
-- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si <http://www.aidaweb.si/>
-- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si
On Oct 16, 2012, at 12:10 PM, dimitris chloupis wrote:
My only concern is if we try to make smalltalk fit the style of the web, wont that mean that we compromise the quality of smalltalk libraries ?
We are not :) Now as usual there is a man power problem. If you pays us 50 engineers during 2 years you will have a lot more than what we have in pharo :)
If we try to make desktop comply with web standards wont that lower the bar ? Would not be much better if we just port well proven desktop technologies to the web as it is already hapenning ( see WebGL) ?
thank you all for the many interesting opinions and thoughtful arguments. I'll have this in mind for my talk too sebastian o/ ----- Original Message ----- From: "Stéphane Ducasse" <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr, "dimitris chloupis" <thekilon@yahoo.co.uk> Sent: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 10:38:06 AM Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] A trend and an unfair comparison about js everywhere On Oct 16, 2012, at 12:10 PM, dimitris chloupis wrote:
My only concern is if we try to make smalltalk fit the style of the web, wont that mean that we compromise the quality of smalltalk libraries ?
We are not :) Now as usual there is a man power problem. If you pays us 50 engineers during 2 years you will have a lot more than what we have in pharo :)
If we try to make desktop comply with web standards wont that lower the bar ? Would not be much better if we just port well proven desktop technologies to the web as it is already hapenning ( see WebGL) ?
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:55 AM, dimitris chloupis <thekilon@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Frankly , I don't find web development that much useful and certainly don't believe that web is the future. My money is on the desktop.
Desktops are a fluke. "Nobody" wanted one before 1995, and "nobody" will want one after 2015. Or maybe now. :) Not to say your points about development are wrong. But as Alan Kay has pointed out, we are compulsive wheel re-inventers. ===Blake===
On 16 October 2012 20:10, blake <dsblakewatson@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:55 AM, dimitris chloupis <thekilon@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Frankly , I don't find web development that much useful and certainly don't believe that web is the future. My money is on the desktop.
Desktops are a fluke. "Nobody" wanted one before 1995, and "nobody" will want one after 2015. Or maybe now. :)
i do not think 'desktop' is a right term. for me, personal computing (and personal computers) is better definition. And let me remind you , that personal computers appeared long before 1995. IMO, the fundamental difference between personal computer apps, that they rely on capabilities of your personal computer. While web-apps, obviously not. Web-apps mainly relocating the computation onto another computer, effectively making your personal one to serve as a remote (even if media-rich) terminal, connected to mainframe. Perhaps web was the catalyst for emergence of cloud-computing. But conceptually, cloud computing is completely orthogonal to 'web', it is just turning computing power into easily accessible commodity. Web, of course, can enjoy exploiting this new approach, as well as any others too. And of course, for certain applications , web will be never completely acceptable, due to: - network latency - security - reliability - etc
Not to say your points about development are wrong. But as Alan Kay has pointed out, we are compulsive wheel re-inventers.
===Blake===
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
And let me remind you , that personal computers appeared long before 1995.
I got my Apple ][+ in 1979. But I was a geek, and both my parents were geeks. (Before that, my dad and I worked on our own ADVENT, using the Fortran code from Colossal Cave.) Geeks will doubtless still continue to have and want desktops.
IMO, the fundamental difference between personal computer apps, that they rely on capabilities of your personal computer. While web-apps, obviously not.
Screen-size is a personal computer capability. Input devices are. Other output devices (e.g., sounds or vibrations) are. Flash is. Anything executing locally requires understanding of capabilities. Bandwidth, although not usually bottlenecked at the device point these days, is still a capability. As for your list of "never"s--well, never say never. The Internet in general is an unsafe mess--and yet here we are. ===Blake===
On 16 October 2012 21:39, blake <dsblakewatson@gmail.com> wrote:
And let me remind you , that personal computers appeared long before 1995.
I got my Apple ][+ in 1979. But I was a geek, and both my parents were geeks. (Before that, my dad and I worked on our own ADVENT, using the Fortran code from Colossal Cave.)
Geeks will doubtless still continue to have and want desktops.
IMO, the fundamental difference between personal computer apps, that they rely on capabilities of your personal computer. While web-apps, obviously not.
Screen-size is a personal computer capability. Input devices are. Other output devices (e.g., sounds or vibrations) are. Flash is. Anything executing locally requires understanding of capabilities. Bandwidth, although not usually bottlenecked at the device point these days, is still a capability.
