I guess the conclusion I would draw from that is not so much that the “web world is so much worse because we have to cater for all these clients” as “the web world is the only feasible answer to catering for all these clients – it’s simply not financially feasible to do it via thick clients”
From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Nathan Schultz Sent: Wednesday, 23 November 2016 5:40 PM To: ozDotNet <ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com> Subject: Re: [OT] node.js and express As I said in my first e-mail, (when Greg was wondering what the key drivers were for web-development), I said "accessibility". Thick clients are simply not transportable. So the simple answer is, you don't. On 23 November 2016 at 14:21, Ken Schaefer <k...@adopenstatic.com<mailto:k...@adopenstatic.com>> wrote: From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com<mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com> [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com<mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com>] On Behalf Of Nathan Schultz Sent: Wednesday, 23 November 2016 5:10 PM To: ozDotNet <ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com<mailto:ozdotnet@ozdotnet.com>> Subject: Re: [OT] node.js and express @Ken, your definition of Technical Debt isn't that different from that of Martin Fowler's. Although I'd say (with some seriousness) that JavaScript is Technical Debt ;-) I've found many of the things you mention far worse in the web-world (where you sometimes have to cater for everything from a mobile phone to a quadruple monitor desk-top, and everything in-between, all with different OS's, software, plug-ins, versions, and incompatibilities). I’m curious to know how you’d cater for this variety of consumers if you were to do thick-client development? Wouldn’t that be even more of a dog’s breakfast of OSes, development environments/languages, pre-requisites you’d need to ship etc?
