Linked by David Adams on Sun 6th Nov 2011 04:35 UTC, submitted by twitterfire
Linux Linux advocates have for so long advocated browser-accessed software as a service as a way to break out of Microsoft's proprietary desktop. Now that this world has arrived, there's less incentive to work on native Linux apps.
Thread beginning with comment 496120
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: This is a bad thing?
by Fergy on Sun 6th Nov 2011 07:14 UTC in reply to "RE: This is a bad thing?"
Fergy
Member since:
2006-04-10

However, I'm now willing to commit myself to so many single points of failure (network connectivity, continued interest in the product on the provider's part, provider uptime, potential differences of opinion regarding the importance of various potential features, etc.)

I would think that webapps in the future will be able to run offline and be packaged in a download.
I guess when they solve those 2 problems you'll love webapps?

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: This is a bad thing?
by mappy on Sun 6th Nov 2011 08:37 in reply to "RE[2]: This is a bad thing?"
mappy Member since:
2010-06-02

I would think that webapps in the future will be able to run offline and be packaged in a download.
I guess when they solve those 2 problems you'll love webapps?


"In the future, we'll have a solution to a problem you didn't have with native apps"

Offline web applications are still slower and still don't use the native UI toolkit. Why put lipstick on a pig? Not everything should be delivered through a web browser.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE[4]: This is a bad thing?
by moondevil on Sun 6th Nov 2011 09:40 in reply to "RE[3]: This is a bad thing?"
moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Offline web applications are still slower and still don't use the native UI toolkit. Why put lipstick on a pig? Not everything should be delivered through a web browser.



I keep telling it every day, but somehow it seems most enterprise applications are moving to web only interfaces and with it the trend is comming to the consumer applications as well.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: This is a bad thing?
by s-peter on Sun 6th Nov 2011 10:10 in reply to "RE[3]: This is a bad thing?"
s-peter Member since:
2006-01-29

Applications with web-based front-ends have a fair share of advantages over native ones, even if you don't use them to collaborate with others through the Internet, and even if you run them on your own machine(s). Notes (including task / todo / buy-list management), personal finance management etc. would be good candidates, as it is useful to be able to access to these from tablets and/or phones besides your desktop/laptop, and having a web-based interface is still easier than having entirely different interfaces for each device type. (You will need somewhat different designs for different screen sizes, but it is still easier to use and develop than having completely different front-ends for each). They are also inherently multi-platform (for the client-side at least, but most web-apps are also developed in a portable manner anyway). Some of these services also happen to be managing information that one may not want to be hosted at a "cloud provider", so the ability to self-host is also important.

Of course, there are still many cases where a native application is better, but I expect that there will be more and more web-based ones coming.

Edited 2011-11-06 10:11 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: This is a bad thing?
by orestes on Sun 6th Nov 2011 17:01 in reply to "RE[3]: This is a bad thing?"
orestes Member since:
2005-07-06

Consider that GTK3 has a web based rendering back end available. It's entirely possible that in the future web based apps will be able to use the native widgets on whatever platform they choose.

Reply Parent Score: 5