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!
On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 at 7:36 PM, 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 (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!
Have I ever seen a bunch of google links that talk a lot of smack, but that don't really deliver anything of substance? Why, yes I have, hahaha :D! Seriously, though, I know there have been quite a few attempts over the years to do things like this in our browsers, but the technology has only caught up to the "dreams" over the last couple years. I think it's really taken a massive undertaking like the V8 project to allow things like this to become truly viable. Anyway, the entire concept of a clean, intuitive browser based "operating system" is something that traditional online content providers (based on link clicking ad revenue) should be positively petrified of.
The entire business model of the current Web is that there be an incomprehensible array of sites, each with incomprehensible interfaces, that reduces each one of us to rabid, slobbering link clickers. From what I've seen of the recent crop of Google IO videos on youtube, there are some real efforts to try to inject some sanity in our online experiences. But Google is not bigger than the entire universe of web developers who are each beholden to the profit motives of the corporations that they work for.
We know that the Web is an ugly mess. The entire problem at hand is how to go about locating remote resources. Currently, we type text strings into input boxes, and are met with thousands and millions of choices. And even when we do find the "best" site to help us out, there is often very little help in deciphering how to navigate the thing. But we all know how to navigate our own native operating systems, because we collectively have a decades long history of doing this. There is just something about windows, icons, and folders that just "makes sense" to us in a very basic way.
Now, with this browser based OS concept in full throttle, we can start thinking about organizing the remote resouces that are most important to us in highly comprehensible ways. Then, once the organization makes sense, we can actually start to reason about them, and then develop truly semantic interfaces (APIs) into their content.
I mean, all of Google's talk of tomorrow's cutting edge web applications is great and all, but if the problem of locating them persists, then it is really all for naught. We really need to begin thinking about the Web at a higher level than just one-to-one mappings between HTTP URLs and pages of HTML content.
> On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 at 7:36 PM, 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!
On Wednesday, September 26, 2012 at 8:33 AM, Dennis Kane wrote:
> Have I ever seen a bunch of google links that talk a lot of smack, but that don't really deliver anything of substance? Why, yes I have, hahaha :D!
I shared it because I thought you'd find it interesting.
> Seriously, though, I know there have been quite a few attempts over the years to do things like this in our browsers, but the technology has only caught up to the "dreams" over the last couple years. I think it's really taken a massive undertaking like the V8 project to allow things like this to become truly viable.
The guy who created that project I shared with you, works on v8 an chromium.
> Anyway, the entire concept of a clean, intuitive browser based "operating system" is something that traditional online content providers (based on link clicking ad revenue) should be positively petrified of.
> The entire business model of the current Web is that there be an incomprehensible array of sites, each with incomprehensible interfaces, that reduces each one of us to rabid, slobbering link clickers. From what I've seen of the recent crop of Google IO videos on youtube, there are some real efforts to try to inject some sanity in our online experiences. But Google is not bigger than the entire universe of web developers who are each beholden to the profit motives of the corporations that they work for.
> We know that the Web is an ugly mess. The entire problem at hand is how to go about locating remote resources. Currently, we type text strings into input boxes, and are met with thousands and millions of choices. And even when we do find the "best" site to help us out, there is often very little help in deciphering how to navigate the thing. But we all know how to navigate our own native operating systems, because we collectively have a decades long history of doing this. There is just something about windows, icons, and folders that just "makes sense" to us in a very basic way.
> Now, with this browser based OS concept in full throttle, we can start thinking about organizing the remote resouces that are most important to us in highly comprehensible ways.
> Then, once the organization makes sense, we can actually start to reason about them, and then develop truly semantic interfaces (APIs) into their content.
> I mean, all of Google's talk of tomorrow's cutting edge web applications is great and all, but if the problem of locating them persists, then it is really all for naught. We really need to begin thinking about the Web at a higher level than just one-to-one mappings between HTTP URLs and pages of HTML content.
