World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
Henrik 19-Sep-2008 [7063x3] | Paul, I began rambling about replacing the viewtop with a browser-like deployment platform in the r3-alpha world. I didn't expect that 30 seconds after posting it, Carl wrote something akin to "Henrik, that's basically what I'm doing now." and at that point he hadn't said anything for over a week. :-) |
He has since only talked more about the new VID, so I don't know if he's leaving the browser implementation up to us or if he's actually doing the browser itself. But it looks like the plan is for a browser. | |
This is basically what I meant earlier about being "psyched about a REBOL browser". I left out things like video playback and advanced audio, because I don't know yet what the approach for making those things possible will be. But if they are possible, they would be equally possible, like OpenGL would be possible. And if it turns out that he won't do the browser himself, then it can easily be a community effort, not hard to build. | |
BrianH 19-Sep-2008 [7066] | Not hard to build, but hard to design. Graphics models, interaction models, security issues, trust issues, resizing and reflow, these are all tricky problems. I can see why it would be taking a while for Carl to think through the implications. |
[unknown: 5] 19-Sep-2008 [7067] | But a REBOL Browser will introduce REBOL to others that have never used REBOL. And if REBOL gains some acceptance then it means that other browsers will have to begin to integrate some compatibiliity with REBOL. |
Henrik 19-Sep-2008 [7068] | yes, the point is to say "hey, this is like a webbrowser, only much faster." |
Rebolek 19-Sep-2008 [7069] | Henrik: "When you fire up R3, you will get what looks like a webbrowser and acts like one." - not just that, I want R3 not just to look like a webbrowser and act like a webbroser but actually TO BE a webbrowser - download R3 (few hunderts kB), run it and be able to browse REBOL pages - and if you enter *.html - just show some window that says "downloading" and download some REBOL plugin that can display webpages (being based on Gecko, Webkit, whatever) - it will be few megs download, but people are used to it. This is definitely possible - it's possible to display OpenGL etc in View window so I believe there are some libraries to do this ("somebody" just needs to make an interface to them ;)' The thing is that R3 browser (and just a R3 browser) will be once again a great platform without apps (Be Inc etc...). If R3 browser can display classic HTML+JS+CSS+DOM+XML+AJAX+WHATEVER combo it's win-win situation. Lots of apps available and we can improve them one after one to show it can be done much easier and faster. |
Henrik 19-Sep-2008 [7070x3] | yes, I agree |
But we also have to realize that REBOL is only the means, not the end. I don't know if the REBOL browser should directly go under the REBOL name. Perhaps the name should be more inline with what KHTML or Gecko means for other browsers. | |
And simply say "we made a new kind of webbrowser. it's much faster than your old webbrowser.". Perhaps market it as a side product of REBOL. This would bring up the old discussion again of what REBOL is. | |
Terry 19-Sep-2008 [7073] | Good luck. Firefox receives $57 milion annually from Google alone. Go big, or go home. |
Rebolek 19-Sep-2008 [7074x2] | Well, even the Firefox had not that backup from begining. |
It was just an independent brach of Mozilla bloat. | |
Claude 19-Sep-2008 [7076] | what about the new documentation of vid in rebol3 ? |
BrianH 19-Sep-2008 [7077x2] | Making another web browser won't help - new web browsers are made every day,and most don't catch on. Google's Chrome is an exception mostly because of the reputation of Google, and some nice features, but even with that it is unlikely to make much headway against the browsers that people are already using. Web browsers are commodities. |
Firefox wasn't an independent branch of Mozilla, it was a branch of Mozilla (the software) written and supported by Mozilla (the organization with corporate sponsors and backing). | |
PeterWood 19-Sep-2008 [7079] | Has the API (or header file) for the R3.dll been published anywhere yet? |
BrianH 19-Sep-2008 [7080x3] | No, nor has any R3 dll. |
At least not for a while. We have had only standalone builds for almost a year. | |
The API isn't set at this point, because of the core changes and more. | |
