On Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Gerald Klein wrote:
> "a thread of rants making deluded claims" Here we go negative again, "a thread of rants making deluded claims" you just love to hear yourself talk don't you. I didn't respond to your last post because you started to make reasonable representation of your case, let it go.
Have you actually read all of the posts in this thread? I have. It reads like "no one does anything interesting, except for me. Why is everyone ignoring me?" That IS my reasonable case presentation.
If you want, I'll spend some time gathering examples for you...
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com (mailto:waldron.r...@gmail.com)> wrote:
> > On Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Gerald Klein wrote:
> > > Call it soap boxing what ever you like, but when you say "I think I speak for most when I say" I have a problem, because you don't. Further the line about show us some code was not what I was talking about, it was the lines prior to that. "you've given us nothing to be interested in, aside from a few YouTube videos and some hints about an API that, to be honest, looks nothing like a well designed JavaScript API" Ah yes a positive and necessary critique from someone with an obvious superior intelligence. Personally I don't care what your creating robots with, this has to do with respect. You know I have always been impressed with braggarts that use accomplishment to justify rude behavior.
> > I didn't mention those projects to brag at all, I mentioned them because the OP has created a thread of rants making deluded claims and then complains that no one is interested.
> > Well... I'm interested, but I want to see more and I don't mean more YouTube videos and rants, I want code.
> > Rick
> > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com (mailto:waldron.r...@gmail.com)> wrote:
> > > > On Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Gerald Klein wrote:
> > > > > > @Rick please don't speak for most, speak for your self. If you have no interest then don't comment. Large ideas come from small ideas, I would hate to think that something I might say could have been short sighted may ruin the chances of something good happening coming out of someones effort. IMHO
> > > > > thanks --jerry
> > > > Reel it in buddy, I was the first person to respond to the original post (shared some interesting, related research and information).
> > > > Since then all I've read is long winded soapboxing, with claims that people don't take JavaScript seriously enough as a "high level" language and that no one is innovating quite like the author is... forgive me, but I expect substance to back claims like that. I've spent the last 7 months programming arduino robots with JavaScript and this past week Felix G demoed ARdrone control programs written in JS... None of that would matter if there were no code to show for it. So like I said, show me some code and I'll show you some interest.
> > > > Rick
> > > > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com (mailto:waldron.r...@gmail.com)> wrote:
> > > > > > > I have added functionality to the bottom dock, including a working Trashcan.
> > > > > > > I have still received precisely zero real interest in any of this & I am really eager to get together with programmers who want to get something beautiful started!
> > > > > > I think I speak for most when I say: you've given us nothing to be interested in, aside from a few YouTube videos and some hints about an API that, to be honest, looks nothing like a well designed JavaScript API. > > > > > > Share some code ;) > > > > > > Rick
> > > > > > > My theory is basically that the nature of the front-end experience crucially determines how much "excitement" the back-end administrators will have. At the moment, the web is filled with absolutely boring/unresponsive front-ends. So anyone who wants to work with me will really have a leg up in terms of offering the kind of user experience that will keep the back-enders on their toes ("on their toes" == "gamefully employed" ;)
> > > > > > > By the way, I am well aware that any business that comes out of this will not want to offer an exact replica of OS X as their front end. I am using OS X as the ultimate challenge to see how awesome I can make the end user experience. Once I can get this prototype working as well as possible, then I can start to think about how to make it even better than OS X!
> > > > > > > I am all ears in terms of what kinds of services can be offered up through this kind of interface...
> > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ > > > > > > > Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines > > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > > > > > Groups "nodejs" group.
> > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to nodejs@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs@googlegroups.com)
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > > nodejs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com)
> > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ > > > > > > Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > > > > Groups "nodejs" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to nodejs@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs@googlegroups.com)
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > nodejs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com)
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
> > > > > Arch Awesome, Ranger & Vim the coding triple threat.
> > > > > Linux registered user #548580
> > > > > -- > > > > > Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ > > > > > Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > > > Groups "nodejs" group.
> > > > > To post to this group, send email to nodejs@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs@googlegroups.com)
> > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > nodejs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com)
> > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
> > > > -- > > > > Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ > > > > Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > > Groups "nodejs" group.
> > > > To post to this group, send email to nodejs@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs@googlegroups.com)
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > nodejs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com)
> > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
> > > Arch Awesome, Ranger & Vim the coding triple threat.
> > > Linux registered user #548580
> > > -- > > > Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ > > > Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > Groups "nodejs" group.
> > > To post to this group, send email to nodejs@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs@googlegroups.com)
> > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > nodejs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com)
> > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
If that it was you feel about this thread you know the subject line, give
it a pass instead of wasting time talking about something that you have
stated does not interest you.
On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 1:26 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Gerald Klein wrote:
> "a thread of rants making deluded claims" Here we go negative again, "a
> thread of rants making deluded claims" you just love to hear yourself talk
> don't you. I didn't respond to your last post because you started to make
> reasonable representation of your case, let it go.
> Have you actually read all of the posts in this thread? I have. It reads
> like "no one does anything interesting, except for me. Why is everyone
> ignoring me?" That IS my reasonable case presentation.
> If you want, I'll spend some time gathering examples for you...
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 1:06 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Gerald Klein wrote:
> Call it soap boxing what ever you like, but when you say "I think I speak
> for most when I say" I have a problem, because you don't. Further the line
> about show us some code was not what I was talking about, it was the lines
> prior to that. "you've given us nothing to be interested in, aside from a
> few YouTube videos and some hints about an API that, to be honest, looks
> nothing like a well designed JavaScript API" Ah yes a positive
> and necessary critique from someone with an obvious superior intelligence.
> Personally I don't care what your creating robots with, this has to do
> with respect. You know I have always been impressed with braggarts that use
> accomplishment to justify rude behavior.
> I didn't mention those projects to brag at all, I mentioned them because
> the OP has created a thread of rants making deluded claims and then
> complains that no one is interested.
> Well... I'm interested, but I want to see more and I don't mean more
> YouTube videos and rants, I want code.
> Rick
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 12:32 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 12:54 PM, Gerald Klein wrote:
> @Rick please don't speak for most, speak for your self. If you have no
> interest then don't comment. Large ideas come from small ideas, I would
> hate to think that something I might say could have been short sighted may
> ruin the chances of something good happening coming out of someones effort.
> IMHO
> thanks --jerry
> Reel it in buddy, I was the first person to respond to the original post
> (shared some interesting, related research and information).
> Since then all I've read is long winded soapboxing, with claims that
> people don't take JavaScript seriously enough as a "high level" language
> and that no one is innovating quite like the author is... forgive me, but I
> expect substance to back claims like that. I've spent the last 7 months
> programming arduino robots with JavaScript and this past week Felix G
> demoed ARdrone control programs written in JS... None of that would matter
> if there were no code to show for it. So like I said, show me some code and
> I'll show you some interest.
> Rick
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 9:53 AM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > I have added functionality to the bottom dock, including a working
> Trashcan.
> > I have still received precisely zero real interest in any of this & I am
> really eager to get together with programmers who want to get something
> beautiful started!
> I think I speak for most when I say: you've given us nothing to be
> interested in, aside from a few YouTube videos and some hints about an API
> that, to be honest, looks nothing like a well designed JavaScript API.
> Share some code ;)
> Rick
> > My theory is basically that the nature of the front-end experience
> crucially determines how much "excitement" the back-end administrators will
> have. At the moment, the web is filled with absolutely boring/unresponsive
> front-ends. So anyone who wants to work with me will really have a leg up
> in terms of offering the kind of user experience that will keep the
> back-enders on their toes ("on their toes" == "gamefully employed" ;)
> > By the way, I am well aware that any business that comes out of this
> will not want to offer an exact replica of OS X as their front end. I am
> using OS X as the ultimate challenge to see how awesome I can make the end
> user experience. Once I can get this prototype working as well as
> possible, then I can start to think about how to make it even better than
> OS X!
> > I am all ears in terms of what kinds of services can be offered up
> through this kind of interface...
On Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Gerald Klein wrote:
> The term constructive criticism which is always welcome innately suggests that there is a better alternative idea or path that could be taken. Now logic would also suggest that the person making this criticism have at least an inkling of what that might be.
I've been really patient with your aggro commentary, but it's clear to me that you're not reading my responses in their entirety.
1. I'm definitely interested in the OPs project.
2. YouTube videos do not satisfy my interests as a programmer and software engineer.
3. I want to see some code, that will be exciting
Hopefully I've made myself perfectly clear this time.
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com (mailto:waldron.r...@gmail.com)> wrote:
> > On Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Mark Hahn wrote:
> > > > I have never found negative comments to be helpful,
> > > I respectfully disagree. Informed opinions should be welcome here.
> > +1 Informed and critical opinions are necessary for broader growth
> > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Gerald Klein <j...@zognet.com (mailto:j...@zognet.com)> wrote:
> > > > I myself only from the seventies and more into the eighties in a practical way. Accept my apologies but the comment before you was a bit harsh and I was already annoyed. I have never found negative comments to be helpful, I also don't assume that I can see the direction that something will take. What I know is that it is good for people to be creative whatever that form takes. He is putting is ideas out there which is more then most people will ever do. I applaud any effort by a person putting out their own ideas out there for everyone to see and I hope he continues to do it and he gets to where he's going, I hope someday he makes millions from it. I would applaud again.
> > > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Mark Hahn <m...@hahnca.com (mailto:m...@hahnca.com)> wrote:
> > > > > > This is also to say that from this may come something interesting
> > > > > That would be great and I certainly don't want to dampen any enthusiasm. I'm just giving my opinion as a potential user.
> > > > > To journey to a great new place, it would seem to be easier to start from somewhere modern instead of something old and moldy. I have been using computers since the mid '60s and witnessed many metaphors come and go. I for one would be happy to get rid of the desktop. Most users nowadays grew up with the web, so it is a metaphor that they are at least as familiar with as the desktop.
> > > > > Maybe a glimpse into the future of the desktop could prove me wrong. Where can it go from here?
> > > > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Gerald Klein <j...@zognet.com (mailto:j...@zognet.com)> wrote:
> > > > > > The point I think he is making is that some derivative of a familiar metaphor will help people grab on to the functionality or feel more at home. This ia also to say that from this may come something interesting after iteration(x) that is created.
> > > > > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Mark Hahn <m...@hahnca.com (mailto:m...@hahnca.com)> wrote:
> > > > > > > I know that this is a popular thing to do, but I don't understand it. Why would you want to put a metaphor that dates from 30 years ago on a modern brower? I find the hyperlinked documents on the web with responsive web pages to be a better experience.
> > > > > > > Google is working hard to replace the old Microsoft functionality with gmail and google docs, yet you don't find Google using a desktop metaphor with folders and trash cans. Apps don't spring up from icons into desktop windows, they appear as web pages from web links.
> > > > > > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com (mailto:waldron.r...@gmail.com)> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > I have added functionality to the bottom dock, including a working Trashcan.
> > > > > > > > > I have still received precisely zero real interest in any of this & I am really eager to get together with programmers who want to get something beautiful started!
> > > > > > > > I think I speak for most when I say: you've given us nothing to be interested in, aside from a few YouTube videos and some hints about an API that, to be honest, looks nothing like a well designed JavaScript API. > > > > > > > > Share some code ;) > > > > > > > > Rick
> > > > > > > > > My theory is basically that the nature of the front-end experience crucially determines how much "excitement" the back-end administrators will have. At the moment, the web is filled with absolutely boring/unresponsive front-ends. So anyone who wants to work with me will really have a leg up in terms of offering the kind of user experience that will keep the back-enders on their toes ("on their toes" == "gamefully employed" ;)
> > > > > > > > > By the way, I am well aware that any business that comes out of this will not want to offer an exact replica of OS X as their front end. I am using OS X as the ultimate challenge to see how awesome I can make the end user experience. Once I can get this prototype working as well as possible, then I can start to think about how to make it even better than OS X!
> > > > > > > > > I am all ears in terms of what kinds of services can be offered up through this kind of interface...
> > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ > > > > > > > > > Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines > > > > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > > > > > > > Groups "nodejs" group.
> > > > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to nodejs@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs@googlegroups.com)
> > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > > > > nodejs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com)
> > > > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ > > > > > > > > Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines > > > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > > > > > > Groups "nodejs" group.
> > > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to nodejs@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs@googlegroups.com)
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > > > nodejs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com)
> > > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
> > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ > > > > > > > Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines > > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > > > > > Groups "nodejs" group.
> > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to nodejs@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs@googlegroups.com)
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > > nodejs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com)
> > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
> > > > > > Arch Awesome, Ranger & Vim the coding triple threat.
> > > > > > Linux registered user #548580
> > > > > > -- > > > > > > Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ > > > > > > Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > > > > Groups "nodejs" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to nodejs@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs@googlegroups.com)
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > nodejs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com (mailto:nodejs%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com)
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
> On Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Gerald Klein wrote:
> The term constructive criticism which is always welcome innately suggests
> that there is a better alternative idea or path that could be taken. Now
> logic would also suggest that the person making this criticism have at
> least an inkling of what that might be.
> I've been really patient with your aggro commentary, but it's clear to me
> that you're not reading my responses in their entirety.
> 1. I'm definitely interested in the OPs project.
> 2. YouTube videos do not satisfy my interests as a programmer and software
> engineer.
> 3. I want to see some code, that will be exciting
> Hopefully I've made myself perfectly clear this time.
> Rick
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com>wrote:
> On Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Mark Hahn wrote:
> > I have never found negative comments to be helpful,
> I respectfully disagree. Informed opinions should be welcome here.
> +1 Informed and critical opinions are necessary for broader growth
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Gerald Klein <j...@zognet.com> wrote:
> I myself only from the seventies and more into the eighties in a practical
> way. Accept my apologies but the comment before you was a bit harsh and I
> was already annoyed. I have never found negative comments to be helpful, I
> also don't assume that I can see the direction that something will take.
> What I know is that it is good for people to be creative whatever that form
> takes. He is putting is ideas out there which is more then most people will
> ever do. I applaud any effort by a person putting out their own ideas out
> there for everyone to see and I hope he continues to do it and he gets to
> where he's going, I hope someday he makes millions from it. I would applaud
> again.
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Mark Hahn <m...@hahnca.com> wrote:
> > This is also to say that from this may come something interesting
> That would be great and I certainly don't want to dampen any enthusiasm.
> I'm just giving my opinion as a potential user.
> To journey to a great new place, it would seem to be easier to start from
> somewhere modern instead of something old and moldy. I have been using
> computers since the mid '60s and witnessed many metaphors come and go. I
> for one would be happy to get rid of the desktop. Most users nowadays grew
> up with the web, so it is a metaphor that they are at least as familiar
> with as the desktop.
> Maybe a glimpse into the future of the desktop could prove me wrong.
> Where can it go from here?
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Gerald Klein <j...@zognet.com> wrote:
> The point I think he is making is that some derivative of a
> familiar metaphor will help people grab on to the functionality or feel
> more at home. This ia also to say that from this may come something
> interesting after iteration(x) that is created.
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Mark Hahn <m...@hahnca.com> wrote:
> I know that this is a popular thing to do, but I don't understand it. Why
> would you want to put a metaphor that dates from 30 years ago on a modern
> brower? I find the hyperlinked documents on the web with responsive web
> pages to be a better experience.
> Google is working hard to replace the old Microsoft functionality with
> gmail and google docs, yet you don't find Google using a desktop metaphor
> with folders and trash cans. Apps don't spring up from icons into desktop
> windows, they appear as web pages from web links.
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > I have added functionality to the bottom dock, including a working
> Trashcan.
> > I have still received precisely zero real interest in any of this & I am
> really eager to get together with programmers who want to get something
> beautiful started!
> I think I speak for most when I say: you've given us nothing to be
> interested in, aside from a few YouTube videos and some hints about an API
> that, to be honest, looks nothing like a well designed JavaScript API.
> Share some code ;)
> Rick
> > My theory is basically that the nature of the front-end experience
> crucially determines how much "excitement" the back-end administrators will
> have. At the moment, the web is filled with absolutely boring/unresponsive
> front-ends. So anyone who wants to work with me will really have a leg up
> in terms of offering the kind of user experience that will keep the
> back-enders on their toes ("on their toes" == "gamefully employed" ;)
> > By the way, I am well aware that any business that comes out of this
> will not want to offer an exact replica of OS X as their front end. I am
> using OS X as the ultimate challenge to see how awesome I can make the end
> user experience. Once I can get this prototype working as well as
> possible, then I can start to think about how to make it even better than
> OS X!
> > I am all ears in terms of what kinds of services can be offered up
> through this kind of interface...
I've kept quiet on this thread to see how it plays out. I was waiting for
the OP to finally post something similar to "Why is everybody ignoring me
why isn't there any interest?". Now that it's happened, here's my 2 cents.
While I admit It looks neat from the YouTube video, It's just a gimmick.
There's been numerous web desktop projects throughout the years and they
all fail to garner enough real interest to go anywhere. Quite frankly there
are so many UI libraries out there for building nice UI that nothing in
your demo is really that revolutionary at all. Node has been around a while
for doing the file IO, UI libraries are plentiful. In fact the only thing
"special" about your demo is that it's a Mac OS clone... (Good luck open
sourcing something thats 100% Apple copyrighted material.). It also doesn't
help the OPs general attitude throughout all his posts is "Everything else
sucks, my stuff is magical". Very reminiscent of Steve Jobs. Adjusting your
tone a little and you might have gotten a little more fish biting.
That said, I have always been interested in the web desktop type projects,
just not interested enough to contribute. I like to see the results and
code. (This is a programming mailing list afterall, nobody cares much about
youtube videos, we want to see code)
On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Gerald Klein <j...@zognet.com> wrote:
> Yes that IS much better, thank you for clearing that up and I am sure OP
> will respond to that in a more positive fashion.
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> On Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Gerald Klein wrote:
>> The term constructive criticism which is always welcome innately suggests
>> that there is a better alternative idea or path that could be taken. Now
>> logic would also suggest that the person making this criticism have at
>> least an inkling of what that might be.
>> I've been really patient with your aggro commentary, but it's clear to me
>> that you're not reading my responses in their entirety.
>> 1. I'm definitely interested in the OPs project.
>> 2. YouTube videos do not satisfy my interests as a programmer and
>> software engineer.
>> 3. I want to see some code, that will be exciting
>> Hopefully I've made myself perfectly clear this time.
>> Rick
>> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> On Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Mark Hahn wrote:
>> > I have never found negative comments to be helpful,
>> I respectfully disagree. Informed opinions should be welcome here.
>> +1 Informed and critical opinions are necessary for broader growth
>> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Gerald Klein <j...@zognet.com> wrote:
>> I myself only from the seventies and more into the eighties in a
>> practical way. Accept my apologies but the comment before you was a bit
>> harsh and I was already annoyed. I have never found negative comments to be
>> helpful, I also don't assume that I can see the direction that something
>> will take. What I know is that it is good for people to be creative
>> whatever that form takes. He is putting is ideas out there which is more
>> then most people will ever do. I applaud any effort by a person putting out
>> their own ideas out there for everyone to see and I hope he continues to do
>> it and he gets to where he's going, I hope someday he makes millions from
>> it. I would applaud again.
>> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Mark Hahn <m...@hahnca.com> wrote:
>> > This is also to say that from this may come something interesting
>> That would be great and I certainly don't want to dampen any enthusiasm.
>> I'm just giving my opinion as a potential user.
>> To journey to a great new place, it would seem to be easier to start from
>> somewhere modern instead of something old and moldy. I have been using
>> computers since the mid '60s and witnessed many metaphors come and go. I
>> for one would be happy to get rid of the desktop. Most users nowadays grew
>> up with the web, so it is a metaphor that they are at least as familiar
>> with as the desktop.
>> Maybe a glimpse into the future of the desktop could prove me wrong.
>> Where can it go from here?
>> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Gerald Klein <j...@zognet.com> wrote:
>> The point I think he is making is that some derivative of a
>> familiar metaphor will help people grab on to the functionality or feel
>> more at home. This ia also to say that from this may come something
>> interesting after iteration(x) that is created.
>> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Mark Hahn <m...@hahnca.com> wrote:
>> I know that this is a popular thing to do, but I don't understand it.
>> Why would you want to put a metaphor that dates from 30 years ago on a
>> modern brower? I find the hyperlinked documents on the web with responsive
>> web pages to be a better experience.
>> Google is working hard to replace the old Microsoft functionality with
>> gmail and google docs, yet you don't find Google using a desktop metaphor
>> with folders and trash cans. Apps don't spring up from icons into desktop
>> windows, they appear as web pages from web links.
>> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com>wrote:
>> > I have added functionality to the bottom dock, including a working
>> Trashcan.
>> > I have still received precisely zero real interest in any of this & I
>> am really eager to get together with programmers who want to get something
>> beautiful started!
>> I think I speak for most when I say: you've given us nothing to be
>> interested in, aside from a few YouTube videos and some hints about an API
>> that, to be honest, looks nothing like a well designed JavaScript API.
>> Share some code ;)
>> Rick
>> > My theory is basically that the nature of the front-end experience
>> crucially determines how much "excitement" the back-end administrators will
>> have. At the moment, the web is filled with absolutely boring/unresponsive
>> front-ends. So anyone who wants to work with me will really have a leg up
>> in terms of offering the kind of user experience that will keep the
>> back-enders on their toes ("on their toes" == "gamefully employed" ;)
>> > By the way, I am well aware that any business that comes out of this
>> will not want to offer an exact replica of OS X as their front end. I am
>> using OS X as the ultimate challenge to see how awesome I can make the end
>> user experience. Once I can get this prototype working as well as
>> possible, then I can start to think about how to make it even better than
>> OS X!
>> > I am all ears in terms of what kinds of services can be offered up
>> through this kind of interface...
>> --
>> Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ >> Posting guidelines:
>> https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> Groups "nodejs" group.
>> To post to this group, send email to nodejs@googlegroups.com
>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>> nodejs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
>> For more options, visit this group at
That's pretty much my take. It's nice to see he is enthusiastic about
his endeavors, and I wish him the best of luck, but for me if you are not
going to show me any code, why are you posting it in this forum?
On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 4:02 PM, Sotonin <soto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've kept quiet on this thread to see how it plays out. I was waiting for
> the OP to finally post something similar to "Why is everybody ignoring me
> why isn't there any interest?". Now that it's happened, here's my 2 cents.
> While I admit It looks neat from the YouTube video, It's just a gimmick.
> There's been numerous web desktop projects throughout the years and they
> all fail to garner enough real interest to go anywhere. Quite frankly there
> are so many UI libraries out there for building nice UI that nothing in
> your demo is really that revolutionary at all. Node has been around a while
> for doing the file IO, UI libraries are plentiful. In fact the only thing
> "special" about your demo is that it's a Mac OS clone... (Good luck open
> sourcing something thats 100% Apple copyrighted material.). It also doesn't
> help the OPs general attitude throughout all his posts is "Everything else
> sucks, my stuff is magical". Very reminiscent of Steve Jobs. Adjusting your
> tone a little and you might have gotten a little more fish biting.
> That said, I have always been interested in the web desktop type projects,
> just not interested enough to contribute. I like to see the results and
> code. (This is a programming mailing list afterall, nobody cares much about
> youtube videos, we want to see code)
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 1:42 PM, Gerald Klein <j...@zognet.com> wrote:
>> Yes that IS much better, thank you for clearing that up and I am sure OP
>> will respond to that in a more positive fashion.
>> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 1:37 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> On Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 2:17 PM, Gerald Klein wrote:
>>> The term constructive criticism which is always
>>> welcome innately suggests that there is a better alternative idea or path
>>> that could be taken. Now logic would also suggest that the person making
>>> this criticism have at least an inkling of what that might be.
>>> I've been really patient with your aggro commentary, but it's clear to
>>> me that you're not reading my responses in their entirety.
>>> 1. I'm definitely interested in the OPs project.
>>> 2. YouTube videos do not satisfy my interests as a programmer and
>>> software engineer.
>>> 3. I want to see some code, that will be exciting
>>> Hopefully I've made myself perfectly clear this time.
>>> Rick
>>> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> On Sunday, September 30, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Mark Hahn wrote:
>>> > I have never found negative comments to be helpful,
>>> I respectfully disagree. Informed opinions should be welcome here.
