[sort of OT, but relevant] is the browser the new os / operativesystem ?

Michael Fesser wrote:
> .oO(Floris)
>
>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> You dont need Internet to run a browser.
>> I disagree. A browser has no use without internet. Why would i use
>> a browser offline, while i can just install the native application?
>
> For example to browse an offline documentation in HTML format?

That's a good point. The browser is not entirely useless offline,
but imo in most situations a native application would be better.
For example i prefer to type a short note in notepad over the
browser.

This is ofcourse just my opinion, but i think using the browser
for things that are better suited to do with native applications
can only have a few reasons:

- to be to some extent platform independent, which becomes
moot when activex and such come to play
- to work online, e.g. software as a service.

Floris

Floris wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> Floris wrote:
>>> f3l wrote:
>>>> Hello everybody
>>>> Is the browser the new os / operative system ?
>>>>
>>>> we had a discussion with some of the senior programmers at the office,
>>>> they said that the OS will always be very relevant
>>>> I say the OS is irrelevant, and that the Browser is all that matters
>>>> (as long as you can localhost, vim, mysql and ssh without problems).
>>>> they said the OS will never dissapear (old ASM geizers), however, I
>>>> agree, but I don't really think that they will make a difference.
>>>
>>> I think the browser will not replace the desktop for a number of
>>> reasons:
>>>
>>> 1) Not everyone has or wants an internet connection
>>
>> You dont need Internet to run a browser.
>
> I disagree. A browser has no use without internet. Why would i use
> a browser offline, while i can just install the native application?
>
>>> The trend that more software will become internet-enabled will
>>> ofcourse continue. And ofcourse there's no internet without an OS.
>>>
>> What utter toss you do talk.
>>
>> MOST of the internet PROBABLY runs on embedded real time or *nix
>> derived kernels. But it doesn't have to run on any particular brand..
>
> And simple as they may be, they are operating systems.
>
> Floris
>

A browser makes an excellent GUI, independent of the OS. Using it for
your interface allows you to concentrate on the job instead of having to
worry as much about the interface.

I'm seeing more and more products using IE as their interface, for
instance. And you may not even be aware they are using IE.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

Floris wrote:
> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> Floris wrote:
>>> f3l wrote:
>>>> Hello everybody
>>>> Is the browser the new os / operative system ?
>>>>
>>>> we had a discussion with some of the senior programmers at the office,
>>>> they said that the OS will always be very relevant
>>>> I say the OS is irrelevant, and that the Browser is all that matters
>>>> (as long as you can localhost, vim, mysql and ssh without problems).
>>>> they said the OS will never dissapear (old ASM geizers), however, I
>>>> agree, but I don't really think that they will make a difference.
>>>
>>> I think the browser will not replace the desktop for a number of
>>> reasons:
>>>
>>> 1) Not everyone has or wants an internet connection
>>
>> You dont need Internet to run a browser.
>
> I disagree. A browser has no use without internet. Why would i use
> a browser offline, while i can just install the native application?

Because your office intranet database is designed to run browser type
access?

For one.


>
>>> The trend that more software will become internet-enabled will
>>> ofcourse continue. And ofcourse there's no internet without an OS.
>>>
>> What utter toss you do talk.
>>
>> MOST of the internet PROBABLY runs on embedded real time or *nix
>> derived kernels. But it doesn't have to run on any particular brand..
>
> And simple as they may be, they are operating systems.
>

Well then every chip has a microcode operating system in it. And all
language above that microcode are 'interpreted'


How silly do you want to get?


> Floris

Floris wrote:
> Michael Fesser wrote:
>> .oO(Floris)
>>
>>> The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>> You dont need Internet to run a browser.
>>> I disagree. A browser has no use without internet. Why would i use
>>> a browser offline, while i can just install the native application?
>>
>> For example to browse an offline documentation in HTML format?
>
> That's a good point. The browser is not entirely useless offline,
> but imo in most situations a native application would be better.
> For example i prefer to type a short note in notepad over the
> browser.
>

OK. lets talk sya Mysql. A nice database.

How to use that without a browser?

you either run it command line, or have to write a HUGELY more
complicated and OS dependent application to make up your forms.

A browser is just another smart terminal. That's all. and a damned sight
more platform independent than X windows, or windows.



> This is ofcourse just my opinion, but i think using the browser
> for things that are better suited to do with native applications
> can only have a few reasons:
>
> - to be to some extent platform independent, which becomes
> moot when activex and such come to play
> - to work online, e.g. software as a service.
>
All software IS a service, its just that on some its a service running
on a local machine..and not connected by a socket..but by and API.

