|
I think that eventually all applications will use a browser as a presentation format.
Desktop applications are starting to have the look and feel of a legacy application.
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
|
|
|
|
|
Wasn't Java supposedly the answer to the question of how to write cross-platform applications?
While the idea of cross platform languages/frameworks is a good idea, until the manufacturers of all/most hardware create browser friendly enabled APIs I don't see the "any platform easy programming" idea taking shape in reality.
Plus letting a browser control hardware is in and of itself full of security risks.
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
GuyThiebaut wrote: Wasn't Java supposedly the answer to the question of how to write cross-platform applications?
Right! 
GuyThiebaut wrote: While the idea of cross platform languages/frameworks is a good idea, until the manufacturers of all/most hardware create browser friendly enabled APIs I don't see the "any platform easy programming" idea taking shape in reality.
Have you heard about JavaScript? 
GuyThiebaut wrote: While the idea of cross platform languages/frameworks is a good idea, until the manufacturers of all/most hardware create browser friendly enabled APIs I don't see the "any platform easy programming" idea taking shape in reality.
Have you heard about JavaScript?
GuyThiebaut wrote: Plus letting a browser control hardware is in and of itself full of security risks.
Only if the control is from a foreign web site. If the browser is deployed as a thin client on the machine it will be just a GUI for a locally running service. The operations running will depend on the service's authorization on the local machine.
I don't see anything wrong with that.
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
modified 19-Jul-14 8:49am.
|
|
|
|
|
JimmyRopes wrote: thin client on the machine it will be just a GUI for a locally running service
In which case wouldn't the service need to be written for a specific architecture?
“That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.”
― Christopher Hitchens
|
|
|
|
|
GuyThiebaut wrote: GuyThiebaut wrote:
Plus letting a browser control hardware is in and of itself full of security risks.
Only if the control is from a foreign web site. If the browser is deployed as a thin client on the machine it will be just a GUI for a locally running service. The operations running will depend on the service's authorization on the local machine.
GuyThiebaut wrote: JimmyRopes wrote: thin client on the machine it will be just a GUI for a locally running service
In which <layer>case wouldn't the service need to be written for a specific architecture?
Yes in that specific case it would be written for a specific architecture.
In a general case where you are not targeting a specific architecture, then the application can be used on any architecture, which is more the general case.
The point is that the browser can be used for the specific case or the general case. It would just be a presentation format.
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
|
|
|
|
|
Thin clients? That's a Novell idea.
I may not last forever but the mess I leave behind certainly will.
|
|
|
|
|
Herbie Mountjoy wrote: Thin clients? That's a Novell idea.
I never claimed that I thought of it first.
It is an idea whose time has come.
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
|
|
|
|
|
JimmyRopes wrote: Clifford Nelson wrote: I have certainly come to had Windows 8.
I don't know what that means you have come to had Windows 8?
That got me scratching my head as well, until I realized he mant "hate", not "had".
JimmyRopes wrote: With 2 screens that means I can work on 4 applications
Not enough. Not even close. Not to mention that for many apps you only need a fraction of the screen, not half of one! There's no good reason why there are only two possible window sizes for every application. That's fine for a phone screen, but not for a tablet, laptop or desktop!
JimmyRopes wrote: Clifford Nelson wrote: now there is no supported environment for creating desktop applications, now that WPF is basically unsupported.
You really should be thinking about moving on.
That may not be feasible. If you program for a living, the clients define the target platform. For a professional developer, it may therefore be more sensible to stick with W7. At least until the clients move on to W8. For the time being, W8 will run most W7 programs in desktop mode, no problem. The reverse isn't true at all. That makes W7 the better developer platform for desktop applications.
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
|
|
|
|
|
Stefan_Lang wrote: That got me scratching my head as well, until I realized he mant "hate", not "had".
That makes more sense.
Stefan_Lang wrote: There's no good reason why there are only two possible window sizes for every application. That's fine for a phone screen, but not for a tablet, laptop or desktop!
I am not on a windows system right now so I can't test this out but I think you can shrink a metro app horizontally, not just full or half screen.
this may help for metro apps[^]
You are not limited to two sizes on the desktop. You can stretch or shrink the window from a non-metro app just like before.
