World: r3wp
[!REBOL3-OLD1]
older newer | first last |
amacleod 20-Sep-2008 [7117] | proving>providing |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7118x2] | For that matter, unless you support their existing web services that they already have their data or the data they already want in it, it won't matter. That means their existing webmail account and Flash video. If you can't play YouTube (and RedTube, ...) it won't matter. People don't care about the underlying technology unless they are techs. If you make a REBOL browser so that you can do REBOL stuff, and then try to support the old web stuff thinking that people will try the REBOL stuff and find it to be better, you will be wrong. Most people won't be able to tell the difference, because it isn't the technology that matters, it is the content. If you have the best content available in the most convenient way, people will install your software to get at it, whatever your software is written in. |
The real advantage to the REBOL browser isn't web integration, it is taking the real advantages of the web (aside from installed base) and applying those to REBOL, but better because we don't have that legacy markup crap. | |
amacleod 20-Sep-2008 [7120x2] | Agreed |
agree again | |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7122x2] | We are not going to compete with Flash directly, not unless we can provide a better source of free videos of cats running on treadmills than Youtube. The only company that can kill Flash/Silverlight video is Google, because they can add HTML 5 video to every open source browser and switch Youtube to use it. Nothing that the REBOL community can do will work on that scale. |
It is thus better for us to do something that Flash can't do, rather than to try to beat Flash at its own game (like Silverlight). | |
Rod 20-Sep-2008 [7124x2] | Agree here also, I want cross platform GUI where the rebol browser provides UI and other services to applications not just content. The value in the Google applications is not their quality (which is okay) but in the access from anywhere feature. The HTML/Browser is trying to grow into the application space but is really at a disadvantage because of the technology. |
Links, discovery via search, anywhere access these are good things that can also be done with the networking strength of REBOL, no need to saddle that with HTML/CSS and the whole mess of patchwork technologies layered on top. | |
Graham 20-Sep-2008 [7126] | anything we can build in rebol can be built with another technology |
Terry 20-Sep-2008 [7127x2] | Rebol is a niche product, and unless it reaches critical mass (of developers) will probably remain that way. |
That said, I've been discussing a new project that will probably use Rebol | |
Rod 20-Sep-2008 [7129x2] | Critical mass is a challenge for sure. I've been bouncing around all the "popular" technologies for some time while earning my keep with old fashioned database applications. Some are very interesting and have good strengths, none are making creating solutions easier or even better in most cases. |
I'm not sold reaching critical mass is what we should be chasing just yet. | |
Terry 20-Sep-2008 [7131] | The concepts behind Rebol are too left field for critical mass. Genius is not always appreciated. |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7132x2] | Everything is a niche product, even Flash. There is no general purpose product. Find your niche and go for it. |
For me, critical mass is being able to use REBOL for work and my research and not have it be career ending. I'm there already :) | |
Graham 20-Sep-2008 [7134x2] | I don't care about any mass |
I just want it to work well enough for me to develop applications. Who cares what they're written in? | |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7136] | Well, as you have to write the applications, I suppose you would care. Not your users though :) |
Graham 20-Sep-2008 [7137x3] | yes, that's assumed :) |
For me the neat thing is that I can give my users access to Rebol inside the product and so they can extend the product as they wish. | |
One language for all .... | |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7140x2] | Hey, I had an idea today that you might be interested in. I want to come up with a REBOL notation that has the same basic semantics as JavaScript but is still valid REBOL syntax. Corresponding concepts should match corresponding syntax (= to :, etc.). If it could be executable by the standard REBOL interpreter that would be even better. As far as I can tell, the only thing without an approximate mapping is regex. |
Obviously this dialect wouldn't be as powerful as the DO dialect, but if it is a proper subset it could be executed by DO and its buddies as is. Once you have this, all you would need is a syntax transliterator and you would have a JavaScript interpreter in REBOL. | |