Its obvious you have never worked in an office computing environment,
where shared access to data means usually a server that orchestrates
and manages that access. A browser is a convenient way to allow shared
access at application, rather than file level.

Half the networkable kit like printers and the like comes with a web
interface..as do things like web cams.

Its such a simple way to add a GUI to a box that doesn't have a screen
or keyboard..

Nothing to do with operating systems at all really.

> Floris

On Mar 6, 8:44*am, The Natural Philosopher <a...@b.c> wrote:


>lots of stuff


thanks everyone for your input, but I believe we wen't a litle off
topic here (as usual)
anyway, I believe that as for "serious computing" and gimp and spss
(and autocad, etc), and that stuff, there is a niche, and such niche
is highly specific, for instance, I don't believe my grandma would
require large amount of proccessing, or any of that stuff.
(but then again, she is kinda dead, so she probably won't have use for
PCs at all, but you get the point)

also, I believe that the conversation is driven by the fact that
current browser implementations seem to loose when you compare their
performance with Desktop apps.

This, doesn't have to be always so, if you consider Flash, Java (ugh),
Etc as compiled, fast-as-hell code running inside a browser, and that
the PCs will only become faster and faster with age (If moore is to be
believed, which isn't really the discussion here), making such
differences irrelevant as time goes by.

I have seen the Browsers evolve from HTML rendering tools with no
scripting, to lousy scripting, to today's current application
plattforms, which are nothing but stunning in their level of
complexity and the possibilities they allow (canvas, flash, activeX
(ugh), PDF, etc), some may argue that scripting still sucks, but I
believe we have come to a point where you can spect some level of
standarization, that makes interoperability easier to achieve and
maintain, as long as you keep using a subset of the API that won't
give you much problems, and stay away from the scary parts (remember
C?, just the same stuff).

If you consider a simple user, with simple needs, all he ever sees is
a browser, for email, chat and random document editing and printing;
for such user, the OS is irrelevant, but browser features,
performance, usability, etc. are very important in his/her everyday
tasks.

As for US, advanced geeks who enjoy learning command line options, we
will care about shells and our tools, and we will have our litle
fights over what filesystem is better, and that's us, and the industry
won't be able to change that, but for normal, regular, standard, out
of the box users, that don't really give a damn about technology, but
they care about their *data*, and they care about comm, and all the
stuff that makes them richer and more productive, for them, those
users, will probably see a slow transition that will render their OS
transparent, and no longer part of their water-cooler conversations (I
hope).



there are 6 HTTP layers (or so I was told),
I care not about any of them.
they are infrastructure.
they are invisible (except for the sixth one).
users don't even know what HTTP stands for.
that's what I'm talking about.

the final layer gets all the credit and the OS APIs get none.
what do you guys think?

On Mar 5, 11:01 pm, f3l <auditor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello everybody
> Is the browser the new os / operative system ?
>
> we had a discussion with some of the senior programmers at the office,
> they said that the OS will always be very relevant
> I say the OS is irrelevant, and that the Browser is all that matters
> (as long as you can localhost, vim, mysql and ssh without problems).
> they said the OS will never dissapear (old ASM geizers), however, I
> agree, but I don't really think that they will make a difference.
>
> Since the browser is a layer on top of the OS, and the final layer is
> the one that gets all the attention, credit and buzz, (its the color
> of the buttons in your cellphone, not its underlying infrastructure,
> which you couldn't give a damn about (unless you are a geek like
> ourselves), what makes a difference), why should we bother to deepen
> our knowledge of OS s, when we can deepen or knowledge of Browsers, I
> mean, its the trend of the furture, right?, browsers, everywere, even
> in your cellphone?
>
> The infrastructure has a tendency to become invisible, do you know, if
> your software supports x25?
> you probably don't. Even know what x25 is (pardon me, gurus), and if
> you do, you probably don't care, because everything is transparent
> these days (it /could/ become even more transparent, but its slow and
> tedious process of interfaces on top of interfaces on top of
> interfaces, that lead to no good when something in the middle breaks
> (like compiling stuff with lots of imcompatble libs)), and we wre the
> plumbers that are supposed to know every litle quirky detal about
> every damn layer between the user and his/her data...
>
> Email had a similar story, with initially being different
> (protocols?), and stuff, and now by having standarized, well, all that
> stuff doesn't matter anymore, and you could rewrite a simpler veriosn
> of sendmail (hopefully), in less time (right?).
>
> I believe that the desktop is becoming less and less important, since
> all these buggy web2.0 js stuff has came out, so
> is the browser you use omre important than the OS?
> and if so, which browser would you recomend? (any votes for lynx?)
>
> you can have your gmail account on linux or windows and it works just
> the same, so why bother with OS wars, when you can have brand new IE
> wars, I mean, Browser wars...
>
> what do you guys think?
>
> should I stop giving a damn?
>
> or should I just move to FFX3 (which btw is the coolest thing ever
> since the sliced bread (check out the new address bar!), which is
> actually making some progress, (I've always been a opera fan, but
> might just convert).
>
> I'm in need of guru assistance and guidance...
>
> thanks in advance, for all of your base are belong to us.
> I mean, all of your kind responses.