Stefan_Lang wrote:
That may not be feasible. If you program for a living, the clients define the target platform. For a professional developer, it may therefore be more sensible to stick with W7. At least until the clients move on to W8
Unless you are working from home the client will provide you with a workstation with the proper OS and development environment.
That does not preclude moving on in you personal life. The added advantage is when the client does move on you will be ahead of the learning curve.
Even if you do develop from home there is no reason that you cannot develop desktop apps on a W8/8.1 machine.
Visual Studio still installs on W8/8.1 so just choose the proper solution type for the target environment.
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
|
|
|
|
|
I only brought up the size (and number of windows) limitation because you mentioned it. Me, I do not use Metro. At all.
The link you posted is interesting, but in another way than you intended. It proves my point about lack of discoverability. Why is there no obvious way to change window arrangement? Why does it need an article to show users how it works? What was so bad about resizing windows by pulling at the borders that Metro is incapable of providing that feature?
A Windows border that changes the mouse pointer to another icon when it's moving over it - that is a discoverable feature. A setting hidden in a jungle of badly organized option dialogs? Not so much! (and if you want to know where I got my bad attitude about W8 option dialogs from: just look at that article again!)
I do realize that on a device with no mouse attached, and with a limited screen size, it may be difficult to catch and move a window border. But if that UI is meant for all devices, why on earth did the MS designers then focus all their efforts on creating an UI that only makes sense on a phone? Yes, there's a desktop. And, yes, on the desktop, resizing works just as we're used to (unless the charm bar gets in the way of course  ). But MS made a point about Metro being the future, and the desktop UI going away. Once that happens it's no longer about who moved my cheese - it is about who stole it!
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
|
|
|
|
|
Stefan_Lang wrote: MS made a point about Metro being the future, and the desktop UI going away. Once that happens it's no longer about who moved my cheese - it is about who stole it!
Get over it!
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
|
|
|
|
|
Desktop applications will be around for quite sometime. I consult for government agencies that have considerable investment in Win 3.11 thru Win XP based applications. In a recent costs analysis, conversion to Win 8.1 in a small (4000 terminal) agency equated to $1.6billion just to upgrade the hardware. Add training and software conversion costs to make the existing systems compatible, you start looking for further reductions in staff. The cost just rose to $7.8BILLION. (No wonder the Chinese are saying NO to Win 8.1.)
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure I'm following you here. You can do anything on 8.1 that you can do with any version of Windows. If you don't like Metro (like I don't) simply don't use it. The desktop system (still really central to the whole thing) is just as functional as it always was.
Paint me confused. What's the problem?
|
|
|
|
|
CodeBubba wrote: I'm not sure I'm following you here. You can do anything on 8.1 that you can do with any version of Windows.
Yes. You can. But it takes longer now. In terms of more mouse clicks/key press/screen swipes. Try performing the following actions
1) take a screenshot of this page and send the image by mail to some one.
2) add up figures on a web page using the calculator.
And that charms bar or what ever they call it is downright annoying. It pops out when it's not required and does not when you need it.
Und wenn du lange in einen abgrund blickst, blickt der Abgrund auch in dich hinein - Friedrich Nietzsche
|
|
|
|
|
Sahir Shah wrote: And that charms bar or what ever they call it is downright annoying. It pops out when it's not required ...
Right-click on the taskbar. Select Properties -> Navigation, and de-select the "When I point to the top right corner show the charms" option.
Sahir Shah wrote: ...and does not when you need it.
Win + C
Take a few minutes the learn the keyboard shortcuts:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KjmBJxjNhs&sns=tw[^]
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
Sahir Shah wrote: Yes. You can. But it takes longer now. In terms of more mouse clicks/key press/screen swipes. Try performing the following actions
1) take a screenshot of this page and send the image by mail to some one.
Sames as other versions of Windows:
a) Alt+PrtScn
b) Open Outlook, select New Message
c) Press Ctrl-V
Sahir Shah wrote: 2) add up figures on a web page using the calculator.
Same as other versions of Windows:
a) Open calculator (I use it a lot, so it is an icon on my desktop)
b) Type or select with mouse, then Ctrl+C, Ctrl+V figures
c) Press + key between entries
d) Press = key to see result
CQ de W5ALT
Walt Fair, Jr., P. E.