Graham 20-Sep-2008 [7142] | you mean a javascript dialect for Rebol ? |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7143] | Yup. |
Graham 20-Sep-2008 [7144] | Go Brian go! |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7145] | I was thinking that if I could do that, then reimplement the rest of REBOL in that dialect, I could write a REBOL compiler to JavaScript. At the very least I could write a JavaScript compiler to REBOL. Or for that matter, a compiler for a subset of REBOL to JavaScript. Semantic equivalency is what would matter here, not syntax. Syntax is irrelevant. |
Graham 20-Sep-2008 [7146] | Having a javascript interpreter embedded inside Rebol would allow more users ( familiar with javascript ) to write their own add ons without having to learn Rebol. |
Reichart 20-Sep-2008 [7147x2] | Agreed. |
It would also bringe the gap of REBOL and....the "web". :) | |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7149] | Should I make a task for this? :) |
Graham 20-Sep-2008 [7150] | Is this on 20% time? :) |
Reichart 20-Sep-2008 [7151] | This is what Gab and I have been talking about, although even more abstracted from REBOL <-> JS, more like REBOL->Dialect->anything (HTML, XHTML, JS, HTML+JS, etc.) |
BrianH 20-Sep-2008 [7152x2] | I have been giving this a lot of thought over the years, but have started coming up with real strategies for doing this for real in the last few weeks. I would like to discuss this kind of thing with you some time later. |
By the way, I would like to ask you that 20% time question for real. | |
Graham 20-Sep-2008 [7154] | ( shouldn't this be in private chat? ) |
amacleod 20-Sep-2008 [7155] | BrianH, You should speak with Henrick too. I believe what you are planning is part of long range goals for his html dialect. |
Henrik 21-Sep-2008 [7156] | I would like to discuss those details, yes. :-) |
Pekr 21-Sep-2008 [7157] | Brian - bring this topic/plan in Complilers group in R3-alpha world. Carl is reading this group, as I pointed him to that interesting chat privately ... |
Henrik 21-Sep-2008 [7158] | Reading this discussion since Terry's first post 8 hours ago (the "be serious" one), shows to me how hard it gets to think outside the box and that's another challenge when it comes to marketing the REBOL browser. When we think of browser, we automatically refer to a whole range of technologies and languages. It's something so ingrained, we never notice it. Partially you can say it's the same for a PC, as it's very likely to run Windows and that if you want to read an electronic document mailed to you from an average person, it's very likely to be written in MS Word. That's not how we want it to be. That's how people think. They think in axioms and familiarity, because they don't know any better. I think the marketing should play strongly on familiarity, such as with the aforementioned GMail clone, where it's easy to tell the difference in speed between the two technologies. Keep duplicating existing stuff. I disagree that the average person can't tell the difference. I've observed average people praising that GMail now runs faster in FF3 than it did in FF2. The REBOL browser is disruptive technology. It will be able to do things that normal webbrowsers won't be able to do for the next 5 years at least, if ever. But only if it's done right, by playing on familiarity. If it's done right, dumping the traditional web can happen faster than we think and I would do it in a heartbeat. I imagine that if Reichart was ever to do QTask for the REBOL browser, he could probably build it alone at 1/3 or 1/4 the time that it takes to build it for a traditional browser and the final product would run faster. |
Pekr 21-Sep-2008 [7159x2] | I think we should wrap some services. Do you remember few scripts, wrapping SlashDot? What about wrapping Google mail? And then showing the source code of VID? I think it could cause some jaws drops, how small the source can be. Then we could encap it, and provide it as a Flash app. It could be downloaded in millions. And Google might get interested. They imo need something against Flash/Silverlight, and there is not third technology to the game but REBOL imo ... |
But - we also need multimedia later, so hopefully codecs get finished one day ... | |
PeterWood 21-Sep-2008 [7161x2] | These are all great ideas. Is it possible to get started of them before we know what Rebol 3 is going to be? |
of them -> on them | |
Henrik 21-Sep-2008 [7163x2] | We have to see the browser and its capabilities first, before we can make a next move. |
Perhaps it would be easier to appeal to the porn industry to gain acceptance. :-) | |
Pekr 21-Sep-2008 [7165] | IMO we can't even be surely Carl will come with browser? Maybe it will be "just" VID 3.4, which will allow creation of such browser. |
Henrik 21-Sep-2008 [7166] | Pekr, why not ask him directly? |
older newer | first last |