As for your list of "never"s--well, never say never.
i am pretty confident, as long as speed of light remains finite :)
The Internet in general is an unsafe mess--and yet here we are.
let the carrier be with you! (an old modem era joke ;)
===Blake===
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
Dne 16. 10. 2012 20:43, piše Igor Stasenko:
IMO, the fundamental difference between personal computer apps, that they rely on capabilities of your personal computer. While web-apps, obviously not. Web-apps mainly relocating the computation onto another computer, effectively making your personal one to serve as a remote (even if media-rich) terminal, connected to mainframe.
Perhaps web was the catalyst for emergence of cloud-computing. But conceptually, cloud computing is completely orthogonal to 'web', it is just turning computing power into easily accessible commodity. Web, of course, can enjoy exploiting this new approach, as well as any others too.
Nowadays web apps are more and more autonomous and client-centric, connecting not just to one server but *many* different services and resources somewhere from the cloud *at once*. Such app is therefore not server-centric anymore but client-centric, as this article explains nicely: Why The Future Of Software And Apps Is Serverless http://www.readwriteweb.com/cloud/2012/10/why-the-future-of-software-and-app... Where Smalltalk can find its place in such future? 1. Providing services from the cloud (that's why all cloud related Smalltalk initiatives needs to be supported) 2. Client-centric web apps (that's why Amber and related initiatives are so important) Note also that classic Smalltalk environments like Pharo are still useful and needed in both cases, because we can *develop* both cloud services and client web apps on classic environments with their superior tools, but *deploy* them both in cloud (headless) and on the client (like by Amber generating/emitting JS code to the client). Best regards Janko -- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:55 AM, dimitris chloupis <thekilon@yahoo.co.uk>wrote:
Frankly , I don't find web development that much useful and certainly don't believe that web is the future. My money is on the desktop.
I wouldn't put your money on the desktop. While reports of the desktop's demise are premature, it's no longer growing. The desktop is alive and well but in a niche. The future (actually the present) is on the smart phone, or embedded in almost anything. We may spend or time in front of a desktop but the world is watching, touching, feeling, listening and speaking to their phone. The phone however is a mobile device and hence it needs the internet and the web is the internet's gui, at least its non-proprietary gui (iTunes, appStore et al being the proprietary guis). The iPhone shows that framework is more important than programming language, and that js isn't necessarily important for mobile, but it is considered neutral compared to e.g. flash.
The very fact that the most popular web app, by far nowdays is facebook and the very fact that if you took facebook out today people would lose nothing in practicality tells so much about what web is all about. Web is not all bad of course, its still without any doubt the library of Alexandria but most of it , its just pointless way of killing your free time.
The trend is to push web to the desktop and I think that has been proven a very bad idea. Web technology is based on some very bad design decisions and it makes me laugh when technologies like node.js take the web world by storm when desktop has similar technologies for far too long.
If you looks carefully you will also see that Desktop is more and more pushing to the web, so for me it looks like web development is not going to have much of a chance. Many existing programming languages are already compiling to js, but even in that case why even bother ? IT makes sense for mobile devices , but what will happen if for example pharo and squeak start making ports for those mobile devices . Why bother with JS at all ?
I try to make a visual coding project and I did consider amber and some js libraries and to my surprise the only dynamic graphic library I found of some serious usefulness was processing.js and its just too slow for what I want to achieve. And if you think about all those so called web technologies are really sandboxed , limited and slow desktop technologies.
I still find the fact that a browser can run anywhere extremely tempting but in the end I dont think its really worth it. And yes I disagree with the video of trying to say that web is like electricity. When electricity came out there was nothing like it, with the web its very diffirent because not only desktop can do many of the things that web can , all web technologies are practically desktop technologies. Also even if you take a look at how much Desktop has progressed 10 years and how much the web , even though the web is super hyped those past 10 years you will get a very clear picture of how things really are.
I dont think squeak or pharo should turn their backs to the web technologies , js and all others (and I love the fact that projects like amber do exist) but I would prefer if more effort is spent on making sure that they work on all platforms equally good.
From where I am standing there is no competitiveness in usefulness when it comes to JS and web technology there is just competitiveness in popularity and hype. And I would rather prefer if pharo and squeak dont play that game and continue being actually useful , innovative , easy to use , technologies. Web is certainly tempting but in the end its an empty promise.
------------------------------ *From:* "sebastian@flowingconcept.com" <sebastian@flowingconcept.com> *To:* Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr *Sent:* Monday, 15 October 2012, 23:02 *Subject:* [Pharo-project] A trend and an unfair comparison about js everywhere
Hi guys,
all comparisons are unfair I know but this is only to make you guy aware of this (please ignore if you're already).