>>> +1 Informed and critical opinions are necessary for broader growth
>>> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 10:32 AM, Gerald Klein <j...@zognet.com> wrote:
>>> I myself only from the seventies and more into the eighties in a
>>> practical way. Accept my apologies but the comment before you was a bit
>>> harsh and I was already annoyed. I have never found negative comments to be
>>> helpful, I also don't assume that I can see the direction that something
>>> will take. What I know is that it is good for people to be creative
>>> whatever that form takes. He is putting is ideas out there which is more
>>> then most people will ever do. I applaud any effort by a person putting out
>>> their own ideas out there for everyone to see and I hope he continues to do
>>> it and he gets to where he's going, I hope someday he makes millions from
>>> it. I would applaud again.
>>> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 12:10 PM, Mark Hahn <m...@hahnca.com> wrote:
>>> > This is also to say that from this may come something interesting
>>> That would be great and I certainly don't want to dampen any enthusiasm.
>>> I'm just giving my opinion as a potential user.
>>> To journey to a great new place, it would seem to be easier to start
>>> from somewhere modern instead of something old and moldy. I have been
>>> using computers since the mid '60s and witnessed many metaphors come and
>>> go. I for one would be happy to get rid of the desktop. Most users
>>> nowadays grew up with the web, so it is a metaphor that they are at least
>>> as familiar with as the desktop.
>>> Maybe a glimpse into the future of the desktop could prove me wrong.
>>> Where can it go from here?
>>> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Gerald Klein <j...@zognet.com> wrote:
>>> The point I think he is making is that some derivative of a
>>> familiar metaphor will help people grab on to the functionality or feel
>>> more at home. This ia also to say that from this may come something
>>> interesting after iteration(x) that is created.
>>> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Mark Hahn <m...@hahnca.com> wrote:
>>> I know that this is a popular thing to do, but I don't understand it.
>>> Why would you want to put a metaphor that dates from 30 years ago on a
>>> modern brower? I find the hyperlinked documents on the web with responsive
>>> web pages to be a better experience.
>>> Google is working hard to replace the old Microsoft functionality with
>>> gmail and google docs, yet you don't find Google using a desktop metaphor
>>> with folders and trash cans. Apps don't spring up from icons into desktop
>>> windows, they appear as web pages from web links.
>>> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 7:53 AM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com>wrote:
>>> > I have added functionality to the bottom dock, including a working
>>> Trashcan.
>>> > I have still received precisely zero real interest in any of this & I
>>> am really eager to get together with programmers who want to get something
>>> beautiful started!
>>> I think I speak for most when I say: you've given us nothing to be
>>> interested in, aside from a few YouTube videos and some hints about an API
>>> that, to be honest, looks nothing like a well designed JavaScript API.
>>> Share some code ;)
>>> Rick
>>> > My theory is basically that the nature of the front-end experience
>>> crucially determines how much "excitement" the back-end administrators will
>>> have. At the moment, the web is filled with absolutely boring/unresponsive
>>> front-ends. So anyone who wants to work with me will really have a leg up
>>> in terms of offering the kind of user experience that will keep the
>>> back-enders on their toes ("on their toes" == "gamefully employed" ;)
>>> > By the way, I am well aware that any business that comes out of this
>>> will not want to offer an exact replica of OS X as their front end. I am
>>> using OS X as the ultimate challenge to see how awesome I can make the end
>>> user experience. Once I can get this prototype working as well as
>>> possible, then I can start to think about how to make it even better than
>>> OS X!
>>> > I am all ears in terms of what kinds of services can be offered up
>>> through this kind of interface...
>>> Arch Awesome, Ranger & Vim the coding triple threat.
>>> Linux registered user #548580
>>> --
>>> Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ >>> Posting guidelines:
>>> https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>> Groups "nodejs" group.
>>> To post to this group, send email to nodejs@googlegroups.com
>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>> nodejs+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
>>> For more options,
I really like Chrome's "create application shortcut" feature. It lets you
treat a website more like an application, by giving it it's own taskbar
item (win7), branded icon, separate context (i.e. you can be logged into 2
different gmail accounts in separate app instances - unlike with tabs), and
reduced chrome (no tabs, address bar, bookmarks, etc.). I normally have my
personal gmail, work gmail, calendar, google docs, home ip camera viewer,
cloud9 ide, github, facebook and twitter open in this way (all with their
own clearly identifiable icons). It needn't be said that eventually there
will be an online alternative to almost every app, and that lots of people
will be completely online.
In that case, people are going to need a way to see and manage all their
apps, a starting point. Today we use a desktop metaphor for that, which has
been optimized for decades. I can imagine users finding an online version
of that for their online apps just as useful. Their cloud apps would be
neatly organized, iconized and available to launch. Their cloud documents
and cloud media could be viewable and playable with just a few clicks.
There could be tools for app discovery and "installation". All accessible
from any machine, of course.
I wouldn't bet against a promising scrappy start-up in it for the long-haul
pursuing "online desktop" dominance. A brave founder could burst on the
scene and declare themselves the first person to live completely on the
cloud, giving up all traditional apps. Monetization would come from
integration and discovery of content providers (i.e. spotify, netflix,
etc.). Judging from the video (I thought it was well done), and if the code
holds up, Dennis looks like the technical lead. Open req's: "business
co-founder", "investor co-founder" and some devs.
I think Denis reminded us (or me at least) what the browser can do and what is possible, I think taking it to the next level would be to show both worlds web like and desktop like but working together (how would that interface be?) for a better user experience, better usability,etc, its all about facilitating users life, I am a fan of apple for this same reason, apple have done a great job with its new iPhone 5, everything on it has a use, its not there just to be.
On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 5:36:37 PM UTC-6, Dennis Kane wrote:
> I was thinking of just responding to this old thread<https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/nodejs/bEhSbsm24Y4>, > in which I talk about the browser based Desktop that I've been working on, > but the new thing I've been doing for the past week is so superior that I > thought it deserved a completely new thead. By the way, I know this forum > is all about server side Javascript, but there is not really any serious > place one can go on the web that talks about the client side. Besides, > with socket.io & websockets... I don't really make much of a distinction > between client and server anymore. I just know that there's no reason to > do a document.getElementById() call in node :)
> This new thing is a totally shocking clone of OS X. I knew I was going to > have to start over from the ground up, because my previous code base was so > sh*tty, haha! I have really been concentrating on getting a nice, tight > little API that developers will positively drool over. I don't want to > make this thing publicly available for many reasons... but you can check > out a youtube vid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq_W19QokXk) that shows > it in action, and I still have my same old crappy prototype online at > http://luvluvluv.info. Well, hopefully this is proof that I am able to > do some cool stuff, and hopefully summa yous will want to start being my > friend now, LOL!!!
> And get this... the current, uncompressed js file size is only 54kb!
Respectfully, I am not the typical poster here. I am a revolutionary and a trailblazer, and everything I do is geared for maximum effect. I have precisely zero interest in working for paychecks or even creating something for the purpose of selling out to a corporation. I am interested in starting a truly socialist movement... one whose participants understand that like it or not, we are constantly moving into a post-capitalist future.
This ultimately just means that the historical corporate/ad buying business model will slowly give way to models that have the notion of "social capital" at their core. For any arbitrarily complicated web domain that does not live and die by the ad revenue "sword" -- for example a university or a municipality -- there is the ever present problem of getting naive users to navigate the domain.
Today's websites typically do not use much logic when organizing their resources. It all comes down to physical page space. So if one page becomes too crowded with content, then another page must be created. Then the problem reduces to how to develop a menu of links that allows to user to navigate to the appropriate resource. At the moment, there are no standards as to how a site should organize its content. Everyone has to roll their own navigation solution, and when happening upon a new domain for the first time, a user has to spend an arbitrary amount of time parsing the visual layout, in order to create a site tree in their minds.
For everyone who says that the desktop environment is simply a "metaphor", I would have to disagree. Our modern desktop GUI's are the result of a evolutionary process... a process that has resulted in the most intuitive and powerful of navigation systems. All that I am saying is that we stop thinking of the client-side as a mere afterthought. For anyone who wants to devote their efforts towards codifying a standard client-side browser web-app interface, there will be countless service providers who will breathe a sigh of relief that they will no longer be forced to worry about layout and navigation.
And yes, I know there have been many many efforts in the past that have tried to bring the desktop experience into the browser. The first obvious problem is that Javascript has only recently become performant enough to allow there to be pretty much zero difference from the native OS in terms of icon/window handling.
Next, all of those other efforts were pre-HTML5, which pretty much forced the applications to rely upon a back end for the purpose of saving state. But now, there are so many different ways to save to the client, it actually makes me blush!
And last but not least, we are really talking about doing a kind radical paradigm inversion that conservative corporate interests just have no interest in. The politics of the modern WWW is such that most websites are completely in service of the corporate bottom line. And since corporations have historically been all about buying up ad space/ad time in whatever medium it can (print, radio, TV...), the Web has inevitably found itself as having this exact same kind of role.
So there really is not "allowed" to be very much creativity on the Web, if this creativity would only confuse/aggravate the corporate bosses who are just trying to hawk their wares to as many naive consumers as possible. The result of all of this political mumbo-jumbo is that the lowly web developer is forced to think of him/herself as a mere layout designer... such that the given layout gives sufficient prominence to whatever ad space it is trying to sell. So the Web becomes nothing but a series of static magazine-like page layouts. The only difference being that Web pages have magic "hyperlinks" that quickly move us between arbitrary pages.
In this case, the programming language of the Web (Javascript) is completely in service of the thing (the DOM) that allows for the representation of the layouts. The paradigm inversion ultimately comes down to making the layout representations completely in service of the programming language. The popular view is that Javascript exists primarily to allow for popup menus and client-side form validation. This view holds that Javascript is fundamentally incapable of allowing for the kind of functionality that I have demonstrated.
So anyone who tries to do what I am attempting must be fully aware of all of these issues, and must have the appropriate battle plan in place. Anyone who simply has the "bright idea" to start using Javascript in order to mimic desktop functionality is pretty much doomed to irrelevance if they are not able to mount a good enough challenge against the corporate interests of yore.
Which brings me back to the original point I made on this post. In order to pull off this paradigm shift, I realize that I have to become a "larger than life" figure. I have to turn myself into a kind of heroic figure in the minds of the average Web using public. I currently live in Gainesville, Florida which is home to the massively important institution known as the University of Florida. I was published as the lead story in the UF student newspaper (The Alligator) under the title, "Turlington Dancer Spreads Love, Equality." I like to keep myself in terrific shape and walk around in public wearing very short shorts. I have recently started a roadside campaign, where I've been holding a sign that says, "Fall in Luv with the Web... LuvLuvLuv.info". You should really see me dancing out there... it's a sight to behold!
By doing this I am making myself the kind of public figure who has the kind of celebrity status to at least have a fighting chance against the fat cat corporate bosses. I mean, Google itself is still forced to operate under the old paradigm because its fate rests in the hands of the old business model. There is really not much that Google can do because its very identity is wrapped up in the notion that the Web is truly all about a networked set of static, hyperlinked documents.
But anything I am involved with will begin from the premise that our browsers ultimately exist simply to provide a thin layer between the hardware and the application. Our in-browser API's are constantly providing more and more access to the native OS. Application developers can start worrying solely about business logic without any of the mechanism logic getting in the way. Whenever we want to accomplish a non-trivial task on our computers, we are very often faced with the decision of whether to allow a given native application to gain full, naked access to our hardware. There is always the inveitable, dreaded prompt that asks if we would like to give program X the ability to... get ready for it... MAKE CHANGES TO THE SYSTEM.
So now we can just start thinking of our browsers as the ultimate sandboxes that have very sophisticted interface building and networking tools. It will slowly start to dawn on native applications developers that there is just no longer very much demand for their products and services, and they will be required to live under the contraints that the in browser Javascript environment enforces. Everything I am doing, then, is a bet against a vision of the future that sees the web browser as the only user space native application on any given computer. Upon booting up, the browser will launch automatically in full screen mode (with no way of minimizing it!). Given this vision of the future of personal computing, doesn't it make sense to start investing time and energy towards making the client interface as intuitive, configurable, and powerful as possible?
"Respectfully, I am not the typical poster here. I am a revolutionary and
a trailblazer, and everything I do is geared for maximum effect."
This sentence perfectly illustrates why your thread received almost 0 real
interest from the beginning. You need to adjust your attitude if you want
to get helpful knowledgable folks interested in your project. You are just
coming off as a "typical" ego-centric lone wolf programmer whom thinks he
is better than everybody else. I don't know you, but with nothing but long
winded e-mails that read like marketing speak, I don't feel any desire to
get to know you or your project (future projects).
