Recent

Author Topic: Chasing the latest web craze - debate  (Read 3064 times)

OwlOfTime

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3827
Re: Chasing the latest web craze - debate
« Reply #45 on: April 10, 2021, 03:22:53 pm »
Quote
Internet Explorer of the time

Using Internet Explorer "of the time" is like using an alpha version of FPC, like less than 1.0, you can get into trouble with unsolved bugs as well.
Just Why?

marcov

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9331
  • FPC developer.
Re: Chasing the latest web craze - debate
« Reply #46 on: April 10, 2021, 03:32:53 pm »
Quote
Internet Explorer of the time

Using Internet Explorer "of the time" is like using an alpha version of FPC, like less than 1.0, you can get into trouble with unsolved bugs as well.

It's not about the tool, it is about the product. If the generated application worked fine with the version at the time, it probably still works fine on current windows (except for some very minor things that changed like direct portaccess and UAC).

Now run the web product that you made back then in the now default browser.

OwlOfTime

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3827
Re: Chasing the latest web craze - debate
« Reply #47 on: April 10, 2021, 04:16:44 pm »
This is the oldest I have
https://leyendadigital.blogspot.com/2013/04/tu-nombre-al-reves.html

2013 and works still in Internet Explorer, Latest Chrome as well.

And this other 2013 (AngularJS 1.0)
https://ventaja-comparativa.blogspot.com/

Using very old libraries, still at CDN, I never changed them!!!

Edit!

In the other hand, I have an Angular 11 (latest version) application that uses angular material design, and its working on Internet Explorer! Almost all the animations and style works the same like in Chrome, because that library is well designed. I code in the latest typescript version and is compiled into old javascript versions, compatible with Internet Explorer and as well it does another bundle with modern javascript for modern browsers, and it loads automatically the version is compatible with your browser.
« Last Edit: April 10, 2021, 04:32:08 pm by lainz »
Just Why?

Warfley

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 451
Re: Chasing the latest web craze - debate
« Reply #48 on: April 10, 2021, 04:32:58 pm »
If and only if there's a full/headless browser present. So same inherent issues as the Java Runtime and the .NET runtime without adding any value.
The thing that adds the *value* of cross compatibility adds no inherent value? Are you kidding me? Cross compatibility is the value and you even acknowledge that. This is exactly the reason why languages like Java, Python or JavaScript are so popular. You need to install just 150mb or so once, and from that point onwards you can use any application using that technology.
If you look at the most popular languages according to their prevalence in open source projects on github, the three most popular languages by a long shot are Javascript, Python and Java, making up together nearly 50% of all the repositories.

Also this argument simply does not work at all, because if you ever used Linux, you might have noticed that Linux does not provide any native system apis for creating graphical user interfaces. In fact you need at least a display server. Modern applications also don't talk to the displayserver directly, but use a framework like QT or GTK for this.
So any argument against a runtime environment must be able to explain why why relying on a 150 mb electron installation is bad, while relying on a 150mb QT5 installation is no issue at all.
Quote
HTML was not created with this in mind. With the craze of browser stuff, it's been mangled to accommodate it, with no real sense of future proof or even standardization.
Originally not, but things can change. Today the W3C consortium designs future versions of web technology with exactly this in mind. And what about that there is no standardization? HTML, CSS are all standardized by the W3C. The last version of the HTML standard, HTML 5.2 was released in 2017: Link. The last version of the CSS (2.1) standard was published in 2016: Link the CSS3 standard is not finalized yet, but the consortium is currently working on it with many features already finalized.
JavaScript is standardized, under the name of ECMAScript, by ecma international, and the latest version ECMAScript 2020 came just out last year: Link
All these standards are developed in close relationship with browser developers and web developers to be designed to serve the emerging needs of the userbase.

So this point is just plainly and factually wrong, front to back. Pretty much everything on the web is standardized and graphical abilities are a major concern in the standardization process.