Comport Computing
Specializing in Technical Engineering Software
|
|
|
|
|
1) take a screenshot of this page and send the image by mail to some one
(...)
And that charms bar or what ever they call it is downright annoying. It pops out when it's not required and does not when you need it.
Whooooosh. I'm sorry, but the irony is strong with these 2 sentences in the same rant.
How to take a print screen and mail it to someone in Windows8 (assuming you're on the desktop): open the charms bar and click share, select mail app and a new e-mail with the screen cap will be ready to send to your desired recipient.
Even better, since the charms bar has some memory, I have all my usual contacts I send shares right there in the share tab, so it's usually no more than 1 swipe and 2 clicks to send an e-mail with a print screen. Quite a feat of usability if you ask me.
As for accessibility of the charms bar, try to get a bit more how it works sooo much better than all kinds of bars, launchers and popups: you have to either hold your mouse in the corner for a long time or you can just hit the corner and then drag the mouse along the right edge of the screen. I think I've had about 1 false-positive charms bar in a few years and even in that case it wasn't intrusive.
|
|
|
|
|
copy paste from apple fainboi forum  - man have you ever USED Win 8.1? Every sentence is crap 
|
|
|
|
|
johannesnestler wrote: copy paste from apple fainboi forum - man have you ever USED Win 8.1? Every sentence is crap
you are the current a**hole here. You are trying to answer a serious discussion with shite.
You are the fanboy!
Once you lose your pride the rest is easy.
I would agree with you but then we both would be wrong.
The report of my death was an exaggeration - Mark Twain
Simply Elegant Designs JimmyRopes Designs
I'm on-line therefore I am.
JimmyRopes
|
|
|
|
|
Nope, johannesnestler is the only one making sense.
The OP clearly has not used Windows 8 at all, it took me all of 5 minutes to realise that Windows 8 is exactly the same as every other version of Windows if you stay on the desktop.
|
|
|
|
|
If "it took you all of 5 Minutes" then it is you who hasn't used W8 and had the opportunities to discover the multitude of issues it has. I've pointed out a small selection in posting above.
I've used W8 for more than a year and wholeheartedly agree with the OP. If all you do is browsing the web, W8 is fine. For serious work, it's a huge pain. If I hadn't already put so many hours of work into my ultrabook just to make it similarly productive as every W7 or XP machine is already out of the box, I'd switch to Linux instead: that would probably also require some work to configure, but at least then I'd knew I'm in control.
As for johannesnestler, he disqualified himself from the discussion by needlessly insulting the OP, without even attempting to make a civilized argument.
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
|
|
|
|
|
I've actually been using it exclusively since beta(nearly 2 years now) and once you are on the desktop there is absolutely no difference from Windows 7(you do know that there is still a desktop right?). I agree that the Metro interface or whatever it's called now is a waste of time but there is absolutely no reason to use it.
What specific issues are you having with Windows 8? I saw that you mentioned Window sizes in your previous comment(whaat?) The OP's example is also completely useless, how does it take more clicks to e-mail a screenshot or use the calculator?
|
|
|
|
|
See my posting here[^] (I hope the link tot he posting works - otherwise just look for my very first response to JimmyRopes in this topic)
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
|
|
|
|
|
The interface is not as different as it may seem. Sure, there's the store apps and the fullscreen app environment, but there's also the regular desktop environment. You can even set an option to boot directly to desktop. Then you pin your most recently used stuff to the task bar and the interface is basically Windows 7.
Sure, the full screen app store world is there, but you're not forced to use it.
|
|
|
|
|
For some reason people seem to think that all that desktop users need is the ability to switch to the desktop and maybe a start menu. That isn't true at all. These two things are just what opens the door to serious work - but it doesn't go halfway to being as productive as Windows XP and Windows 7 were out of the box.
There are plenty of issues that make the W8 desktop needlessly hard to use; some caused by touch based functionality, some by removed functionality, some by the UI getting in the way in a manner it never did in any previous version.
This isn't a matter of choosing whether or not to use the metro/app world - it is the issue that the non-Metro/App world is messed up, too!
GOTOs are a bit like wire coat hangers: they tend to breed in the darkness, such that where there once were few, eventually there are many, and the program's architecture collapses beneath them. (Fran Poretto)
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