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Dennis Kane <dkan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Respectfully, I am not the typical poster here. I am a revolutionary and
> a trailblazer, and everything I do is geared for maximum effect. I have
> precisely zero interest in working for paychecks or even creating something
> for the purpose of selling out to a corporation. I am interested in
> starting a truly socialist movement... one whose participants understand
> that like it or not, we are constantly moving into a post-capitalist future.
> This ultimately just means that the historical corporate/ad buying
> business model will slowly give way to models that have the notion of
> "social capital" at their core. For any arbitrarily complicated web domain
> that does not live and die by the ad revenue "sword" -- for example a
> university or a municipality -- there is the ever present problem of
> getting naive users to navigate the domain.
> Today's websites typically do not use much logic when organizing their
> resources. It all comes down to physical page space. So if one page
> becomes too crowded with content, then another page must be created. Then
> the problem reduces to how to develop a menu of links that allows to user
> to navigate to the appropriate resource. At the moment, there are no
> standards as to how a site should organize its content. Everyone has to
> roll their own navigation solution, and when happening upon a new domain
> for the first time, a user has to spend an arbitrary amount of time parsing
> the visual layout, in order to create a site tree in their minds.
> For everyone who says that the desktop environment is simply a "metaphor",
> I would have to disagree. Our modern desktop GUI's are the result of a
> evolutionary process... a process that has resulted in the most intuitive
> and powerful of navigation systems. All that I am saying is that we stop
> thinking of the client-side as a mere afterthought. For anyone who wants
> to devote their efforts towards codifying a standard client-side browser
> web-app interface, there will be countless service providers who will
> breathe a sigh of relief that they will no longer be forced to worry about
> layout and navigation.
> And yes, I know there have been many many efforts in the past that have
> tried to bring the desktop experience into the browser. The first obvious
> problem is that Javascript has only recently become performant enough to
> allow there to be pretty much zero difference from the native OS in terms
> of icon/window handling.
> Next, all of those other efforts were pre-HTML5, which pretty much forced
> the applications to rely upon a back end for the purpose of saving state.
> But now, there are so many different ways to save to the client, it
> actually makes me blush!
> And last but not least, we are really talking about doing a kind radical
> paradigm inversion that conservative corporate interests just have no
> interest in. The politics of the modern WWW is such that most websites are
> completely in service of the corporate bottom line. And since corporations
> have historically been all about buying up ad space/ad time in whatever
> medium it can (print, radio, TV...), the Web has inevitably found itself as
> having this exact same kind of role.
> So there really is not "allowed" to be very much creativity on the Web, if
> this creativity would only confuse/aggravate the corporate bosses who are
> just trying to hawk their wares to as many naive consumers as possible.
> The result of all of this political mumbo-jumbo is that the lowly web
> developer is forced to think of him/herself as a mere layout designer...
> such that the given layout gives sufficient prominence to whatever ad space
> it is trying to sell. So the Web becomes nothing but a series of static
> magazine-like page layouts. The only difference being that Web pages have
> magic "hyperlinks" that quickly move us between arbitrary pages.
> In this case, the programming language of the Web (Javascript) is
> completely in service of the thing (the DOM) that allows for the
> representation of the layouts. The paradigm inversion ultimately comes
> down to making the layout representations completely in service of the
> programming language. The popular view is that Javascript exists primarily
> to allow for popup menus and client-side form validation. This view holds
> that Javascript is fundamentally incapable of allowing for the kind of
> functionality that I have demonstrated.
> So anyone who tries to do what I am attempting must be fully aware of all
> of these issues, and must have the appropriate battle plan in place.
> Anyone who simply has the "bright idea" to start using Javascript in order
> to mimic desktop functionality is pretty much doomed to irrelevance if they
> are not able to mount a good enough challenge against the corporate
> interests of yore.
> Which brings me back to the original point I made on this post. In order
> to pull off this paradigm shift, I realize that I have to become a "larger
> than life" figure. I have to turn myself into a kind of heroic figure in
> the minds of the average Web using public. I currently live in
> Gainesville, Florida which is home to the massively important institution
> known as the University of Florida. I was published as the lead story in
> the UF student newspaper (The Alligator) under the title, "Turlington
> Dancer Spreads Love, Equality." I like to keep myself in terrific shape
> and walk around in public wearing very short shorts. I have recently
> started a roadside campaign, where I've been holding a sign that says,
> "Fall in Luv with the Web... LuvLuvLuv.info". You should really see me
> dancing out there... it's a sight to behold!
> By doing this I am making myself the kind of public figure who has the
> kind of celebrity status to at least have a fighting chance against the fat
> cat corporate bosses. I mean, Google itself is still forced to operate
> under the old paradigm because its fate rests in the hands of the old
> business model. There is really not much that Google can do because its
> very identity is wrapped up in the notion that the Web is truly all about a
> networked set of static, hyperlinked documents.
> But anything I am involved with will begin from the premise that our
> browsers ultimately exist simply to provide a thin layer between the
> hardware and the application. Our in-browser API's are constantly
> providing more and more access to the native OS. Application developers
> can start worrying solely about business logic without any of the mechanism
> logic getting in the way. Whenever we want to accomplish a non-trivial
> task on our computers, we are very often faced with the decision of whether
> to allow a given native application to gain full, naked access to our
> hardware. There is always the inveitable, dreaded prompt that asks if we
> would like to give program X the ability to... get ready for it... MAKE
> CHANGES TO THE SYSTEM.
> So now we can just start thinking of our browsers as the ultimate
> sandboxes that have very sophisticted interface building and networking
> tools. It will slowly start to dawn on native applications developers that
> there is just no longer very much demand for their products and services,
> and they will be required to live under the contraints that the in browser
> Javascript environment enforces. Everything I am doing, then, is a bet
> against a vision of the future that sees the web browser as the only user
> space native application on any given computer. Upon booting up, the
> browser will launch automatically in full screen mode (with no way of
> minimizing it!). Given this vision of the future of personal computing,
> doesn't it make sense to start investing time and energy towards making the
> client interface as intuitive, configurable, and powerful as possible?
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 6:56 AM, Sotonin <soto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "Respectfully, I am not the typical poster here. I am a revolutionary and
> a trailblazer, and everything I do is geared for maximum effect."
> This sentence perfectly illustrates why your thread received almost 0 real
> interest from the beginning. You need to adjust your attitude if you want
> to get helpful knowledgable folks interested in your project. You are just
> coming off as a "typical" ego-centric lone wolf programmer whom thinks he
> is better than everybody else. I don't know you, but with nothing but long
> winded e-mails that read like marketing speak, I don't feel any desire to
> get to know you or your project (future projects).
> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Dennis Kane <dkan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Respectfully, I am not the typical poster here. I am a revolutionary and
>> a trailblazer, and everything I do is geared for maximum effect. I have
>> precisely zero interest in working for paychecks or even creating something
>> for the purpose of selling out to a corporation. I am interested in
>> starting a truly socialist movement... one whose participants understand
>> that like it or not, we are constantly moving into a post-capitalist future.
>> This ultimately just means that the historical corporate/ad buying
>> business model will slowly give way to models that have the notion of
>> "social capital" at their core. For any arbitrarily complicated web domain
>> that does not live and die by the ad revenue "sword" -- for example a
>> university or a municipality -- there is the ever present problem of
>> getting naive users to navigate the domain.
>> Today's websites typically do not use much logic when organizing their
>> resources. It all comes down to physical page space. So if one page
>> becomes too crowded with content, then another page must be created. Then
>> the problem reduces to how to develop a menu of links that allows to user
>> to navigate to the appropriate resource. At the moment, there are no
>> standards as to how a site should organize its content. Everyone has to
>> roll their own navigation solution, and when happening upon a new domain
>> for the first time, a user has to spend an arbitrary amount of time parsing
>> the visual layout, in order to create a site tree in their minds.
>> For everyone who says that the desktop environment is simply a
>> "metaphor", I would have to disagree. Our modern desktop GUI's are the
>> result of a evolutionary process... a process that has resulted in the most
>> intuitive and powerful of navigation systems. All that I am saying is that
>> we stop thinking of the client-side as a mere afterthought. For anyone who
>> wants to devote their efforts towards codifying a standard client-side
>> browser web-app interface, there will be countless service providers who
>> will breathe a sigh of relief that they will no longer be forced to worry
>> about layout and navigation.
>> And yes, I know there have been many many efforts in the past that have
>> tried to bring the desktop experience into the browser. The first obvious
>> problem is that Javascript has only recently become performant enough to
>> allow there to be pretty much zero difference from the native OS in terms
>> of icon/window handling.
>> Next, all of those other efforts were pre-HTML5, which pretty much forced
>> the applications to rely upon a back end for the purpose of saving state.
>> But now, there are so many different ways to save to the client, it
>> actually makes me blush!
>> And last but not least, we are really talking about doing a kind radical
>> paradigm inversion that conservative corporate interests just have no
>> interest in. The politics of the modern WWW is such that most websites are
>> completely in service of the corporate bottom line. And since corporations
>> have historically been all about buying up ad space/ad time in whatever
>> medium it can (print, radio, TV...), the Web has inevitably found itself as
>> having this exact same kind of role.
>> So there really is not "allowed" to be very much creativity on the Web,
>> if this creativity would only confuse/aggravate the corporate bosses who
>> are just trying to hawk their wares to as many naive consumers as possible.
>> The result of all of this political mumbo-jumbo is that the lowly web
>> developer is forced to think of him/herself as a mere layout designer...
>> such that the given layout gives sufficient prominence to whatever ad space
>> it is trying to sell. So the Web becomes nothing but a series of static
>> magazine-like page layouts. The only difference being that Web pages have
>> magic "hyperlinks" that quickly move us between arbitrary pages.
>> In this case, the programming language of the Web (Javascript) is
>> completely in service of the thing (the DOM) that allows for the
>> representation of the layouts. The paradigm inversion ultimately comes
>> down to making the layout representations completely in service of the
>> programming language. The popular view is that Javascript exists primarily
>> to allow for popup menus and client-side form validation. This view holds
>> that Javascript is fundamentally incapable of allowing for the kind of
>> functionality that I have demonstrated.
>> So anyone who tries to do what I am attempting must be fully aware of all
>> of these issues, and must have the appropriate battle plan in place.
>> Anyone who simply has the "bright idea" to start using Javascript in order
>> to mimic desktop functionality is pretty much doomed to irrelevance if they
>> are not able to mount a good enough challenge against the corporate
>> interests of yore.
>> Which brings me back to the original point I made on this post. In order
>> to pull off this paradigm shift, I realize that I have to become a "larger
>> than life" figure. I have to turn myself into a kind of heroic figure in
>> the minds of the average Web using public. I currently live in
>> Gainesville, Florida which is home to the massively important institution
>> known as the University of Florida. I was published as the lead story in
>> the UF student newspaper (The Alligator) under the title, "Turlington
>> Dancer Spreads Love, Equality." I like to keep myself in terrific shape
>> and walk around in public wearing very short shorts. I have recently
>> started a roadside campaign, where I've been holding a sign that says,
>> "Fall in Luv with the Web... LuvLuvLuv.info". You should really see me
>> dancing out there... it's a sight to behold!
>> By doing this I am making myself the kind of public figure who has the
>> kind of celebrity status to at least have a fighting chance against the fat
>> cat corporate bosses. I mean, Google itself is still forced to operate
>> under the old paradigm because its fate rests in the hands of the old
>> business model. There is really not much that Google can do because its
>> very identity is wrapped up in the notion that the Web is truly all about a
>> networked set of static, hyperlinked documents.
>> But anything I am involved with will begin from the premise that our
>> browsers ultimately exist simply to provide a thin layer between the
>> hardware and the application. Our in-browser API's are constantly
>> providing more and more access to the native OS. Application developers
>> can start worrying solely about business logic without any of the mechanism
>> logic getting in the way. Whenever we want to accomplish a non-trivial
>> task on our computers, we are very often faced with the decision of whether
>> to allow a given native application to gain full, naked access to our
>> hardware. There is always the inveitable, dreaded prompt that asks if we
>> would like to give program X the ability to... get ready for it... MAKE
>> CHANGES TO THE SYSTEM.
