Mailing List Archive: 49091 messages
  • Home
  • Script library
  • AltME Archive
  • Mailing list
  • Articles Index
  • Site search

[REBOL] Re: The future of the web will be based on personal computing

From: brian::wisti::gmail::com at: 23-Mar-2007 13:27

Hi Maxim, On 3/23/07, Maxim Olivier-Adlhoch <> wrote:
> my two cents,
My two cents are mingled below. Together we have four cents.
> languages and most technologies, in fact, on the fringe NEVER get the push > to become mainstream until MS nudges through their corporate platform.
Java? Perl? There are a lot of technologies that are mainstream within their intended domain. I'm not sure that the definition of "fringe" is Microsoft isn't selling it. I mean, relational databases were mainstream before SQL Server 1.0 in the late 1980s.
> name it, sharepoint is just another example, there are thousands of > collaborative systems. but the only one which will make a real impact will > be sharepoint. MS only moves on things that WILL make money... its what > they do. so they let everyone break their necks, and then buy out or copy > the guys with the good ideas but no more cash.
What's sharepoint? I could only find buzzwords at
> Java would not have taken off really unless MS had (sort of) supported it.
Java was already taking off pretty quickly when MS tried to step in with J++ and their own VM. I was surprised that even non-programmers were asking me questions about Java as early as 1996.
> look at flash... even though its installed practically anywhere, its still a > fringe application used only for simple web development (by the masses I > mean).
But ... Flash was expressly written for Web development, wasn't it? It is definitely not fringe within that area. It seems like every time I talk to a client about building a site, they are asking me to include Flash.
> if MS where to buy it out or make their own Flash interpreter... they would > then integrate it everywhere and suddenly, you'd hear about Flash in every > MS discussion and suddenly, it would become a mainstream dev platform, and > many would use it for other things. (powerpoint?)
Adobe's Apollo project is the closest thing I could think of to Flash as a mainstream dev platform. I think Sparkle is the Microsoft answer to Flash. I'm not particularly interested in either, but they aren't trying to sell it to me. We'll see how this Adobe-versus-Microsoft thing works out.
> basically, if you invent something, and MS decides to copy/buy/trample you, > that's your indication for success... MS only moves when things are ready > for success, and with their money, can give the final push to make it happen > for real.
No, my primary indication for success is whether or not a business makes a profit. There are numerous lesser indicators, but "get copied/bought/trampled by Microsoft" is probably not a good one. Well, maybe "bought."
> This doesn't remove the need and desire for other systems, only that if you > want to generate REVENUE, then the only juggernaught is still today MS. > Some current players ARE changing the landscape though, and Google has > definitively taken MS by surprise by their business model... but that is > just it... its not the technology behind Google which is superior... its > their business model... most of googles products are dead simple, and border > on the barely usefull.
Didn't Microsoft start out with a BASIC interpreter? BASIC is almost the definition of dead simple and barely useful.
> so we must only continue to use REBOL increase the userbase, improve it and > continue to offer faster response times. its a swiss army knive... just > use it. > > -MAx
I will continue to use REBOL for exactly as long as I find it to be useful in general purpose light weight tasks. I am impatient for it to be more than a pocket knife with a corkscrew, though ;-) I think that my only problem with your post is based on differing definitions of success for a business. Mine is based simply on profit and maintaining whatever values the company has defined for itself. Yours appears to be based on widespread recognition and assimilation into normal corporate affairs. Your statements are probably accurate for that definition of success at this point in corporate history. Kind Regards, Brian Wisti