Here is the thing:
The Jeff Bezos' Electricity Metaphor: http://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_bezos_on_the_next_web_innovation.html
Makes (probably) any smalltalker remember the Alan Kay's talk about having in the internet an IP for every object and spectacular computer science ideas like that.
The js everywhere trend makes a lot of sense. Once it achieves critical mass it might tempt intel and friends to do some hardware accelerator for js VM's. Who knows. We have a long way to go but, in the meantime, all js staked frameworks make a lot of sense and WILL get traction because of that. Example:
A talk here: https://vimeo.com/31603156
So.. the unfair question here would be:
What we'll have to match that competitiveness?
sebastian
o/
PS: Pharo + WebSockets + Amber sounds in that line doesn't?
-- best, Eliot
On 16 October 2012 20:44, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda@gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:55 AM, dimitris chloupis <thekilon@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
Frankly , I don't find web development that much useful and certainly don't believe that web is the future. My money is on the desktop.
I wouldn't put your money on the desktop. While reports of the desktop's demise are premature, it's no longer growing. The desktop is alive and well but in a niche. The future (actually the present) is on the smart phone, or embedded in almost anything. We may spend or time in front of a desktop but the world is watching, touching, feeling, listening and speaking to their phone.
To me those gadgets is just highly portable personal computers. The big paradigm shift, is that they are always connected to network, while for desktop systems this was ultimately not necessary and optional.
The phone however is a mobile device and hence it needs the internet and the web is the internet's gui, at least its non-proprietary gui (iTunes, appStore et al being the proprietary guis). The iPhone shows that framework is more important than programming language, and that js isn't necessarily important for mobile, but it is considered neutral compared to e.g. flash.
Yes, you cannot speak or watch anything on the phone without being connected, because all content is delivered via network, and without connection (GPS/4G/WIFI) those gadgets is just useless pieces of glass and plastic. But regarding your comment about framework, i am not so sure. Maybe i am blind, but Apple frameworks don't impress me to the point that i could tell that it is far superior to anything existing. And take a look at xcode.. it just don't delivers. In fact, this is the worst integrated development environment i ever used before. Especially considering how much human/engineering resources Apple has. IMO, the reason why developers rush for iphone market is much much more simpler: MONEY.. Everyone thinks that they can sell their content to the millions and get rich fast (dreams, dreams).. Take the popularity of Objective-C language, for example: it was existed long before iphone(s).. and where it was? It skyrocketed in popularity just after i<cool expensive stuff> appeared.. So, saying that this is because "it so cool has uber frameworks" is sweet lies. During rush, people paying little attention to such insignificant detail(s) like language or framework. -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
Well I cannot argue that I can talk for the entire coding field. The field I am working on are 3d graphics, 2d graphics and audio / music. So when I posted my opinion it was largely based on my personal needs and expectations. I should have said "I don't believe that web is my future". 3d graphics wise, desktop not only is light years ahead any web technology out there but it also moves in warp speed. The progress in opengl , directX and graphic cards is just phenomenal. With the latest CUDA technology a graphic card can be even 100 times faster than a CPU , and this accelaration is no longer specialized on graphics alone , making this acceleration ideal for many different kinds of computation (but not all). The best library, web wise, so far is webgl which is a port of opengl es 2 to the web and very reliant on it. Webgl support is still messy across browser and the speed is still a joke even compared to some of the slowest modern desktops (even 10 years old desktops). So 3d department is pretty much non existent web wise. If you take a look to many so called "3d browser games" you will find out that they are not browser games at all and they are very much reliant on desktop they run on like QuakeLive. iPhone wise, it uses also opengl es 2 which is a cut down version of opengl 4 so again its desktop technology repackaged and re-marketed under a different name. Audio synthesis and music wise, there is some midi support for JS and some audio synthesis engines, but nothing nowhere close to what desktop has to offer in terms of products and libraries. Again iPhone seems to have quite a lot of music apps , but once again most of them are just small ports of desktop apps and they are extremely limited. Of course iPhone has a very small relation to web development per se since its pretty much close related to the same tools and libraries as the macos desktop. Of course the problem is that two fields I am touching here graphics and music are very dependent on processing power and execution speed , not ideal for either mobile development or web development. But still both are extremely popular fields, that guarantee the success of desktop for eons to come. I do understand however that other fields of coding are much easier to bring to the web and maybe to a degree this transition already has happened. But I cant feel qualified to talk about coding fields that I am not familiar with. Saying that there is a boom in game market concerning the mobile market with iOS and Android, again those are not web fields and still very reliant to desktop technology. The issues with those fields is that they boom because of the low cost of the devices and the games themselves but the graphic quality they offer is much lower to such extend that I dont think they pose any threat to pc and console game market. ________________________________ From: Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda@gmail.com> To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Sent: Tuesday, 16 October 2012, 21:44 Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] A trend and an unfair comparison about js everywhere On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 12:55 AM, dimitris chloupis <thekilon@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: Frankly , I don't find web development that much useful and certainly don't believe that web is the future. My money is on the desktop.