>> So now we can just start thinking of our browsers as the ultimate
>> sandboxes that have very sophisticted interface building and networking
>> tools. It will slowly start to dawn on native applications developers that
>> there is just no longer very much demand for their products and services,
>> and they will be required to live under the contraints that the in browser
>> Javascript environment enforces. Everything I am doing, then, is a bet
>> against a vision of the future that sees the web browser as the only user
>> space native application on any given computer. Upon booting up, the
>> browser will launch automatically in full screen mode (with no way of
>> minimizing it!). Given this vision of the future of personal computing,
>> doesn't it make sense to start investing time and energy towards making the
>> client interface as intuitive, configurable, and powerful as possible?
> So there really is not "allowed" to be very much creativity on the Web,
Yeah, right. (Sarcasm)
> So the Web becomes nothing but a series of static magazine-like page
layouts.
Have you ever seen a Google App? The app I'm working on now has only one
page and it is 100% dynamic. I also did a one-page app four years ago.
> Upon booting up, the browser will launch automatically in full screen mode
Exactly as Chrome OS has done for years.
As I said before you are trying to drag the web back to the desktop
metaphor from 30 years ago. Call me when you have some interesting features
to propose. I am always excited to have my mind blown. Reading drivel
about how some naked cowboy is going to change the world does not blow my
mind.
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Something tells me that we're being mega-trolled.
> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 6:56 AM, Sotonin <soto...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> "Respectfully, I am not the typical poster here. I am a revolutionary
>> and a trailblazer, and everything I do is geared for maximum effect."
>> This sentence perfectly illustrates why your thread received almost 0
>> real interest from the beginning. You need to adjust your attitude if you
>> want to get helpful knowledgable folks interested in your project. You are
>> just coming off as a "typical" ego-centric lone wolf programmer whom thinks
>> he is better than everybody else. I don't know you, but with nothing but
>> long winded e-mails that read like marketing speak, I don't feel any desire
>> to get to know you or your project (future projects).
>> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Dennis Kane <dkan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Respectfully, I am not the typical poster here. I am a revolutionary
>>> and a trailblazer, and everything I do is geared for maximum effect. I
>>> have precisely zero interest in working for paychecks or even creating
>>> something for the purpose of selling out to a corporation. I am interested
>>> in starting a truly socialist movement... one whose participants understand
>>> that like it or not, we are constantly moving into a post-capitalist future.
>>> This ultimately just means that the historical corporate/ad buying
>>> business model will slowly give way to models that have the notion of
>>> "social capital" at their core. For any arbitrarily complicated web domain
>>> that does not live and die by the ad revenue "sword" -- for example a
>>> university or a municipality -- there is the ever present problem of
>>> getting naive users to navigate the domain.
>>> Today's websites typically do not use much logic when organizing their
>>> resources. It all comes down to physical page space. So if one page
>>> becomes too crowded with content, then another page must be created. Then
>>> the problem reduces to how to develop a menu of links that allows to user
>>> to navigate to the appropriate resource. At the moment, there are no
>>> standards as to how a site should organize its content. Everyone has to
>>> roll their own navigation solution, and when happening upon a new domain
>>> for the first time, a user has to spend an arbitrary amount of time parsing
>>> the visual layout, in order to create a site tree in their minds.
>>> For everyone who says that the desktop environment is simply a
>>> "metaphor", I would have to disagree. Our modern desktop GUI's are the
>>> result of a evolutionary process... a process that has resulted in the most
>>> intuitive and powerful of navigation systems. All that I am saying is that
>>> we stop thinking of the client-side as a mere afterthought. For anyone who
>>> wants to devote their efforts towards codifying a standard client-side
>>> browser web-app interface, there will be countless service providers who
>>> will breathe a sigh of relief that they will no longer be forced to worry
>>> about layout and navigation.
>>> And yes, I know there have been many many efforts in the past that have
>>> tried to bring the desktop experience into the browser. The first obvious
>>> problem is that Javascript has only recently become performant enough to
>>> allow there to be pretty much zero difference from the native OS in terms
>>> of icon/window handling.
>>> Next, all of those other efforts were pre-HTML5, which pretty much
>>> forced the applications to rely upon a back end for the purpose of saving
>>> state. But now, there are so many different ways to save to the client, it
>>> actually makes me blush!
>>> And last but not least, we are really talking about doing a kind radical
>>> paradigm inversion that conservative corporate interests just have no
>>> interest in. The politics of the modern WWW is such that most websites are
>>> completely in service of the corporate bottom line. And since corporations
>>> have historically been all about buying up ad space/ad time in whatever
>>> medium it can (print, radio, TV...), the Web has inevitably found itself as
>>> having this exact same kind of role.
>>> So there really is not "allowed" to be very much creativity on the Web,
>>> if this creativity would only confuse/aggravate the corporate bosses who
>>> are just trying to hawk their wares to as many naive consumers as possible.
>>> The result of all of this political mumbo-jumbo is that the lowly web
>>> developer is forced to think of him/herself as a mere layout designer...
>>> such that the given layout gives sufficient prominence to whatever ad space
>>> it is trying to sell. So the Web becomes nothing but a series of static
>>> magazine-like page layouts. The only difference being that Web pages have
>>> magic "hyperlinks" that quickly move us between arbitrary pages.
>>> In this case, the programming language of the Web (Javascript) is
>>> completely in service of the thing (the DOM) that allows for the
>>> representation of the layouts. The paradigm inversion ultimately comes
>>> down to making the layout representations completely in service of the
>>> programming language. The popular view is that Javascript exists primarily
>>> to allow for popup menus and client-side form validation. This view holds
>>> that Javascript is fundamentally incapable of allowing for the kind of
>>> functionality that I have demonstrated.
>>> So anyone who tries to do what I am attempting must be fully aware of
>>> all of these issues, and must have the appropriate battle plan in place.
>>> Anyone who simply has the "bright idea" to start using Javascript in order
>>> to mimic desktop functionality is pretty much doomed to irrelevance if they
>>> are not able to mount a good enough challenge against the corporate
>>> interests of yore.
>>> Which brings me back to the original point I made on this post. In
>>> order to pull off this paradigm shift, I realize that I have to become a
>>> "larger than life" figure. I have to turn myself into a kind of heroic
>>> figure in the minds of the average Web using public. I currently live in
>>> Gainesville, Florida which is home to the massively important institution
>>> known as the University of Florida. I was published as the lead story in
>>> the UF student newspaper (The Alligator) under the title, "Turlington
>>> Dancer Spreads Love, Equality." I like to keep myself in terrific shape
>>> and walk around in public wearing very short shorts. I have recently
>>> started a roadside campaign, where I've been holding a sign that says,
>>> "Fall in Luv with the Web... LuvLuvLuv.info". You should really see me
>>> dancing out there... it's a sight to behold!
>>> By doing this I am making myself the kind of public figure who has the
>>> kind of celebrity status to at least have a fighting chance against the fat
>>> cat corporate bosses. I mean, Google itself is still forced to operate
>>> under the old paradigm because its fate rests in the hands of the old
>>> business model. There is really not much that Google can do because its
>>> very identity is wrapped up in the notion that the Web is truly all about a
>>> networked set of static, hyperlinked documents.
>>> But anything I am involved with will begin from the premise that our
>>> browsers ultimately exist simply to provide a thin layer between the
>>> hardware and the application. Our in-browser API's are constantly
>>> providing more and more access to the native OS. Application developers
>>> can start worrying solely about business logic without any of the mechanism
>>> logic getting in the way. Whenever we want to accomplish a non-trivial
>>> task on our computers, we are very often faced with the decision of whether
>>> to allow a given native application to gain full, naked access to our
>>> hardware. There is always the inveitable, dreaded prompt that asks if we
>>> would like to give program X the ability to... get ready for it... MAKE
>>> CHANGES TO THE SYSTEM.
>>> So now we can just start thinking of our browsers as the ultimate
>>> sandboxes that have very sophisticted interface building and networking
>>> tools. It will slowly start to dawn on native applications developers that
>>> there is just no longer very much demand for their products and services,
>>> and they will be required to live under the contraints that the in browser
>>> Javascript environment enforces. Everything I am doing, then, is a bet
>>> against a vision of the future that sees the web browser as the only user
>>> space native application on any given computer. Upon booting up, the
>>> browser will launch automatically in full screen mode (with no way of
>>> minimizing it!). Given this vision of the future of personal computing,
>>> doesn't it make sense to start investing time and energy towards making the
>>> client
I hope you are all aware that I fully expect the reception that I have gotten here. The accusations of mental illness and trollishness are fully expected. The only problem is that I have a real life outside of professional programming circles. I know what it takes to make real things happen in this world. The fact is that it requires much, much more that mere programming talent to have any kind of impact. The importance of fact that I put my physical ass on the line in the *real world* in order to make profound connections with *real people* is something that the vast majority of you will never be able to comprehend, which is extremely sad. I mean, I am here in the deep south, for chrissake, where there are so many hillbillies with shotguns who are constantly on the lookout for guys like me to sneer at and intimidate.
So please, be my guest and continue to ridicule in those pithy, sardonic ways that have been perfected over the years on message forums like this. I am beholden to no one, and it will remain like that. But please understand that people are falling head over heels for me on a mass level here in the *real world*. It is just a matter of time before I am able to command their attention and educate them about the Web and about computing in general... so that they will eventually need precisely zero of the services that any of you are offering.
I was getting mad up until I read "I have to turn myself into a kind of
heroic figure in the minds of the average Web using public." And then I
just couldn't stop laughing the rest of the way through.
-Chad
From: nodejs@googlegroups.com [mailto:nodejs@googlegroups.com] On Behalf
Of Rick Waldron
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2012 12:03 PM
To: nodejs@googlegroups.com
Subject: [*** SPAM ***] - Re: [nodejs] Re: "Evil OS X"... the perfect
client to a node server! - Bayesian Filter detected spam
Something tells me that we're being mega-trolled.
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 6:56 AM, Sotonin <soto...@gmail.com> wrote:
"Respectfully, I am not the typical poster here. I am a revolutionary
and a trailblazer, and everything I do is geared for maximum effect."
This sentence perfectly illustrates why your thread received almost 0
real interest from the beginning. You need to adjust your attitude if
you want to get helpful knowledgable folks interested in your project.
You are just coming off as a "typical" ego-centric lone wolf programmer
whom thinks he is better than everybody else. I don't know you, but with
nothing but long winded e-mails that read like marketing speak, I don't
feel any desire to get to know you or your project (future projects).
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 8:38 AM, Dennis Kane <dkan...@gmail.com> wrote:
Respectfully, I am not the typical poster here. I am a revolutionary
and a trailblazer, and everything I do is geared for maximum effect. I
have precisely zero interest in working for paychecks or even creating
something for the purpose of selling out to a corporation. I am
interested in starting a truly socialist movement... one whose
participants understand that like it or not, we are constantly moving
into a post-capitalist future.
This ultimately just means that the historical corporate/ad buying
business model will slowly give way to models that have the notion of
"social capital" at their core. For any arbitrarily complicated web
domain that does not live and die by the ad revenue "sword" -- for
example a university or a municipality -- there is the ever present
problem of getting naive users to navigate the domain.
Today's websites typically do not use much logic when organizing their
resources. It all comes down to physical page space. So if one page
becomes too crowded with content, then another page must be created.
Then the problem reduces to how to develop a menu of links that allows
to user to navigate to the appropriate resource. At the moment, there
are no standards as to how a site should organize its content. Everyone
has to roll their own navigation solution, and when happening upon a new
domain for the first time, a user has to spend an arbitrary amount of
time parsing the visual layout, in order to create a site tree in their
minds.
For everyone who says that the desktop environment is simply a
"metaphor", I would have to disagree. Our modern desktop GUI's are the
result of a evolutionary process... a process that has resulted in the
most intuitive and powerful of navigation systems. All that I am saying
is that we stop thinking of the client-side as a mere afterthought. For
anyone who wants to devote their efforts towards codifying a standard
client-side browser web-app interface, there will be countless service
providers who will breathe a sigh of relief that they will no longer be
forced to worry about layout and navigation.
And yes, I know there have been many many efforts in the past that have
tried to bring the desktop experience into the browser. The first
obvious problem is that Javascript has only recently become performant
enough to allow there to be pretty much zero difference from the native
OS in terms of icon/window handling.