PeterWood 19-Sep-2008 [7083x2] | I only have the public alpha which has a dll. |
It sounds as though there is still a huge amount of work to be done before R3 is going to be ready. | |
BrianH 19-Sep-2008 [7085x2] | Well the API wasn't finalized even then, and then would have needed to change drastically with the Unicode changes. That doesn't even include Carl's current rewrites or the unfinished tasking model. |
New blog! http://www.rebol.net/r3blogs/0147.html | |
Pekr 20-Sep-2008 [7087x3] | Henrik - very good POV .... |
Terry - why are you constantly demotivated? You may as well take another aproach - use rebol free technologies, you will be safe this way. Watch R3, it can only surprise you, or it can fail, but you will not be hurt ... | |
As for FF, they receive money from Google only because Google is preset as default search engine. We might do similar if R3 browser gets popular :-) At OSNews, I also suggested Google to adopt REBOL, as it is THE ONLY small RIA technology along to Flash, SilverLight., which is a complete platform ... | |
Graham 20-Sep-2008 [7090] | terry's cup is always half empty |
Pekr 20-Sep-2008 [7091x3] | It is good to have Terry here otoh, or I thought I am the most depressed person about REBOL here :-) |
After reading Henrik's post, I also think we found RT a good REBOL advocate ;-) | |
Henrik - re new name for REBOL browser. You mentioned "side" effect or so .... I think that the best so far is FireSide, even if .com domain is chosen ... it suggest Fire as in FireFox, FireBird, and we aproach it from side. Of course we could come-up with anything else ... | |
Graham 20-Sep-2008 [7094] | call it WMD browser |
Henrik 20-Sep-2008 [7095] | Graham, that won't work. USA users wouldn't find it. :-) |
Graham 20-Sep-2008 [7096] | LOL |
[unknown: 5] 20-Sep-2008 [7097] | The rest of the world would believe it wasn't real if we claimed to find it. ;-) |
Terry 20-Sep-2008 [7098x2] | Rebol as being 'half empty or half full' .. either way, is a good metaphor. |
Be serious. There's no way you can pull the necessary resources together to build anything like a browser. Just won't happen. Call that 'half-empty', if you want.. I call it 45:1 odds against it every happening.. any takers? | |
Pekr 20-Sep-2008 [7100] | Terry - you are starting to be boring with your attitude. Those naysayers like you, always claim anything like that before some product becomes eventually popular. |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7101] | If by "like a browser" you mean implement HTML rendering and styling, a JavaScript interpreter and all of that, then I agree. If you want to implement a REBOL browser, then you are dead wrong. It's not the browser part that is the hard part. |
Terry 20-Sep-2008 [7102] | I meant the former |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7103] | I don't see the point to the former. |
amacleod 20-Sep-2008 [7104] | If the html browser part is seperate from the rebol "bowser" (as a plug-in using web kit?) it would not be too tuff. |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7105x4] | That is also not what Carl is doing. |
I don't see the part to implementing an HTML browser at all - we already have those, and they suck. | |
part -> point | |
I can see the point to implementing a compiler from a REBOL dialect to HTML/CSS/JavaScript though. | |
amacleod 20-Sep-2008 [7109] | html borwser would allow rebol to infiltrate the masses...No one will use rebol only browser if they can't also access google or any of their other favorite sites. A An html plug-in could activate when an html page is requesteed...? |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7110] | No, an HTML browser would not allow REBOL to infiltrate the masses because they already have HTML browsers and most of them don't want to switch. I can see the point to making something that works in the browser that they already have, but not one that would require them to switch browsers because that would fail. |
amacleod 20-Sep-2008 [7111] | They would switch for the added benifits rebol pages would provide but they would still be able to accesshtml until those sites cought up to speed... |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7112] | It would be better to work with their existing browser because they won't switch. I may not even like Firefox but I can't switch. |
older newer | first last |