Thanks for the thoughtful reply Dick. Gotcha on playing devils advocate a bit, and you certainly spawned a lively discussion!
I've never used a desktop browser google apps didn't work on, and am primarily a linux user. I assumed GWT targeted anything worth targeting. I seem to remember hearing GWT generating something like 10 versions of javascript includes for different user agents (as opposed to frameworks like jquery or mootools that handle variations in a single source). You make a good point about google using flash elsewhere, although the biggest case is an acquired business. I doubt we will see new development in flash by google as they continue to push HTML5 hard. Perhaps pure flex apps are not inherently less accessible/usable than javascript/html, but it sure feels that way, don't ya think? I mean, how many times have you wanted ctrl+f to search for a text string, or been aggravated that your clipboard didn't work, or back buttons didn't behave as expected? I use flex at work and know it doesn't have to be this way. It is neat stuff, and I even kinda like actionscript, but live in the nix community where flash is hated (then again, java often is too, sigh). I tend to agree that before long the browser will not be the dominant platform for web apps, and actually predict javafx will rule the world. Note that this is coming from someone who hasn't had to time to play with javafx, but enjoys making uneducated predictions <smile> cheers, Adam On Jun 29, 10:50 pm, Dick Wall <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Ad > > I brought up flash because of all of the options discussed, it is the > most widely disseminated in a usable form (much higher penetration > than HTML 5 considering IE 6 and 7 don't have support for it yet, nor > does Firefox 3). I do agree that HTML 5 availability will grow as > browsers move forward, but I also have my issues with the promise of > GWT - for example, while I have been using the firefox 3.5 beta for > some time as my primary browser, it has not been supported by GWT. I > just went to the GWT site to look at the list of supported browsers > and I can't seem to find it right now (can anyone point me to it - I > like to have my facts straight). > > Without strong support and clear details on supported browsers, and > timetables for their support, I would not want to commit a project to > using GWT when it might result in people not being able to use my > site. > > I am playing devils advocate a little. Open standards are, of course, > good. I think there are some valid reasons to question the HTML 5/ > browser only approach though - if only to get a discussion going. I > don't believe Google will develop a flash version of wave, even though > they do use flash heavily for other services (analytics, finance, > youtube, etc.). However it is noteworthy that the selling point of > wave seems to be "look at what we can do in the browser!" rather than > "look at what we can do!". I also fully expect to see flash or JavaFX > wave clients quickly pass the browser version in terms of pizazz and > functionality, although I think the browser version will rule for > market share. > > I think we should not be to caught up in what we can do in the browser > though as the be-all and end-all of development. I think a future > solely consisting of web applications is a limited one indeed. > > Several people have addressed the question of accessibility already, > but I will point out that a pure javascript application is no more > inherently accessible than a flex one - I know this was a big focus of > T.V. Raman when I worked at Google - how to make GWT and JavaScript > behave nicely for the visually impaired and other accessibility > concerns. > > Anyway - I believe it made for a good discussion, which was the point > after all. I think the next few years are going to be interesting. > > Dick > > On Jun 29, 7:44 pm, ad <[email protected]> wrote: > > > +1 > > > This rant seemed odd, especially bringing up flex so much. Does > > anybody honestly believe google would consider using flex for the wave > > ui?! Flash support is still bad in unix. Flex has its place, > > especially in the business app world, but is disliked by many and the > > interfaces are often clumsy or even inaccessible to some. JavaFx just > > isn't open or mature yet, and obviously Silverlight is not an option. > > Google has been all about speeding up javascript and making the > > browser the app platform. Open standards/Chrome/javascript/html is > > decidedly the google client platform of choice. > > > Adam > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Java Posse" 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/javaposse?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
