Linked by Kroc Camen on Sat 29th May 2010 20:41 UTC
Apple I've been meaning to write this for some time, and for all the time I delayed the more poignant the point I wanted to make started to become as new news came out further solidifying my angle. When I begun writing this article the iPad had not yet been revealed, iPhone OS 4 was not on the map and Apple had not yet purchased Lala. You've probably just noticed that all of these events in fact point toward Apple embracing the web more and in this article I will point out why this is not the case because I believe Apple's agenda here is similar to something we've already seen in recent history.
Thread beginning with comment 427201
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Native binaries, seriously?
by soulrebel123 on Sun 30th May 2010 08:11 UTC
soulrebel123
Member since:
2009-05-13

I really doubt that the web will accept binary applications as the standard way of doing things.
There are three problems:
- separation between logic and presentation. HTML enforces that and it's a good thing.
- application deployment, data synchronization, real portability and similar. The fat client has failed once.
- security. Sandboxing binaries is almost impossible. That will mean either viruses or complicated encryption certificates.

pNaCl is not that different from java applets.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Native binaries, seriously?
by rom508 on Sun 30th May 2010 11:31 in reply to "Native binaries, seriously?"
rom508 Member since:
2007-04-20

I really doubt that the web will accept binary applications as the standard way of doing things.
There are three problems:
- separation between logic and presentation. HTML enforces that and it's a good thing.
- application deployment, data synchronization, real portability and similar. The fat client has failed once.
- security. Sandboxing binaries is almost impossible. That will mean either viruses or complicated encryption certificates.


I wouldn't call HTML a web applications. Anything that you do on computers eventually ends up as binary code.

Java compiled into bytecodes, then interpreted into native machine instructions.

PHP/Perl/Python etc., interpreted into native machine instructions. That means if you want to be able to execute your PHP web application, you have to build the interpreter.

The beauty of binary applications is superior performance. No need for extra layers of translators and interpreters at run time.

HTML and JavaScript are dated and don't really scale. That's why you have people using ad hoc plugins like Java or Flash. Event good old HTTP protocol needs updating/replacing with something better. As for XML, it should just die asap.

Reply Parent Score: 1

Kroc Member since:
2005-11-10

HTML and JavaScript are dated and don't really scale.


Can you define ‘scale’? HTML has scaled horizontally to the entire world. It’s appeared on almost every platform on innumerable devices from an Apple II and Commodore 64 to smart phones. It has scaled to devices and uses far and beyond its original design or even what Sir Tim envisioned. Java cannot even come close to what HTML has achieved.

Vertically, JavaScript has seen a 1000 fold increase in speed in the last two years. It can be run at near-native speeds and improvements are still coming. It’s fast enough to now run a speech synthesizer in JavaScript, or run Quake II. That’s scaling, considering where JS came from only a few years ago. It might not be as fast as native code, but it has survived being pushed well beyond the boundaries it was designed for—that’s scaling.

Event good old HTTP protocol needs updating/replacing with something better


SPDY.

As for XML, it should just die asap.


JSON is the new XML, thank goodness.

Reply Parent Score: 1