[REBOL] Re: Popularity
From: rebol-list2:seznam:cz at: 28-Mar-2006 22:08
Thursday, January 26, 2006, 12:00:30 AM, you wrote:
TJ> * Carl Read <carl-cybercraft.co.nz> [060125 11:12]:
>> On Wednesday, 25-January-2006 at 9:54:08 Tim Johnson wrote,
>> > I feel like rebol is in sort of a "catch-22" where the low level of
>> > usage contraindicates usage and contributes to maintaining that low
>> > level.
>> My feeling is it'll stay there too, unless plugins are released for
>> the main browsers (of all the main OSs) and it goes open-source. The
>> plugins are important as I think the browser is the desktop of the
>> future - think REBOL vs AJAX. And it needs to be open-source because
TJ> Rebol could be awesome as an alternative to AJAX.
AJAX is nothing, it's just a way how to call server without need to
reload all the page. How you can compare Rebol and AJAX?
Will you make FLASH compiler in AJAX? NO Will you make scripts for
data mining in AJAX? No. So what?
I'm using the XMLHttpRequestObj, but I know, that some browser do not support it,
so I still must do normal version as well. It's still just a HTML with
all the disadvanteges HTML has.
>> many won't touch a language that isn't, and a high percentage of those
>> who won't are loud voices on the Net. Meaning to be talked about
>> these days requires it to be open-source.
And I don't like the talks about open-sources. Yes, I do open source
scripts, do I need open-sourced Rebol? No. Most of the people talking that
want Rebol to be open-source even don't try to do "probe system" in
Rebol itself. Maybe mr. B.G. would like to see Rebol's code to make
another system to be sold for I don't know how much billions.
I don't mind that people don't know Rebol yet. If they are
lucky with XML or anything else, let them be happy with that.
For me it's important that I can do what I do.
I event don't need the Rebol3 so much.
>> Apart from the plugin only supporting IE, REBOL's in quite good shape now.
TJ> The availability of plugins for firefox and the ease of installation is
TJ> going to "sell" the browser big-time, IMHO.
TJ> Having a rebol plugin fore firefox could then help "sell" rebol.
Most of my scripts I use are not suitable to be in browser. But anyway,
I would like to see Rebol in Firefox. But in browser you are missing
all the fun which you can do with console.
I don't think that Rebol will replace Flash from web. And it's not
designed to do that. Flash is very limited because of security
limitations and I like that Rebol is not. I was trying to do something
with Flex (Flash 8.5 API) and was not able even to do "hello world" in
it, but still there is so many people talking about it on osflash
mailing list. Maybe because it's so difficult to do something, that
must talk about it. Do I want to make my visions in XML? I'm sure I
don't want to. But I'm not going to mail to all these people: hay, you
should use something else.
>> The docs are good, it's on OS X and rebcode's there for those
>> who need speedy routines. Maybe it'd be enough if the rough-ends were
>> tidied up (OS X version leaves beta and so on) and the plugin appeared
>> on the other browsers. It'd require some really interesting software
>> to be produced for the plugin though - and for it to get a mention
>> here and there.
TJ> Does rebol as a plugin for IE have the ability to interact with the
TJ> DOM? Or to the same affect?
why not? of course it is.
>> -- Carl Read.
>> To unsubscribe from the list, just send an email to
>> lists at rebol.com with unsubscribe as the subject.
TJ> Tim Johnson <tim-johnsons-web.com>
rebOldes -----------------[ http://oldes.multimedia.cz/ ]