Next, all of those other efforts were pre-HTML5, which pretty much
forced the applications to rely upon a back end for the purpose of
saving state. But now, there are so many different ways to save to the
client, it actually makes me blush!
And last but not least, we are really talking about doing a kind radical
paradigm inversion that conservative corporate interests just have no
interest in. The politics of the modern WWW is such that most websites
are completely in service of the corporate bottom line. And since
corporations have historically been all about buying up ad space/ad time
in whatever medium it can (print, radio, TV...), the Web has inevitably
found itself as having this exact same kind of role.
So there really is not "allowed" to be very much creativity on the Web,
if this creativity would only confuse/aggravate the corporate bosses who
are just trying to hawk their wares to as many naive consumers as
possible. The result of all of this political mumbo-jumbo is that the
lowly web developer is forced to think of him/herself as a mere layout
designer... such that the given layout gives sufficient prominence to
whatever ad space it is trying to sell. So the Web becomes nothing but
a series of static magazine-like page layouts. The only difference
being that Web pages have magic "hyperlinks" that quickly move us
between arbitrary pages.
In this case, the programming language of the Web (Javascript) is
completely in service of the thing (the DOM) that allows for the
representation of the layouts. The paradigm inversion ultimately comes
down to making the layout representations completely in service of the
programming language. The popular view is that Javascript exists
primarily to allow for popup menus and client-side form validation.
This view holds that Javascript is fundamentally incapable of allowing
for the kind of functionality that I have demonstrated.
So anyone who tries to do what I am attempting must be fully aware of
all of these issues, and must have the appropriate battle plan in place.
Anyone who simply has the "bright idea" to start using Javascript in
order to mimic desktop functionality is pretty much doomed to
irrelevance if they are not able to mount a good enough challenge
against the corporate interests of yore.
Which brings me back to the original point I made on this post. In
order to pull off this paradigm shift, I realize that I have to become a
"larger than life" figure. I have to turn myself into a kind of heroic
figure in the minds of the average Web using public. I currently live
in Gainesville, Florida which is home to the massively important
institution known as the University of Florida. I was published as the
lead story in the UF student newspaper (The Alligator) under the title,
"Turlington Dancer Spreads Love, Equality." I like to keep myself in
terrific shape and walk around in public wearing very short shorts. I
have recently started a roadside campaign, where I've been holding a
sign that says, "Fall in Luv with the Web... LuvLuvLuv.info". You
should really see me dancing out there... it's a sight to behold!
By doing this I am making myself the kind of public figure who has the
kind of celebrity status to at least have a fighting chance against the
fat cat corporate bosses. I mean, Google itself is still forced to
operate under the old paradigm because its fate rests in the hands of
the old business model. There is really not much that Google can do
because its very identity is wrapped up in the notion that the Web is
truly all about a networked set of static, hyperlinked documents.
But anything I am involved with will begin from the premise that our
browsers ultimately exist simply to provide a thin layer between the
hardware and the application. Our in-browser API's are constantly
providing more and more access to the native OS. Application developers
can start worrying solely about business logic without any of the
mechanism logic getting in the way. Whenever we want to accomplish a
non-trivial task on our computers, we are very often faced with the
decision of whether to allow a given native application to gain full,
naked access to our hardware. There is always the inveitable, dreaded
prompt that asks if we would like to give program X the ability to...
get ready for it... MAKE CHANGES TO THE SYSTEM.
So now we can just start thinking of our browsers as the ultimate
sandboxes that have very sophisticted interface building and networking
tools. It will slowly start to dawn on native applications developers
that there is just no longer very much demand for their products and
services, and they will be required to live under the contraints that
the in browser Javascript environment enforces. Everything I am doing,
then, is a bet against a vision of the future that sees the web browser
as the only user space native application on any given computer. Upon
booting up, the browser will launch automatically in full screen mode
(with no way of minimizing it!). Given this vision of the future of
personal computing, doesn't it make sense to start investing time and
energy towards making the client interface as intuitive, configurable,
and powerful as possible?
The current version of the program now includes drag and drop functionality of text files from the native desktop straight into the browser desktop or (any of the subfolders). The difference between my drag and drop and all the HTML5 demos that you see on the web is that the dropped files immediately become icons that are integrated into the program.
I will soon start working on getting multimedia icons/files working, so you'll be able to drop those directly in too. Then I will probably do a very basic kind of image editing demo that will allow you to change individual pixels or some such nonsense. But I don't want to get bogged down in the details of any particular application, because I always want to stay focused on the big picture of creating a totally powerful and intuitive way to organize our online lives.
Anyway, I know I am quite a controversial figure here, but there should be no controversy that this thing is just about ready for prime time. I really do need to start getting interested people on board who would like to help me push the web forward. The basic mission statement for the venture will basically be that the "old web" (HTML4/version 1.0) is dead and gone. If anyone calls in search of help on their Flintstone era <html> documents with all of their <a href> and <div> tags laying about, we'll just point them in an entirely new direction. If they still insist on doing things the old way, we'll just hang up on them… This thing is all about the future!
We can easily develop libraries of high-level interface widgets that people just need to attach event listeners to. There will be no angle brackets in sight! <hand><coded><html><markup></is></so></last></millenium>!
Come one, come all, for the thrill of your lives :)
On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:36:37 PM UTC-4, Dennis Kane wrote:
> I was thinking of just responding to this old thread<https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/nodejs/bEhSbsm24Y4>, > in which I talk about the browser based Desktop that I've been working on, > but the new thing I've been doing for the past week is so superior that I > thought it deserved a completely new thead. By the way, I know this forum > is all about server side Javascript, but there is not really any serious > place one can go on the web that talks about the client side. Besides, > with socket.io & websockets... I don't really make much of a distinction > between client and server anymore. I just know that there's no reason to > do a document.getElementById() call in node :)
> This new thing is a totally shocking clone of OS X. I knew I was going to > have to start over from the ground up, because my previous code base was so > sh*tty, haha! I have really been concentrating on getting a nice, tight > little API that developers will positively drool over. I don't want to > make this thing publicly available for many reasons... but you can check > out a youtube vid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq_W19QokXk) that shows > it in action, and I still have my same old crappy prototype online at > http://luvluvluv.info. Well, hopefully this is proof that I am able to > do some cool stuff, and hopefully summa yous will want to start being my > friend now, LOL!!!
> And get this... the current, uncompressed js file size is only 54kb!
> The current version of the program now includes drag and drop
> functionality of text files from the native desktop straight into the
> browser desktop or (any of the subfolders). The difference between my drag
> and drop and all the HTML5 demos that you see on the web is that the
> dropped files immediately become icons that are integrated into the program.
> I will soon start working on getting multimedia icons/files working, so
> you'll be able to drop those directly in too. Then I will probably do a
> very basic kind of image editing demo that will allow you to change
> individual pixels or some such nonsense. But I don't want to get bogged
> down in the details of any particular application, because I always want to
> stay focused on the big picture of creating a totally powerful and
> intuitive way to organize our online lives.
> Anyway, I know I am quite a controversial figure here, but there should be
> no controversy that this thing is just about ready for prime time. I
> really do need to start getting interested people on board who would like
> to help me push the web forward. The basic mission statement for the
> venture will basically be that the "old web" (HTML4/version 1.0) is dead
> and gone. If anyone calls in search of help on their Flintstone era <html>
> documents with all of their <a href> and <div> tags laying about, we'll
> just point them in an entirely new direction. If they still insist on
> doing things the old way, we'll just hang up on them… This thing is all
> about the future!
> We can easily develop libraries of high-level interface widgets that
> people just need to attach event listeners to. There will be no angle
> brackets in sight! <hand><coded><html><markup></is></so></last></millenium>!
> Come one, come all, for the thrill of your lives :)
> On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:36:37 PM UTC-4, Dennis Kane wrote:
>> I was thinking of just responding to this old thread<https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/nodejs/bEhSbsm24Y4>,
>> in which I talk about the browser based Desktop that I've been working on,
>> but the new thing I've been doing for the past week is so superior that I
>> thought it deserved a completely new thead. By the way, I know this forum
>> is all about server side Javascript, but there is not really any serious
>> place one can go on the web that talks about the client side. Besides,
>> with socket.io & websockets... I don't really make much of a distinction
>> between client and server anymore. I just know that there's no reason to
>> do a document.getElementById() call in node :)
>> This new thing is a totally shocking clone of OS X. I knew I was going
>> to have to start over from the ground up, because my previous code base was
>> so sh*tty, haha! I have really been concentrating on getting a nice, tight
>> little API that developers will positively drool over. I don't want to
>> make this thing publicly available for many reasons... but you can check
>> out a youtube vid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?**v=Tq_W19QokXk<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq_W19QokXk>) that
>> shows it in action, and I still have my same old crappy prototype online at
>> http://luvluvluv.info. Well, hopefully this is proof that I am able to
>> do some cool stuff, and hopefully summa yous will want to start being my
>> friend now, LOL!!!
>> And get this... the current, uncompressed js file size is only 54kb!
Why do you want the code so bad? It's not like there's any kind of fancy algorithms at work. There are many many open source windowing packages out there. It's not exactly rocket science, this. It's all been done many times before. The only difference is that this one is *my* baby! Besides, you are welcome to all the code of my desktop prototype on my site at luvluvluv.info... it's just sitting there on the server for the taking.
I am mainly using this thing as blackmail to get people to be interested in being my friend. I want to do some real world community building, and something like this will go a long way to get a cooperative business up and running.
Furthermore... you do realize that asking another programmer to "just show me your code" is exactly the same as asking a girl to "just show me your breasts", right? I mean, I have nothing against it in principle, but, my god... I hardly know ye!!!
My lastest work includes that rubber-band selection feature as well as dropping icons directly onto folder icons (with that "open folder" hover trick). I have also included some basic image file support.
>> The current version of the program now includes drag and drop >> functionality of text files from the native desktop straight into the >> browser desktop or (any of the subfolders). The difference between my drag >> and drop and all the HTML5 demos that you see on the web is that the >> dropped files immediately become icons that are integrated into the program.
>> I will soon start working on getting multimedia icons/files working, so >> you'll be able to drop those directly in too. Then I will probably do a >> very basic kind of image editing demo that will allow you to change >> individual pixels or some such nonsense. But I don't want to get bogged >> down in the details of any particular application, because I always want to >> stay focused on the big picture of creating a totally powerful and >> intuitive way to organize our online lives.
>> Anyway, I know I am quite a controversial figure here, but there should >> be no controversy that this thing is just about ready for prime time. I >> really do need to start getting interested people on board who would like >> to help me push the web forward. The basic mission statement for the >> venture will basically be that the "old web" (HTML4/version 1.0) is dead >> and gone. If anyone calls in search of help on their Flintstone era <html> >> documents with all of their <a href> and <div> tags laying about, we'll >> just point them in an entirely new direction. If they still insist on >> doing things the old way, we'll just hang up on them… This thing is all >> about the future!
>> We can easily develop libraries of high-level interface widgets that >> people just need to attach event listeners to. There will be no angle >> brackets in sight! <hand><coded><html><markup></is></so></last></millenium>!
>> Come one, come all, for the thrill of your lives :)
>> On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:36:37 PM UTC-4, Dennis Kane wrote:
>>> I was thinking of just responding to this old thread<https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/nodejs/bEhSbsm24Y4>, >>> in which I talk about the browser based Desktop that I've been working on, >>> but the new thing I've been doing for the past week is so superior that I >>> thought it deserved a completely new thead. By the way, I know this forum >>> is all about server side Javascript, but there is not really any serious >>> place one can go on the web that talks about the client side. Besides, >>> with socket.io & websockets... I don't really make much of a >>> distinction between client and server anymore. I just know that there's no >>> reason to do a document.getElementById() call in node :)
>>> This new thing is a totally shocking clone of OS X. I knew I was going >>> to have to start over from the ground up, because my previous code base was >>> so sh*tty, haha! I have really been concentrating on getting a nice, tight >>> little API that developers will positively drool over. I don't want to >>> make this thing publicly available for many reasons... but you can check >>> out a youtube vid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?**v=Tq_W19QokXk<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq_W19QokXk>) that >>> shows it in action, and I still have my same old crappy prototype online at >>> http://luvluvluv.info. Well, hopefully this is proof that I am able to >>> do some cool stuff, and hopefully summa yous will want to start being my >>> friend now, LOL!!!