> On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 8:17:14 PM UTC-4, Rick Waldron wrote:
> > Dennis,
> > On Tuesday, September 25, 2012 at 7:36 PM, 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!
Well, I think that we can all agree that the idea of a purely portable desktop environment is a highly compelling one, and that there are many ways to approach the problem. There is, of course, the VNC approach, wherein all of our actions are transmitted over the wire in order to control a remote computer. The problem of having to wait on all of the network delays obviously leaves much to be desired.
Another way of approaching it is to think of a desktop as a purely logical construct that can be represented fairly well by, for example, a JSON object. This will allow us to abstract way the "form" of the desktop from its "content" fairly well. (What I mean by the "form" is simply the locations of icons and the locations + sizes of windows. By "content", I am talking about the actual data in the files that the icons represent.)
All of the form related stuff can be transmitted by JSON blazingly fast, and the local user will be able to control his/her in-browser desktop without delay. But the content may very well still be sitting on the remote server, so double clicking on an icon might result in an indeterminate delay before the content is fully loaded, depending on file size and network conditions. But now we can cache the content, and we won't have to suffer the same delay again... as long as the cache is still intact, of course.
But even beyond the idea of desktop portability, there remains to crucial problem of how to locate, retrieve, and render the various bits of information that are scattered all over the WWW.
In my opinion, all of the past attempts at developing web based desktop environments have failed because they were, at their hearts, focused primarily on replicating native desktop functionality by any means necessary (eg, Flash based desktops) rather than on making actual, functioning websites more responsive and comprehensible. All of those past efforts amounted to nothing but curiosities because we just don't need our web browsers as gateways to hackish, barely responsive desktop environments. We will always need our web browsers as gateways to the wild, wonderful, weird place that is the WWW!
As it currently stands, it is next to impossible to reason with the content that is contained on remote machines. This is because the URL schemes that we use are fairly arbitrary strings of text. That is, in order to locate a remote resource, we have to get our grubby little hands on some string that looks something like "http://www.somedumbdomain.com/stupidpage?crazy_param=flux&dumb_arg=sp...", and on and on it goes. To the end user, these are incomprehensible, indecipherible messes. They only make sense to the backend URL parsing algorithms.
And even when we are able to locate a remote resource, due to the fact that the crucial information is usually buried inside of a messy HTML document, we are often no wiser because of our inability to sift through the layout markup in order to finally get to the data that we seek.
So in order to inject some sanity into our online experiences, we have to start thinking about how to allow users to locate the various bits of content that they are after in much more intuitive ways. And you can't get more intuitive that icons sitting on desktops and in folders! In this case, a user is no longer forced to remember a random string of text known as a URL... all he/she has to do is know what the icon looks like, and in which folder it might be located.
And power users will be able to reason about remote content using familiar Unix path notation (/path/to/the/file). They will be able to trivially write scripts that perform various actions depending on whatever state the remote content is in (eg current weather or traffic conditions). No longer will developers be forced to construct convoluted GET requests in order to retrieve some little bit of information. There can simply be a "file" named something like "/home/dennis/weather.info" that we can open up by double-clicking or via script... and now we are enlightened!
I am simply trying to make our web browsing experiences better rather than making our desktop experiences worse. No one will ever get excited about offers of desktops that sit in browser windows. But the idea of having the world at our fingertips from within the context of a familiar, intuitive interface is something entirely new and exciting! And being able to reason about the world via programs that are trivial to write is something that should make all of us programmers positively delirious!!
So the trick now is to get web developers to stop obsessing so much over serving up full fledged HTML documents, and to start thinking about how to offer services that deliver compact, essential nuggets of JSON data that can be delivered into these kinds of in-browser GUIs at blazingly fast speeds.
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!
