> On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 00:41 +0300, Louigi Verona wrote: >> Hey guys! >> I have worked several years as a web developer and continue to create >> personal projects actively. >> What can I say - the web obviously has lots to offer. However, the >> client-side has more promises than >> actual accomplishments, especially when it comes to cross-browser >> things. >> >> Want it or not, even jQuery has problems, especially on (you guessed >> it) IE. The amount of hacks one needs >> to put it to make even normal html look the same in FF and IE is >> enormous. Experienced html guys might not >> notice how much hacks they automatically put into the code. > > If you choose to care about IE, life is indeed going to be miserable. > > I certainly don't ;) > >> Not to mention the memory problem. Browsers simply cannot handle as >> much memory as a desktop app can >> and you never know if settings of the visitor of your web app will >> allow him to not have his browser crash. >> >> As for graphics, each solution available today has loads of issues and >> nothing I've seen is satisfactory. Google >> stuff is interesting, but how lasting it will be - nobody knows. >> >> I would agree that the web has potential. I would agree that Java >> failed as a dream of an ultimate platform for all. >> But I would not agree that the web is there already today, nor that it >> is close. In terms of actual interaction it is >> very, very far away from what even a Java tool like Processing can >> offer, not to mention all of Java. > > There seems to be the impression that I, or anyone, is arguing that > absolutely every UI ever is best implemented in the browser. Of course, > not, that's silly. > > But most audio control UIs are quite simple. All we need is a couple of > sliders and knobs and such. It's quite straight forward and perfectly > appropriate. Transport controls, faders, knobs, XY pads, step > sequencing, toggles, all that kind of stuff. Having remote controls and > plugin UIs and such in the browser would be awesome, and it's not > anywhere near the realm of things too large to be feasible, or too > complicated to be portable (even to that atrocity you mentioned). >
Does html5 support JACK yet? That will be nice. > If you need very high performance realtime visualization or whatever, > sure, dont use the browser. Duh. > With html5 support for opengl this is actually decent on new browsers. > Put differently: nobody is going to be rewriting the main Ardour UI in > Javascript any time soon - but it would make a great control surface. > > -dr > > > _______________________________________________ > Linux-audio-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev > -- Patrick Shirkey Boost Hardware Ltd _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