>>> And get this... the current, uncompressed js file size is only 54kb!
On Monday, October 8, 2012 at 8:12 PM, Dennis Kane wrote:
> Why do you want the code so bad? It's not like there's any kind of fancy algorithms at work. There are many many open source windowing packages out there. It's not exactly rocket science, this. It's all been done many times before. The only difference is that this one is *my* baby! Besides, you are welcome to all the code of my desktop prototype on my site at luvluvluv.info... it's just sitting there on the server for the taking.
> I am mainly using this thing as blackmail to get people to be interested in being my friend. I want to do some real world community building, and something like this will go a long way to get a cooperative business up and running.
> Furthermore... you do realize that asking another programmer to "just show me your code" is exactly the same as asking a girl to "just show me your breasts", right? I mean, I have nothing against it in principle, but, my god... I hardly know ye!!!
> My lastest work includes that rubber-band selection feature as well as dropping icons directly onto folder icons (with that "open folder" hover trick). I have also included some basic image file support.
> > > The current version of the program now includes drag and drop functionality of text files from the native desktop straight into the browser desktop or (any of the subfolders). The difference between my drag and drop and all the HTML5 demos that you see on the web is that the dropped files immediately become icons that are integrated into the program.
> > > I will soon start working on getting multimedia icons/files working, so you'll be able to drop those directly in too. Then I will probably do a very basic kind of image editing demo that will allow you to change individual pixels or some such nonsense. But I don't want to get bogged down in the details of any particular application, because I always want to stay focused on the big picture of creating a totally powerful and intuitive way to organize our online lives.
> > > Anyway, I know I am quite a controversial figure here, but there should be no controversy that this thing is just about ready for prime time. I really do need to start getting interested people on board who would like to help me push the web forward. The basic mission statement for the venture will basically be that the "old web" (HTML4/version 1.0) is dead and gone. If anyone calls in search of help on their Flintstone era <html> documents with all of their <a href> and <div> tags laying about, we'll just point them in an entirely new direction. If they still insist on doing things the old way, we'll just hang up on them… This thing is all about the future!
> > > We can easily develop libraries of high-level interface widgets that people just need to attach event listeners to. There will be no angle brackets in sight! <hand><coded><html><markup></is></so></last></millenium>!
> > > Come one, come all, for the thrill of your lives :)
> > > On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:36:37 PM UTC-4, Dennis Kane wrote:
> > > > I was thinking of just responding to this old thread (https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/nodejs/bEhSbsm24Y4), in which I talk about the browser based Desktop that I've been working on, but the new thing I've been doing for the past week is so superior that I thought it deserved a completely new thead. By the way, I know this forum is all about server side Javascript, but there is not really any serious place one can go on the web that talks about the client side. Besides, with socket.io (http://socket.io) & websockets... I don't really make much of a distinction between client and server anymore. I just know that there's no reason to do a document.getElementById() call in node :)
> > > > This new thing is a totally shocking clone of OS X. I knew I was going to have to start over from the ground up, because my previous code base was so sh*tty, haha! I have really been concentrating on getting a nice, tight little API that developers will positively drool over. I don't want to make this thing publicly available for many reasons... but you can check out a youtube vid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq_W19QokXk) that shows it in action, and I still have my same old crappy prototype online at http://luvluvluv.info (http://luvluvluv.info/). Well, hopefully this is proof that I am able to do some cool stuff, and hopefully summa yous will want to start being my friend now, LOL!!!
> > > > And get this... the current, uncompressed js file size is only 54kb!
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 9:31 PM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is it possible to have this address banned?
> -Rick
> On Monday, October 8, 2012 at 8:12 PM, Dennis Kane wrote:
> Why do you want the code so bad? It's not like there's any kind of fancy
> algorithms at work. There are many many open source windowing packages out
> there. It's not exactly rocket science, this. It's all been done many
> times before. The only difference is that this one is *my* baby! Besides,
> you are welcome to all the code of my desktop prototype on my site at
> luvluvluv.info... it's just sitting there on the server for the taking.
> I am mainly using this thing as blackmail to get people to be interested
> in being my friend. I want to do some real world community building, and
> something like this will go a long way to get a cooperative business up and
> running.
> Furthermore... you do realize that asking another programmer to "just show
> me your code" is exactly the same as asking a girl to "just show me your
> breasts", right? I mean, I have nothing against it in principle, but, my
> god... I hardly know ye!!!
> My lastest work includes that rubber-band selection feature as well as
> dropping icons directly onto folder icons (with that "open folder" hover
> trick). I have also included some basic image file support.
> The current version of the program now includes drag and drop
> functionality of text files from the native desktop straight into the
> browser desktop or (any of the subfolders). The difference between my drag
> and drop and all the HTML5 demos that you see on the web is that the
> dropped files immediately become icons that are integrated into the program.
> I will soon start working on getting multimedia icons/files working, so
> you'll be able to drop those directly in too. Then I will probably do a
> very basic kind of image editing demo that will allow you to change
> individual pixels or some such nonsense. But I don't want to get bogged
> down in the details of any particular application, because I always want to
> stay focused on the big picture of creating a totally powerful and
> intuitive way to organize our online lives.
> Anyway, I know I am quite a controversial figure here, but there should be
> no controversy that this thing is just about ready for prime time. I
> really do need to start getting interested people on board who would like
> to help me push the web forward. The basic mission statement for the
> venture will basically be that the "old web" (HTML4/version 1.0) is dead
> and gone. If anyone calls in search of help on their Flintstone era <html>
> documents with all of their <a href> and <div> tags laying about, we'll
> just point them in an entirely new direction. If they still insist on
> doing things the old way, we'll just hang up on them… This thing is all
> about the future!
> We can easily develop libraries of high-level interface widgets that
> people just need to attach event listeners to. There will be no angle
> brackets in sight! <hand><coded><html><markup></**
> is></so></last></millenium>!
> Come one, come all, for the thrill of your lives :)
> On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:36:37 PM UTC-4, Dennis Kane wrote:
> I was thinking of just responding to this old thread<https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/nodejs/bEhSbsm24Y4>,
> in which I talk about the browser based Desktop that I've been working on,
> but the new thing I've been doing for the past week is so superior that I
> thought it deserved a completely new thead. By the way, I know this forum
> is all about server side Javascript, but there is not really any serious
> place one can go on the web that talks about the client side. Besides,
> with socket.io & websockets... I don't really make much of a distinction
> between client and server anymore. I just know that there's no reason to
> do a document.getElementById() call in node :)
> This new thing is a totally shocking clone of OS X. I knew I was going to
> have to start over from the ground up, because my previous code base was so
> sh*tty, haha! I have really been concentrating on getting a nice, tight
> little API that developers will positively drool over. I don't want to
> make this thing publicly available for many reasons... but you can check
> out a youtube vid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?****v=Tq_W19QokXk<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq_W19QokXk>) that
> shows it in action, and I still have my same old crappy prototype online at
> http://luvluvluv.info. Well, hopefully this is proof that I am able to
> do some cool stuff, and hopefully summa yous will want to start being my
> friend now, LOL!!!
> And get this... the current, uncompressed js file size is only 54kb!
Dennis, this is a developer forum. If you want to peddle your software and aren't willing to show something besides videos, you're in the wrong place.
Also I'm not going to watch a 15 minute video. You're not selling yourself very well, I kindly advise you to move on so this stops clogging my inbox :)
-- Joshua Gross
Christian / SpanDeX / BA Candidate of Computer Science, UW-Madison 2013
414-377-1041 / http://www.joshisgross.com
On Oct 8, 2012, at 7:12 PM, Dennis Kane <dkan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why do you want the code so bad? It's not like there's any kind of fancy algorithms at work. There are many many open source windowing packages out there. It's not exactly rocket science, this. It's all been done many times before. The only difference is that this one is *my* baby! Besides, you are welcome to all the code of my desktop prototype on my site at luvluvluv.info... it's just sitting there on the server for the taking.
> I am mainly using this thing as blackmail to get people to be interested in being my friend. I want to do some real world community building, and something like this will go a long way to get a cooperative business up and running.
> Furthermore... you do realize that asking another programmer to "just show me your code" is exactly the same as asking a girl to "just show me your breasts", right? I mean, I have nothing against it in principle, but, my god... I hardly know ye!!!
> My lastest work includes that rubber-band selection feature as well as dropping icons directly onto folder icons (with that "open folder" hover trick). I have also included some basic image file support.
> The current version of the program now includes drag and drop functionality of text files from the native desktop straight into the browser desktop or (any of the subfolders). The difference between my drag and drop and all the HTML5 demos that you see on the web is that the dropped files immediately become icons that are integrated into the program.
> I will soon start working on getting multimedia icons/files working, so you'll be able to drop those directly in too. Then I will probably do a very basic kind of image editing demo that will allow you to change individual pixels or some such nonsense. But I don't want to get bogged down in the details of any particular application, because I always want to stay focused on the big picture of creating a totally powerful and intuitive way to organize our online lives.
> Anyway, I know I am quite a controversial figure here, but there should be no controversy that this thing is just about ready for prime time. I really do need to start getting interested people on board who would like to help me push the web forward. The basic mission statement for the venture will basically be that the "old web" (HTML4/version 1.0) is dead and gone. If anyone calls in search of help on their Flintstone era <html> documents with all of their <a href> and <div> tags laying about, we'll just point them in an entirely new direction. If they still insist on doing things the old way, we'll just hang up on them… This thing is all about the future!
> We can easily develop libraries of high-level interface widgets that people just need to attach event listeners to. There will be no angle brackets in sight! <hand><coded><html><markup></is></so></last></millenium>!
> Come one, come all, for the thrill of your lives :)
> On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:36:37 PM UTC-4, Dennis Kane wrote:
> I was thinking of just responding to this old thread, in which I talk about the browser based Desktop that I've been working on, but the new thing I've been doing for the past week is so superior that I thought it deserved a completely new thead. By the way, I know this forum is all about server side Javascript, but there is not really any serious place one can go on the web that talks about the client side. Besides, with socket.io & websockets... I don't really make much of a distinction between client and server anymore. I just know that there's no reason to do a document.getElementById() call in node :)
> This new thing is a totally shocking clone of OS X. I knew I was going to have to start over from the ground up, because my previous code base was so sh*tty, haha! I have really been concentrating on getting a nice, tight little API that developers will positively drool over. I don't want to make this thing publicly available for many reasons... but you can check out a youtube vid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq_W19QokXk) that shows it in action, and I still have my same old crappy prototype online at http://luvluvluv.info. Well, hopefully this is proof that I am able to do some cool stuff, and hopefully summa yous will want to start being my friend now, LOL!!!
On Monday, October 8, 2012 at 11:37 PM, Joshua Gross wrote:
> Dennis, this is a developer forum. If you want to peddle your software and aren't willing to show something besides videos, you're in the wrong place.
> Also I'm not going to watch a 15 minute video. You're not selling yourself very well, I kindly advise you to move on so this stops clogging my inbox :)
> -- Joshua Gross
> Christian / SpanDeX / BA Candidate of Computer Science, UW-Madison 2013
> 414-377-1041 / http://www.joshisgross.com
> On Oct 8, 2012, at 7:12 PM, Dennis Kane <dkan...@gmail.com (mailto:dkan...@gmail.com)> wrote:
> > Why do you want the code so bad? It's not like there's any kind of fancy algorithms at work. There are many many open source windowing packages out there. It's not exactly rocket science, this. It's all been done many times before. The only difference is that this one is *my* baby! Besides, you are welcome to all the code of my desktop prototype on my site at luvluvluv.info... it's just sitting there on the server for the taking.
> > I am mainly using this thing as blackmail to get people to be interested in being my friend. I want to do some real world community building, and something like this will go a long way to get a cooperative business up and running.
> > Furthermore... you do realize that asking another programmer to "just show me your code" is exactly the same as asking a girl to "just show me your breasts", right? I mean, I have nothing against it in principle, but, my god... I hardly know ye!!!
> > My lastest work includes that rubber-band selection feature as well as dropping icons directly onto folder icons (with that "open folder" hover trick). I have also included some basic image file support.
> > > > The current version of the program now includes drag and drop functionality of text files from the native desktop straight into the browser desktop or (any of the subfolders). The difference between my drag and drop and all the HTML5 demos that you see on the web is that the dropped files immediately become icons that are integrated into the program.