Also a bit bold by someone who uses Pascal to criticize lack of Standardization. Because Pascal is one of the few languages where there are Standards but everyone decides to ignore them completely.
Quote
I still think its a craze/fad but I'm not futurist to see it's cycle end. But granted, there is a crowd that as chosen to board that train.
You can think what you want, personally I also don't like web technology, because everything feels like they reinvented the wheel, like storing data for offline usage, instead of allowing an internal filesystem it deploys a complete database system, which makes the very simple act of storing and loading files a real pain in the neck.
But a large community is a major argument for a development environment. It means more libraries available with more users to be using and testing them, more support and less likely to loose support in the future.

Quote
But in the end, native only depends on the OS. It does not depend on the interpreting platform(JavaScript/Python/PERL/PHP).
If for some wacky reason the interpreting platform goes away, so will all the effort put on it.
If the OS goes away, errrmmm, well, then the computer doesn't work and the argument is moot.
You can't be serious here. Have you never updated your computer? If Windows XP goes away, I can still use the computer using Windows Vista, 7, 8 or 10, but there will be software that will not run anymore. Whats the difference between software that does not work anymore because the only OS it was running on was going EOL vs a program not working anymore because the only interpreter it was working on going EOL.
Except that it is often much easier to run outdated interpreting environments on a modern machine then it is to run outdated operating systems. Windows XP would simply not work on my new PC, but from personal experience I can tell that I was able to easiely run Java 5 on my new machine, which I needed for a very old application to run locally.

Quote
Adding another layer of complexity and resource hogging software is not something I'm very interested in, even if all your bullet list points where true.
Is it harder going the compiled way? Well, it's bloody easier from the assembly days and the IDE's help a bunch.
Yes it is harder in certain circumstances. How about we do a simple experiment. We write both a calculator, I using only web technology, you fully native. Requirements are: It has to run on Android, iOS, Mac, Linux and Windows. Who do you think will have to put more work into this? I am pretty sure that using webdev I could do that in like 10 minutes.

Quote
@Warfley: A compiled 32b app made in the Windows XP era, can still run in all it's glory on a Windows 10 64b machine of today.
This is a property of windows which Microsoft pays a lot of money to have. Neither on Android, iOS, Linux or Mac will this work. You basically just picked out the single platform this works with.

To me your whole post feels like you are also just talking about windows and windows alone. But thats not what reality is like. Windows is not the be all and end all for software development, it isn't even anymore the most used operating system, android is. Tablets have taken over a lot of the market from home PCs, and Android and iOS together make up 56% of the market.
Even on desktops windows is falling especially in the US, ChomeOS already makes up nearly 7% of the market, Mac OS another 30%, with windows only left with 60%.

Modern software must be designed to reflect this change. Most applications must run on mobile, for many apps like mail clients or chat services, this might even be the most important requirement. Corporations are using more and more using Chrome Books, for whom web development is the native platform.

Sure you can say that you personally only develop for Windows, in which case you are right, there is no reason to use web technology. This is why Microsoft still develops native apps for Windows using C++ or .Net and not with web technology. But don't act surprised that people with different requirements might choose a different development platform
Quote
If you try to run your power hungry, memory hogging HTML5+CSS+JS web app on an Internet Explorer of the time, you're shit out of luck aren't you?
How can you complain about standardization earlier and then mention internet explorer, which was notorious for ignoring the HTML, CSS and JavaScript standards. But that aside, this comparison is very lackluster, because this is exactly the other way around as your previous claim. You develop apps for the current system, not for the past. A modern Windows 10 64 bit application won't run on 32 bit Windows XP either.

To make the analogy more fitting consider a website written in XHMTL 1.2 from 2003 and run it in a modern day browser. And this works still really well, because backwards compatibility is also a major concern for browser developers. In fact a webapp from 2010 will still work in a modern browser. A native android app from 2010 will not work on a modern android device. This is again a point for web tech and against native

Quote
This whole Web craze really looks like the way Microsoft kept pumping out new versions of Windows, just to make people upgrade their hardware...
Like Marco says, if you have state-of-the-art gaming rig, then you can run, PROBABLY, 2 Electron apps at once.
If you still have Windows 8 and don't update hardware, it's 1 Electron app and the computer turn into a heat exchanger!!!
Which is completely wrong. VSCode, one of the most complex electron apps out there even runs on my 7 year old macbook air completely fluently, much better than for example XCode which is a native app, even developed by Apple themselves.

