On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 2:04 AM, Will Light <visi...@gmail.com> wrote: > yeah, I'm aware that the stuff exists. just earlier today I was doing > quite a bit of fiddling around with the current version of audiotool > (http://www.audiotool.com/), and it's pretty cool. the potential is > definitely there, but the point I'm trying to make is that these > things are constantly playing catch-up. the feature set that these > browser-based apps are seeking to duplicate is the sort of stuff that > was novel, say...10 years ago, but it's nothing groundbreaking from > the standpoint of a professional music producer. perhaps these apps > will end up replacing the entry-level stuff like garageband or iMovie, > but I think they will be hard-pressed to unseat Cubase, ProTools, or > even newcomers like REAPER.
I'd hope that progress will be a little faster once the application-core can be implemented in any language that you can compile to "obviously safe machine code" (maybe even the same application-core codebase used in the standalone product). But I think you're probably going to be right, but for "utility to the expected user" reasons rather than for any technological problem. The interesting thing about browser-applications is for doing "task X" for those people who don't do X very much at all. The majority of these people will only benefit from functionality that you can present in easy-to-understand-and-use-immediately ways, in contrast to "use-it-everyday" people who will both install the application locally and learn over time how to use subtle functionality. So I'd expect that web-applications will acquire those "advanced" capabilities which are basically automatic, but won't acquire the stuff that requires sophisticated user understanding to use. -- cheers, dave tweed__________________________ computer vision reasearcher: david.tw...@gmail.com "while having code so boring anyone can maintain it, use Python." -- attempted insult seen on slashdot
