From: "Paul G. Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
I contend that web front ends are amongst the worst. A web browser is a
very poor generic application interface. There are too many random
differences in browsers and the way they interpret HTML. So not only do
you have to test your application on various platforms, but on various
application front end rendering agents (what the rest of us normally
call browsers).

Thus the need for the W3C HTML 4.01 standard and XHTML 1.0 standard and the reasoning behind not using browser specific tags. Many end-users want a web front end so they can access the software system from anywhere, on any platform, without having to install a program on every machine they want to access it from.



There's still a difference between browsers. Different browsers render differently, and always will.


A Java applet can provide a GUI as well, at a possible cost in speed.

Assuming he has java installed. And assuming its a compatible version of Java.



This is fine for a developer, but most end users don't want to have to write an interface (or can't), they just want to get their work done.


Who said the end user had to be the interested party? Look at linux cd burning and playing software- you have a choice of a bunch of GUIs, which all tend to be front ends for 2 or 3 different CLI programs. This is a great way to design a program. You have a fully functional CLI version, and a choice of GUIs so you can pick your favorite. Or write your own should none of the provided ones work for you. Its also good from a design perspective- it absolutely garuntees a separation of the buisness logic and the UI code. On the rare occasions I write anything with a GUI this is how I end up doing it- I write a CLI version, test it, then throw a GUI on top.

Gabe


-- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg

Reply via email to