In fact, I have VSCode open nearly all the time, and I don't notice it at all.

Quote
Yeap, that rando on the internet that disagrees... Sorry!!
Well disagreement is one thing, but the thing that bothers me with your response is that it is factually wrong on like half of your points. You claim that the thing that adds cross compatibility, which is a value, has no inherent value, is plainly a contradiction. The claim that there are no standards and that HTML is not developed for complex graphical usage is also just wrong, and that it if an OS goes EOL or "disappears", you can't use your computer is just comically stupid. Your last post about backwards compatibility sim completely missed the mark because of a analogy that simply does not work and makes it even ridiculus to think about because backwards compatibility is one of the major concerns for web development, and browsers are in that regard even better fitted than Windows.

I don't like webdev, I think its practices are often overcomplicated, reinvent the wheel on nearly all issues and disregards any best practices that developed on native development. I think JavaScript is a stupid language that should be burned to the ground and completely reworked, and the idea that you should include a whole framework just for one line of code, which is a common practice in web development, is just beyond me.
But it has it's merits, and to conclude here, every argument of yours that does not boil down to "I don't like it" (which is completely fine) relies on misconceptions, faulty comparisons or being factually wrong.
You seem to have a very strong opinion on that matter, but it is build upon misconceptions, an outdated view of the technology and really the points that you are bringing up are, for anyone who knows even a little bit about the technology, just comically wrong.

Warfley

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 451
Re: Chasing the latest web craze - debate
« Reply #49 on: April 10, 2021, 05:02:23 pm »
I just want to add one thing about this, which I think does not fit that well in the previous post (which already got a little bit long), so I add it here
Quote
@Warfley: A compiled 32b app made in the Windows XP era, can still run in all it's glory on a Windows 10 64b machine of today.
The thing that amuses me about this the most is, that earlier you complained about the complexity and resource hogging of another interpreter, but the reason why this backwards compatibility on windows works so well is, because Windows is shipping a complete set of 32 bit libraries, the windows on windows 64 (WoW64) system, with it's installation. Besides this there is a lot of old versions of apis and libraries which windows links against programs compiled for older windows versions to ensure backwards compatibility.

The reason that old executables run on new versions of windows, is literally because windows basically ships with it older versions of itself to make it work. You don't like the overhead from additional runtimes, but praise windows for having exactly that baked right into the system.

This level of irony is just of the charts, honestly I had to lough out loud when I read this

Gustavo 'Gus' Carreno

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 535
  • Professional amateur ;-P
Re: Chasing the latest web craze - debate
« Reply #50 on: April 11, 2021, 10:43:03 am »
Hey Warfley,

Not gonna contribute, any more, to this ongoing mess that is probably my fault to begin with.

Some of your points are valid and some are just you digging your heels and covering your eyes.

I'll agree with the former but will not go into any discussion into the latter.

You are set in your ways, as am I. We both have rigid opinions.

I concede and say: Agree to disagree.

Cheers,
Gus
« Last Edit: April 11, 2021, 10:09:24 pm by Gustavo 'Gus' Carreno »
Lazarus 2.1.0(trunk) FPC 3.3.1(trunk) Ubuntu 21.04 64b Dark Theme
Lazarus 2.0.12(stable) FPC 3.2.2(stable) Ubuntu 21.04 64b Dark Theme
http://github.com/gcarreno

PascalDragon

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3056
  • Compiler Developer
Re: Chasing the latest web craze - debate
« Reply #51 on: April 11, 2021, 08:39:00 pm »
Quote
@Warfley: A compiled 32b app made in the Windows XP era, can still run in all it's glory on a Windows 10 64b machine of today.
This is a property of windows which Microsoft pays a lot of money to have. Neither on Android, iOS, Linux or Mac will this work. You basically just picked out the single platform this works with.

