On 15 June 2010 14:05, Ethan Grammatikidis <eeke...@fastmail.fm> wrote: > On 15 Jun 2010, at 12:51, Connor Lane Smith wrote: > > In my opinion the problem is purely user experience: > > Is this your opinion, or lines you've been fed?
My own, strangely enough. UX is one of my interests, particularly since most programmers seem to suck so hard at it. Let's at least assume for the time being that suckless devs have minds of their own. > > (a) installing > > software is perceived as difficult, so not having to bother with that > > is an instant plus, and (b) your data is available everywhere. > > Neither is a reason to use horse-shit like HTTP, HTML, CSS or JavaScript. You clearly didn't read anything else I wrote. Just for you I will repeat myself: On 15 Jun 2010 12:51, Connor Lane Smith <c...@lubutu.com> wrote: > However, HTML and HTTP do not form a panacea. It's just the "in thing" > nowadays to write slow, buggy clones of existing software in > JavaScript and to call it innovation. > Both of > these problems could be solved with improved package management and > data synchronisation, but it's an uphill struggle, since everyone's > just fixated with the intertubes now... How tiring. Next time I suggest reading what people actually write before replying with snotty shit. Thanks, cls