In short, no. If you have a webmail account, try opening your client
now. How long does it take to load? That's the time your computer is
taking to parse all the Javascript, HTML, and CSS that is needed to
display the page - which takes quite a while. Try opening a desktop
email client. It takes about half the time, because precompiled code
is being run more-or-less straight through the processor.

Now, think of the implications that this would have in terms of global
warming. Computers today are powerful enough to do all of the tasks
we want them to do; if they were to do exactly the same tasks, but
rather than with code written in Javascript rather than C++ or
similar, much more computing power would be required, and much more
electrical power to run the computers - a major focus of the IT
industry at present is to reduce the impact on the environment that we
have, and using more electricity is not a good way of doing that.

Also, there are theoretically limitless styles for web pages - I don't
know about you, but I like my word processor, graphics program, and
email client to be the same colour, at least - although also having
the same icon theme would be preferable.

However, writing Javascript is much easier than C++, and you can run
programs through a web browser, with no installation. Maybe a more
accurate prediction would be that in the future a compromise, such as
semi-compiled programs written in Java, will become more common. They
allow for faster running with minimal downloading, and Java Web Start
can be used to start programs straight from the web, allowing for
convenience. The SWT toolkit, and I'm sure others, allow developers
to use the widgets supplied by the OS or display manager, keeping a
consistent look across applications.

On Mar 6, 9:51 am, fel <felipeval...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I believe that as for "serious computing" and gimp and spss
> (and autocad, etc), and that stuff, there is a niche, and
> such niche is highly specific, for instance, I don't believe
> my grandma would require large amount of proccessing

Not until she starts playing DVDs on her computer or gets on
Skype... :) If she does, her CPU usage will increase
dramatically...

> for normal, regular, standard, out of the box users, that
> don't really give a damn about technology, but they care
> about their *data*,

Exactly. But "data" must be understood loosely, including
media. Early data hogs wanted to keep all their word
processing and spreadsheets. Second-generation data hogs
kept all their e-mail. Third-generation data hogs keep all
their photos and music. The emerging fourth generation
will want to keep all their video, whether homemade or
otherwise. There already are terabyte storage devices for
home use on the market. And people will want to access
all that data without the overhead of HTTP.

> and they care about comm, and all the stuff that makes
> them richer and more productive,

Or keeps them entertained...

> those users, will probably see a slow transition that
> will render their OS transparent

Sorry, I just don't see it happen. There will always be
programs that either are CPU-intensive or communicate via the
Internet using protocols other than stateless high-overhead
HTTP.

> what do you guys think?

You are overstating your case. An engineer, having defined a
certain approach to development, would attempt to establish
natural boundaries for its application; an evangelist would
trumpet about it being an all-cure. Sadly, you seem to take
an evangelist's route...

Cheers,
NC

f3l wrote:

> Is the browser the new os / operative system ?

Some factors that haven't been mentioned yet in this thread:

1. Use of a local HTTP server as a deployment method for *local* apps.
Some apps on Linux/UNIX are starting to move in this direction.

For example, the CUPS printing management software has a web-based
interface -- that is, not a bunch of scripts running through a web server,
but the web server is built right into the print management software.
Another example is Deluge, a bittorrent client, which although GTK based,
also includes a web interface.

I wouldn't be surprised if in the next few years we started to see
traditional desktop apps deployed as a tiny webserver that you would
download, run on localhost on some weird port number, and then use via a
web browser.

2. An even more integrated version of #1 with a lightweight web server and
database built straight into the browser. A web app can be install itself
(HTML, images, javascript) locally into the browser's built-in web server
and store data in a built-in database. Google Gears is already providing
this sort of functionality as a Firefox extension; work is being done on a
Safari version; Opera has indicated that it will probably include a Gears-
compatible API in Opera 10; Adobe has plan on implementing the API in a
future version of Apollo.