To be fair, FPC binaries that don't link to other libraries (e.g. the compiler itself) run on Linux quite far back (I think 2.4 or so).

lucamar

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4009
Re: Chasing the latest web craze - debate
« Reply #52 on: April 11, 2021, 10:10:30 pm »
To be fair, FPC binaries that don't link to other libraries (e.g. the compiler itself) run on Linux quite far back (I think 2.4 or so).

In fact with carefully versions of the compiler and features used you can compile for even older distros. We still have a fairly large program maintained on old machines with Debian Potato (which IIRC is Linux 2.2 or thereabouts).

I don't remember ATM which version of the compiler we had to use but I kind of think it being one of the late v1.x (1.4 or 1.6). It needs quite a lot of memory (IIRC 64 or 128 MiB) but it's doable.
Turbo Pascal 3 CP/M - Amstrad PCW 8256 (512 KB !!!) :P
Lazarus/FPC 2.0.8/3.0.4 & 2.0.12/3.2.0 - 32/64 bits on:
(K|L|X)Ubuntu 12..18, Windows XP, 7, 10 and various DOSes.

ASBzone

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 613
  • Automation leads to relaxation...
    • Free Console Utilities for Windows (and a few for Linux) from BrainWaveCC
Re: Chasing the latest web craze - debate
« Reply #53 on: April 11, 2021, 10:48:22 pm »
Some of your points are valid and some are just you digging your heels and covering your eyes.

Cheers,
Gus

Gus, I really have to say that your posts are generally helpful or at least amusing (and I don't mean anything particularly negative by that), but in this particular thread, you have engaged in what can only be referred to as "rampant projection."

Seriously.  The quoted statement is just one tiny example.
-ASB: https://www.BrainWaveCC.com/

Lazarus v2.0.13 r64843 / FPC v3.2.1-r49055 (via FpcUpDeluxe) -- Windows 64-bit install w/Win32 and Linux/Arm cross-compiles
Primary System: Windows 10 Pro x64, Version 2009 (Build 19042)
Other Systems: Windows 10 Pro x64, Version 2009 (Build 19042) or greater

Gustavo 'Gus' Carreno

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 535
  • Professional amateur ;-P
Re: Chasing the latest web craze - debate
« Reply #54 on: April 12, 2021, 09:25:48 pm »
Hey ASBzone,

Gus, I really have to say that your posts are generally helpful or at least amusing (and I don't mean anything particularly negative by that), but in this particular thread, you have engaged in what can only be referred to as "rampant projection."

Seriously.  The quoted statement is just one tiny example.

First of all, many thanks for the compliment. :D I'll take the funny and the helpful with pride ;)

Second of all, I think you're absolutely right!!

I got to a point, in this thread, where I didn't really like what I was doing and where I was going. So I decided to end it.
I have to admit that it was abrupt and most possibly not the best way to do  it.

For that I sincerely apologise. I guess I was hating myself and I lashed out AT myself, but TOWARDS others, with no clear indication of this fact.

Also, thanks for taking the time to point it out. I guess I needed a bit of a reality check.

Edit: This probably means that I need to apologise to Warfley too...
@Warfley: I'm sorry I accused you of digging you heels and closing your eyes, that was mean of me and I profoundly apologise for it.
But I will still maintain that we have very opposite views and I'm conceding that we should agree do disagree.

Cheers,
Gus
« Last Edit: April 12, 2021, 09:38:12 pm by Gustavo 'Gus' Carreno »
Lazarus 2.1.0(trunk) FPC 3.3.1(trunk) Ubuntu 21.04 64b Dark Theme
Lazarus 2.0.12(stable) FPC 3.2.2(stable) Ubuntu 21.04 64b Dark Theme
http://github.com/gcarreno

 

TinyPortal © 2005-2018