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

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.

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
2) Not everyone wants to be forced to be online for trivial tasks, such
as writing some text in notepad.
3) People will be worried about being hacked, or about important data
being read by other people on the internet.

The trend that more software will become internet-enabled will ofcourse
continue. And ofcourse there's no internet without an OS.

Floris

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.

> 2) Not everyone wants to be forced to be online for trivial tasks, such
> as writing some text in notepad.

You dont need to be online to use a browser.

> 3) People will be worried about being hacked, or about important data
> being read by other people on the internet.
>
You cant be hacked if you are not online

> 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..




> Floris

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.
>
> 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?

Once upon a tionme there were no operating systems, and people argued
about which COMPUTER ARCHITECTURE was the best.


Then we sort of standardsised on that more or less, and anyway people
wanted a stable platform to program applications on, and we argued about
what COMPILED (or assembled) LANGUAGE was the best. And forgot about te
chips underneath it.

Then we got operating systems to argue about. Despite their
shortcomings, programmers still managed to write PROGRAMS to run over them

Now you want to start arguing about brwoers..

A browser can be regarded as a integrated GUI program environment. Shame
it runs the worst load of carp ever devied..Javashite. Shame it has
almost no concept of WYSIWYG built in..

Still it does a fair amount of stuff passably well.

It sure beats an IBM3270..or a wyse 50...


>
> 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?)
>

They are all crap, as are all the (desktop) operating systems. Pick your
excrement.

> 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?
>

I think I will just go one developing code for
browers-as-smart=terminals on whathever OS people care to use,soving all
te issues they throw in the way..
> should I stop giving a damn?

yes.
>
> 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.
>

really, use whatever you like, I've got three broswers here and they are
all flawed. I use whichever one works best for the sites I want to access.


>

On Mar 5, 3:01 pm, f3l <auditor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Is the browser the new os / operative system ?

Yes, but it is but one OS of many. Let me play the devil's advocate
for you and see if we can elicit something interesting...

> 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).

Someone with pro-Microsoft proclivities would correct you; they would
say that the browser is all that matters as long as it can run
ActiveX.
Or they could make a more blatant version of the same argument and
say
that the OS is irrelevant, as long as it is a Windows OS. :)

> 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.

They will. You seem to ignore the fact that computers are no longer
the only things that need an operating system; these days, cell
phones
have operating systems; wait a few more years, and you may see an
operating system pre-installed in a car, an airplane, or a nuclear
reactor...

> Since the browser is a layer on top of the OS,

That's what you think; folks at Microsoft now say that the browser
is an integral part of the OS.

> The infrastructure has a tendency to become invisible, do you know,
> if your software supports x25?

No, but I do know which one of my browsers supports ActiveX... :)

> I believe that the desktop is becoming less and less important,

Clearly, it's been a while since you did any actual computing... :)
Consider emulating SPSS or eViews in browser...

> I'm in need of guru assistance and guidance...

Thin-client OS-ignorant applications definitely have their niche.
But so do traditional desktop applications. There is also a big
area where either architecture may work just fine. I would say
that applications that are used to do lots of different manipulations
with large amounts of data (for example, statistical packages)
belong on the desktop, while applications that are largely used to
accept simple user input from many clients (say, applications
tracking work time) are perfect candidates for thin-client
implementation. And there's a universe between these two extremes...

Cheers,
NC

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.
>
> 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.
>
>

This *is* an OT post here, but as you say it's sort of relevant, as PHP
is part of the increase in online apps. In the past 10 minutes I've done
some stuff with the GIMP that nothing online compares to (or could for a
while at least), and also used a lightweight PHP wiki that could never
be set up or work so easily were it linked to some desktop,
online-only-so-often native application (whatever the OS).

Both have their place and it will stay that way as long as (a) there are
a large number of people NOT with the advantage of a decent/consistent
connection and (b) there is no emergent web technology that can work as
quickly as a native app.

First post, be nice.

tomas

"f3l" <auditor400@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:e66485dd-5f13-4d68-b9d9-7a2b61e820c0@60g2000hsy.googlegroups.com...
> Hello everybody
> Is the browser the new os / operative system ?

You are confusing a browser with an operating system?

Do you also confuse your car with the infrastructure (road, petrol, traffic
light, pothole fixing person) that allows you to drive it from here to over
there? And what about my truck and her bicycle and that blokes horse?

--
Richard.

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

..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?

Micha

Floris a écrit :
>>> 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?

Since many "native" applications nowadays are just web applications.

You can have a nice web app at work, which you would update from times
to times (let's say you come once every 2 weeks at work to make the
updates), rest of the time you work from home or directly at a
customer's office, and you have your application offline which you use
with your browser. (and you can still work online but your application
isn't, and it's possible that you can't connect to your office network
if the offline application/use is well defined and organize, you won't
need any VPN)

Seriously, there are now plenty of reasons to work offline with web
based tools, and there are now plenty of web based tools. It's a
relevant argue.

--
Guillaume