> > > > I will soon start working on getting multimedia icons/files working, so you'll be able to drop those directly in too. Then I will probably do a very basic kind of image editing demo that will allow you to change individual pixels or some such nonsense. But I don't want to get bogged down in the details of any particular application, because I always want to stay focused on the big picture of creating a totally powerful and intuitive way to organize our online lives.
> > > > Anyway, I know I am quite a controversial figure here, but there should be no controversy that this thing is just about ready for prime time. I really do need to start getting interested people on board who would like to help me push the web forward. The basic mission statement for the venture will basically be that the "old web" (HTML4/version 1.0) is dead and gone. If anyone calls in search of help on their Flintstone era <html> documents with all of their <a href> and <div> tags laying about, we'll just point them in an entirely new direction. If they still insist on doing things the old way, we'll just hang up on them… This thing is all about the future!
> > > > We can easily develop libraries of high-level interface widgets that people just need to attach event listeners to. There will be no angle brackets in sight! <hand><coded><html><markup></is></so></last></millenium>!
> > > > Come one, come all, for the thrill of your lives :)
> > > > On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:36:37 PM UTC-4, Dennis Kane wrote:
> > > > > I was thinking of just responding to this old thread (https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/nodejs/bEhSbsm24Y4), in which I talk about the browser based Desktop that I've been working on, but the new thing I've been doing for the past week is so superior that I thought it deserved a completely new thead. By the way, I know this forum is all about server side Javascript, but there is not really any serious place one can go on the web that talks about the client side. Besides, with socket.io (http://socket.io) & websockets... I don't really make much of a distinction between client and server anymore. I just know that there's no reason to do a document.getElementById() call in node :)
> > > > > This new thing is a totally shocking clone of OS X. I knew I was going to have to start over from the ground up, because my previous code base was so sh*tty, haha! I have really been concentrating on getting a nice, tight little API that developers will positively drool over. I don't want to make this thing publicly available for many reasons... but you can check out a youtube vid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq_W19QokXk) that shows it in action, and I still have my same old crappy prototype online at http://luvluvluv.info (http://luvluvluv.info/). Well, hopefully this is proof that I am able to do some cool stuff, and hopefully summa yous will want to start being my friend now, LOL!!!
> > > > > And get this... the current, uncompressed js file size is only 54kb!
> Funny thing, I said much the same as you have here and got a gnarly chastising.
> -Rick
> On Monday, October 8, 2012 at 11:37 PM, Joshua Gross wrote:
>> Dennis, this is a developer forum. If you want to peddle your software and aren't willing to show something besides videos, you're in the wrong place.
>> Also I'm not going to watch a 15 minute video. You're not selling yourself very well, I kindly advise you to move on so this stops clogging my inbox :)
>> -- Joshua Gross
>> Christian / SpanDeX / BA Candidate of Computer Science, UW-Madison 2013
>> 414-377-1041 / http://www.joshisgross.com
>> On Oct 8, 2012, at 7:12 PM, Dennis Kane <dkan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Why do you want the code so bad? It's not like there's any kind of fancy algorithms at work. There are many many open source windowing packages out there. It's not exactly rocket science, this. It's all been done many times before. The only difference is that this one is *my* baby! Besides, you are welcome to all the code of my desktop prototype on my site at luvluvluv.info... it's just sitting there on the server for the taking.
>>> I am mainly using this thing as blackmail to get people to be interested in being my friend. I want to do some real world community building, and something like this will go a long way to get a cooperative business up and running.
>>> Furthermore... you do realize that asking another programmer to "just show me your code" is exactly the same as asking a girl to "just show me your breasts", right? I mean, I have nothing against it in principle, but, my god... I hardly know ye!!!
>>> My lastest work includes that rubber-band selection feature as well as dropping icons directly onto folder icons (with that "open folder" hover trick). I have also included some basic image file support.
>>>>> The current version of the program now includes drag and drop functionality of text files from the native desktop straight into the browser desktop or (any of the subfolders). The difference between my drag and drop and all the HTML5 demos that you see on the web is that the dropped files immediately become icons that are integrated into the program.
>>>>> I will soon start working on getting multimedia icons/files working, so you'll be able to drop those directly in too. Then I will probably do a very basic kind of image editing demo that will allow you to change individual pixels or some such nonsense. But I don't want to get bogged down in the details of any particular application, because I always want to stay focused on the big picture of creating a totally powerful and intuitive way to organize our online lives.
>>>>> Anyway, I know I am quite a controversial figure here, but there should be no controversy that this thing is just about ready for prime time. I really do need to start getting interested people on board who would like to help me push the web forward. The basic mission statement for the venture will basically be that the "old web" (HTML4/version 1.0) is dead and gone. If anyone calls in search of help on their Flintstone era <html> documents with all of their <a href> and <div> tags laying about, we'll just point them in an entirely new direction. If they still insist on doing things the old way, we'll just hang up on them… This thing is all about the future!
>>>>> We can easily develop libraries of high-level interface widgets that people just need to attach event listeners to. There will be no angle brackets in sight! <hand><coded><html><markup></is></so></last></millenium>!
>>>>> Come one, come all, for the thrill of your lives :)
>>>>> On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:36:37 PM UTC-4, Dennis Kane wrote:
>>>>>> I was thinking of just responding to this old thread, in which I talk about the browser based Desktop that I've been working on, but the new thing I've been doing for the past week is so superior that I thought it deserved a completely new thead. By the way, I know this forum is all about server side Javascript, but there is not really any serious place one can go on the web that talks about the client side. Besides, with socket.io & websockets... I don't really make much of a distinction between client and server anymore. I just know that there's no reason to do a document.getElementById() call in node :)
>>>>>> This new thing is a totally shocking clone of OS X. I knew I was going to have to start over from the ground up, because my previous code base was so sh*tty, haha! I have really been concentrating on getting a nice, tight little API that developers will positively drool over. I don't want to make this thing publicly available for many reasons... but you can check out a youtube vid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq_W19QokXk) that shows it in action, and I still have my same old crappy prototype online at http://luvluvluv.info. Well, hopefully this is proof that I am able to do some cool stuff, and hopefully summa yous will want to start being my friend now, LOL!!!
>>>>>> And get this... the current, uncompressed js file size is only 54kb!
>>>>> -- >>>>> Job Board: http://jobs.nodejs.org/ >>>>> Posting guidelines: https://github.com/joyent/node/wiki/Mailing-List-Posting-Guidelines >>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>>>>> Groups "nodejs" group.
>>>>> To post to this group, send email to nod...@googlegroups.com
>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
>>>>> nodejs+un...@googlegroups.com
>>>>> For more options, visit this group at
>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
Guys, be nice. Dennis is unusual, sure, but unusual isn't bad. We're
all unusual in some way. I don't see anything sociopathic or trollish
here, just a lot of excitement about a program he's writing, and
perhaps a bit of naivety regarding the best ways to go about
recruiting contributors.
Dennis,
The reason you're getting no traction here is that your "I'm going to
be a larger than life superhero because of my code, which I want you
to help with, and it'll make you rich, but no, you can't see it"
matches a *very* common pattern of "crazy person", which we've all
seen before. It's a lot of talk, and no substance. It's trying to
spend credibility on credit, and that's not how credibility works.
I'd recommend that you assume that no one will take you seriously, and
focus on overcoming that, if your goal is actually to be successful
and recruit others to your mission of whatever it is you hope to
accomplish with your technology. Of course, if your goal is to get a
little bit of attention, and wave your freak flag, well, then bravo,
you're doing a wonderful job, please carry on :)
FWIW, I agree with most of your politics, and wish you the best of
success. You seem like a nice person. But if you want to recruit
coders, write more code, and fewer words, and share it liberally. The
revolution in software already happened, and that's the new paradigm.
You will gain more credibility if you become a part of the OSS
community before asking it for favors.
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 1:10 AM, Joshua Gross <joshua.gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Maybe I'll get one, too :) this doesn't seem to be going anywhere though.
> -- Joshua Gross
> Christian / SpanDeX / BA Candidate of Computer Science, UW-Madison 2013
> 414-377-1041 / http://www.joshisgross.com
> On Oct 9, 2012, at 12:04 AM, Rick Waldron <waldron.r...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Funny thing, I said much the same as you have here and got a gnarly
> chastising.
> -Rick
> On Monday, October 8, 2012 at 11:37 PM, Joshua Gross wrote:
> Dennis, this is a developer forum. If you want to peddle your software and
> aren't willing to show something besides videos, you're in the wrong place.
> Also I'm not going to watch a 15 minute video. You're not selling yourself
> very well, I kindly advise you to move on so this stops clogging my inbox :)
> -- Joshua Gross
> Christian / SpanDeX / BA Candidate of Computer Science, UW-Madison 2013
> 414-377-1041 / http://www.joshisgross.com
> On Oct 8, 2012, at 7:12 PM, Dennis Kane <dkan...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why do you want the code so bad? It's not like there's any kind of fancy
> algorithms at work. There are many many open source windowing packages out
> there. It's not exactly rocket science, this. It's all been done many
> times before. The only difference is that this one is *my* baby! Besides,
> you are welcome to all the code of my desktop prototype on my site at
> luvluvluv.info... it's just sitting there on the server for the taking.
> I am mainly using this thing as blackmail to get people to be interested in
> being my friend. I want to do some real world community building, and
> something like this will go a long way to get a cooperative business up and
> running.
> Furthermore... you do realize that asking another programmer to "just show
> me your code" is exactly the same as asking a girl to "just show me your
> breasts", right? I mean, I have nothing against it in principle, but, my
> god... I hardly know ye!!!
> My lastest work includes that rubber-band selection feature as well as
> dropping icons directly onto folder icons (with that "open folder" hover
> trick). I have also included some basic image file support.
> The current version of the program now includes drag and drop functionality
> of text files from the native desktop straight into the browser desktop or
> (any of the subfolders). The difference between my drag and drop and all the
> HTML5 demos that you see on the web is that the dropped files immediately
> become icons that are integrated into the program.
> I will soon start working on getting multimedia icons/files working, so
> you'll be able to drop those directly in too. Then I will probably do a
> very basic kind of image editing demo that will allow you to change
> individual pixels or some such nonsense. But I don't want to get bogged
> down in the details of any particular application, because I always want to
> stay focused on the big picture of creating a totally powerful and intuitive
> way to organize our online lives.
> Anyway, I know I am quite a controversial figure here, but there should be
> no controversy that this thing is just about ready for prime time. I really
> do need to start getting interested people on board who would like to help
> me push the web forward. The basic mission statement for the venture will
> basically be that the "old web" (HTML4/version 1.0) is dead and gone. If
> anyone calls in search of help on their Flintstone era <html> documents with
> all of their <a href> and <div> tags laying about, we'll just point them in
> an entirely new direction. If they still insist on doing things the old
> way, we'll just hang up on them… This thing is all about the future!
> We can easily develop libraries of high-level interface widgets that people
> just need to attach event listeners to. There will be no angle brackets in
> sight! <hand><coded><html><markup></is></so></last></millenium>!
> Come one, come all, for the thrill of your lives :)
> On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 7:36:37 PM UTC-4, Dennis Kane wrote:
> I was thinking of just responding to this old thread, in which I talk about
> the browser based Desktop that I've been working on, but the new thing I've
> been doing for the past week is so superior that I thought it deserved a
> completely new thead. By the way, I know this forum is all about server
> side Javascript, but there is not really any serious place one can go on the
> web that talks about the client side. Besides, with socket.io &
> websockets... I don't really make much of a distinction between client and
> server anymore. I just know that there's no reason to do a
> document.getElementById() call in node :)
> This new thing is a totally shocking clone of OS X. I knew I was going to
> have to start over from the ground up, because my previous code base was so
> sh*tty, haha! I have really been concentrating on getting a nice, tight
> little API that developers will positively drool over. I don't want to make
> this thing publicly available for many reasons... but you can check out a
> youtube vid (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tq_W19QokXk) that shows it in
> action, and I still have my same old crappy prototype online at
> http://luvluvluv.info. Well, hopefully this is proof that I am able to do
> some cool stuff, and hopefully summa yous will want to start being my friend
> now, LOL!!!
> And get this... the current, uncompressed js file size is only 54kb!
