> > Would it be that hard to get the general public to accept a new internet
> > that involves application browsers?
>
> I think that you dramatically underestimate people’s reluctance to
> install something new. It took a long time for the web and its
> protocols to reach the levels of saturation that they currently have.
> Trying to create a brand new one would just about be an exercise in
> futility.
> But about GWT specifically... think about it like this. GWT is the
> evolution of web development. It does what computer languages and
> development technologies have always done. They took a look at what
> was needed Javascript, CSS, html, Ajax and they encapsulated it
> allowing the developer to compose solutions to their specific needs
> without (or with little) regard for the underlying complexities.
> Compare that what a high level language like C or Fortran are. They
> allow you to compose solutions to your problems in relatively easy to
> manage functions. You don’t care what it takes in assembly language
> to get user input from a keyboard you just create an input stream.
> This level of encapsulation is what GWT brings to the table for the
> web and in my opinion it is simply brilliant in its execution.
> I’ve been doing web and app development professionally for over 12
> years now and I can’t remember the last time I was this excited about
> a new technology. I find that being able to compose web UI’s with a
> rich programming language to be liberating.
> Now that I’ve gone completely off track, to address your concern more
> directly: what would a new protocol mean for me as a developer? If all
> it provides is a way for me to execute Java (or some other high level
> language) on the client then for one thing it’s not really giving me
> anything fundamentally new. Especially if the UI Widget set was still
> based on Swing or AWT or the like. What it really does is limits
> where my app can be used because no one (or very few people) will have
> the ability to connect to it. The inherent ability to push from the
> server is pretty trivial in comparison to not having an app that can
> be used by the majority of people without requiring them to install
> new software and potentially modify firewall or other hardware
> settings. I mean, I’d rather just fake push by polling the server and
> have it usable to everyone. Ajax makes that trivial. And GWT makes
> Ajax trivial.
>
Good input. And the funny thing is I agree with most of what you say.
I definitely agree that GWT is the most exciting thing that has
happened in the web world in a long long time. And yes, who cares
what's under the hood (or in the cloud). But I still say two things:
1) even with GWT, you still have to rely on CSS, and therefore, deal
with all the browser incompatibilities. 2) I still think that having
push abilities would be a great step forward.
oh, and I'm not saying it would be simple, but I believe that we could
eventually get the world to accept a new browser (and network). Just
thinking.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Google Web Toolkit" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/google-web-toolkit?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