I wouldn't put your money on the desktop.  While reports of the desktop's demise are premature, it's no longer growing.  The desktop is alive and well but in a niche.   The future (actually the present) is on the smart phone, or embedded in almost anything.  We may spend or time in front of a desktop but the world is watching, touching, feeling, listening and speaking to their phone. The phone however is a mobile device and hence it needs the internet and the web is the internet's gui, at least its non-proprietary gui (iTunes, appStore et al being the proprietary guis).  The iPhone shows that framework is more important than programming language, and that js isn't necessarily important for mobile, but it is considered neutral compared to e.g. flash. Â
The very fact that the most popular web app, by far nowdays is facebook and the very fact that if you took facebook out today people would lose nothing in practicality tells so much about what web is all about. Web is not all bad of course, its still without any doubt the library of Alexandria but most of it , its just pointless way of killing your free time.
The trend is to push web to the desktop and I think that has been proven a very bad idea. Web technology is based on some very bad design decisions and it makes me laugh when technologies like node.js take the web world by storm when desktop has similar technologies for far too long.
If you looks carefully you will also see that Desktop is more and more pushing to the web, so for me it looks like web development is not going to have much of a chance. Many existing programming languages are already compiling to js, but even in that case why even bother ? IT makes sense for mobile devices , but what will happen if for example pharo and squeak start making ports for those mobile devices . Why bother with JS at all ?
I try to make a visual coding project and I did consider amber and some js libraries and to my surprise the only dynamic graphic library I found of some serious usefulness was processing.js and its just too slow for what I want to achieve. And if you think about all those so called web technologies are really sandboxed , limited and slow desktop technologies.
I still find the fact that a browser can run anywhere extremely tempting but in the end I dont think its really worth it. And yes I disagree with the video of trying to say that web is like electricity. When electricity came out there was nothing like it, with the web its very diffirent because not only desktop can do many of the things that web can , all web technologies are practically desktop technologies. Also even if you take a look at how much Desktop has progressed 10 years and how much the web , even though the web is super hyped those past 10 years you will get a very clear picture of how things really are.
I dont think squeak or pharo should turn their backs to the web technologies , js and all others (and I love the fact that projects like amber do exist) but I would prefer if more effort is spent on making sure that they work on all platforms equally good.
From where I am standing there is no competitiveness in usefulness when it comes to JS and web technology there is just competitiveness in popularity and hype. And I would rather prefer if pharo and squeak dont play that game and continue being actually useful , innovative , easy to use , technologies. Web is certainly tempting but in the end its an empty promise. Â
________________________________ From: "sebastian@flowingconcept.com" <sebastian@flowingconcept.com> To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Sent: Monday, 15 October 2012, 23:02 Subject: [Pharo-project] A trend and an unfair comparison about js everywhere
Hi guys,
all comparisons are unfair I know but this is only to make you guy aware of this (please ignore if you're already).
Here is the thing:
The Jeff Bezos' Electricity Metaphor: http://www.ted.com/talks/jeff_bezos_on_the_next_web_innovation.html
Makes (probably) any smalltalker remember the Alan Kay's talk about having in the internet an IP for every object and spectacular computer science ideas like that.
The js everywhere trend makes a lot of sense. Once it achieves critical mass it might tempt intel and friends to do some hardware accelerator for js VM's. Who knows. We have a long way to go
but, in the meantime, all js staked frameworks make a lot of sense and WILL get traction because of that. Example:
A talk here: https://vimeo.com/31603156
So.. the unfair question here would be:
What we'll have to match that competitiveness?
sebastian
o/
PS: Pharo + WebSockets + Amber sounds in that line doesn't?
-- best, Eliot
participants (10)
-
blake -
Camillo Bruni -
Dale Henrichs -
dimitris chloupis -
Eliot Miranda -
Igor Stasenko -
Janko Mivšek -
Marten Feldtmann -
sebastian＠flowingconcept.com -
Stéphane Ducasse