--
Toby A Inkster BSc (Hons) ARCS
[Geek of HTML/SQL/Perl/PHP/Python/Apache/Linux]
[OS: Linux 2.6.17.14-mm-desktop-9mdvsmp, up 37 days, 18:24.]
[Now Playing: Tiny - They Say Its Weird]

Bottled Water
http://tobyinkster.co.uk/blog/2008/02/18/bottled-water/

Toby A Inkster wrote:
> f3l wrote:
>
>> Is the browser the new os / operative system ?
>
> Some factors that haven't been mentioned yet in this thread:
>
> 1. Use of a local HTTP server as a deployment method for *local* apps.
> Some apps on Linux/UNIX are starting to move in this direction.
>
> For example, the CUPS printing management software has a web-based
> interface -- that is, not a bunch of scripts running through a web server,
> but the web server is built right into the print management software.
> Another example is Deluge, a bittorrent client, which although GTK based,
> also includes a web interface.
>

Don't forget webmin. Yes its designed for remote management, but it
works well locally too.

> I wouldn't be surprised if in the next few years we started to see
> traditional desktop apps deployed as a tiny webserver that you would
> download, run on localhost on some weird port number, and then use via a
> web browser.
>

Lots of things lend themselves to this approach. It is after all a very
lightweight way to make an application.

For example there are a few people in a field I am involved in writing
specialised engineering calculators in javascript. Run on ANY machine -
Linux, PC, Mac, as long as it has a javascript enabled browser. Its
nicer than doing it in excel.

A hiuge amount of stuff doesn't need a complex fast GUI. Manupulation of
graphics or drawing still does, but loads of other apps don't need that.
They can run as browser based apps, either locally, intranet, or on line.


database apps utterly lend themselves to browser based access at the LAN
level. They even work well WAN.


> 2. An even more integrated version of #1 with a lightweight web server and
> database built straight into the browser. A web app can be install itself
> (HTML, images, javascript) locally into the browser's built-in web server
> and store data in a built-in database. Google Gears is already providing
> this sort of functionality as a Firefox extension; work is being done on a
> Safari version; Opera has indicated that it will probably include a Gears-
> compatible API in Opera 10; Adobe has plan on implementing the API in a
> future version of Apollo.
>

On Mar 6, 1:01 am, f3l <auditor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello everybody
> Is the browser the new os / operative system ?
>
> we had a discussion with some of the senior programmers at the office,
> they said that the OS will always be very relevant
> I say the OS is irrelevant, and that the Browser is all that matters
> (as long as you can localhost, vim, mysql and ssh without problems).
> they said the OS will never dissapear (old ASM geizers), however, I
> agree, but I don't really think that they will make a difference.
>
> Since the browser is a layer on top of the OS, and the final layer is
> the one that gets all the attention, credit and buzz, (its the color
> of the buttons in your cellphone, not its underlying infrastructure,
> which you couldn't give a damn about (unless you are a geek like
> ourselves), what makes a difference), why should we bother to deepen
> our knowledge of OS s, when we can deepen or knowledge of Browsers, I
> mean, its the trend of the furture, right?, browsers, everywere, even
> in your cellphone?
>
> The infrastructure has a tendency to become invisible, do you know, if
> your software supports x25?
> you probably don't. Even know what x25 is (pardon me, gurus), and if
> you do, you probably don't care, because everything is transparent
> these days (it /could/ become even more transparent, but its slow and
> tedious process of interfaces on top of interfaces on top of
> interfaces, that lead to no good when something in the middle breaks
> (like compiling stuff with lots of imcompatble libs)), and we wre the
> plumbers that are supposed to know every litle quirky detal about
> every damn layer between the user and his/her data...
>
> Email had a similar story, with initially being different
> (protocols?), and stuff, and now by having standarized, well, all that
> stuff doesn't matter anymore, and you could rewrite a simpler veriosn
> of sendmail (hopefully), in less time (right?).
>
> I believe that the desktop is becoming less and less important, since
> all these buggy web2.0 js stuff has came out, so
> is the browser you use omre important than the OS?
> and if so, which browser would you recomend? (any votes for lynx?)
>
> you can have your gmail account on linux or windows and it works just
> the same, so why bother with OS wars, when you can have brand new IE
> wars, I mean, Browser wars...
>
> what do you guys think?
>
> should I stop giving a damn?
>
> or should I just move to FFX3 (which btw is the coolest thing ever
> since the sliced bread (check out the new address bar!), which is
> actually making some progress, (I've always been a opera fan, but
> might just convert).
>
> I'm in need of guru assistance and guidance...
>
> thanks in advance, for all of your base are belong to us.
> I mean, all of your kind responses.

Are you okay? This is one of the most stupid thread i have ever read
on comp.lang.php

Your assumptions is like to kill a fly with a rifle or reducing
rifle's mission to a something like that.

Computing is not all about database connections and queries...