On Tue, Jun 15, 2010 at 4:38 AM, Alexander Teinum <atei...@gmail.com> wrote: > If you host the applications locally, > and use something like web sockets and Node.js to communicate with the > lower level stuff,
This is some of the most horrifying shit ever spewed into this mailing list. > 1. uses web technologies, How the hell is this an advantage? > 2. performs good, Maybe on your 4-core processor. There's no way this will ever be competitive with a real program. > 3. is open. Great. Open-source dogshit. Observe as I scramble toward sourceforge, blinded by my desire for this download. > I’m not sure if this is a good idea. I'm absolutely positive it isn't. > I do think it’s the most > streamlined way to do it, since you’re most likely using the web > browser anyway. I use a car a lot, too, can we just require me to start that engine to do an 'ls'? Maybe have the speedometer point to different numbers -- then I can point my webcam at it and run a program to convert them into ascii and transmit them via RDS to my car stereo so I can read them. I mean, it's the most streamlined way to do it, even if it's circuitous, wasteful, and idiotic. I'm most likely using my car anyway. > There was some talk about the idea of implementing a > suckless web browser engine in the other thread that’s 100 % standards > compliant. Web standards aren't "100% standards-compliant." Every last one of them is self-contradictory. > That could make a web-based terminal application almost as > snappy as xterm if done right. You have no grounds for this conclusion *whatsoever*. > I’d love to see, or to be a part of that. Feel free to watch, but if someone starts to produce code, do the world a favor and keep your opinions from contaminating it -- # Kurt H Maier