If you're looking to supplant the WIMP paradigm, you should be familiar with "The Anti-Mac Interface" (really a post-Macintosh UI): http://www.useit.com/papers/anti-mac.html
Cool! When I scrolled down to the section called "The Central Role of Language", I realized that the "anti-mac" concept was something I could work with. I am a believer in the concept of leveraging Javascript in order to devise a kind of higher level computing language that can deal very well in human concepts. Think of it as a kind of highly structured natural language, and we can start really getting on our way. The problem is that programmers and logically-minded people in general need to start getting creative with how they think about computers.
When I scroll through this list on any given day, I am often quite disheartened by the utter lack of trying to think of Javascript at a higher level. There is often so much discussion concerning issues that are well on their way to becoming irrelevant anymore. Whether to fork off node or whether to make it threaded, for example. But node is really good enough for anything that can be reasonably thrown at it. I remember hearing Ryan talking about the fact that node can always be made to be faster, but that the real increase in speed occurred between the leap from the pre-node world to the post-node world.
I think it's high time for many programmers to just take a little breather to think about where we can go next. I recommend really meditating on some of those Crockford youtube videos, and start thinking about what it really means that we have a blazing fast DOM-aware prototypal scripting language that uses first order functions. It's all pretty mind blowing when you really think about it.
Developers are just so damn scared to actually *use* the language rather than just using some dumb library that forces you to think in a certain way about in-browser programming.
My API is currently a little messy, but from the beginning, I wanted to focus on keeping it exceedingly simple and intuitive. There are function calls like make_desktop(), make_window(), and make_icon(). Kids will be able to type these into their browser consoles and see magic happen in front of their eyes. I'm talking about giving kids of the same kind of experience that us 30 or 40-somethings had when we tapped those BASIC programs from BYTE magazine into black screens with glowing green characters.
In today's world, there is such a schism between the experiences of end users and developers. When I was in 5th grade, we had a programming class taught by our Math teacher. These kinds of things are extremely important to teach kids when their minds are eager to learn.
So basically, the way that we think about what our computers are all about needs to start evolving, and it is really up to programmers to start programming in ways that are new/exciting/experimental (just like when we were kids!) rather than so mind numbingly dull.
On Thursday, September 27, 2012 1:26:06 PM UTC-4, P. Douglas Reeder wrote:
> One mashup to rule them all? That's a tall order.
> If you're looking to supplant the WIMP paradigm, you should be familiar > with "The Anti-Mac Interface" (really a post-Macintosh UI): > http://www.useit.com/papers/anti-mac.html
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!
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 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
> 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
> http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
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...
> @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
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...
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...
> 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 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...
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.
> > > 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
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.
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 1:32 PM, Gerald Klein 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 wasn't being negative, I was identifying exactly what it would take to interest me. As an engineer, I want to know how things work... I guess I wrongly assumed that this list was for engineers that liked to make things or learn how things work. That's why I said "speaking for most", thanks for correcting me there, I won't make the mistake again.
> 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
> > -- > > 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 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...
On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Mark Hahn <m...@hahnca.com> wrote:
> > I have never found negative comments to be helpful,
> I respectfully disagree. Informed opinions should be welcome here.
> 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...
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.
> 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
> 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
> > > -- > > > 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
"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.
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...
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.
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...
On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Gerald Klein <j...@zognet.com> wrote:
> I agree but there is a way of presenting them, further if you have a
> negative I would assume you must have a positive to supplant it.
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Mark Hahn <m...@hahnca.com> wrote:
>> > I have never found negative comments to be helpful,
>> I respectfully disagree. Informed opinions should be welcome here.
>> 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...
On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Mark Hahn <m...@hahnca.com> wrote:
> > there is a way of presenting them
> Yes. Civility is to be expected.
> > if you have a negative I would assume you must have a positive to
> supplant it.
> Huh? I have what I have. This isn't a debate, it's just me giving my
> opinion.
> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Gerald Klein <j...@zognet.com> wrote:
>> I agree but there is a way of presenting them, further if you have a
>> negative I would assume you must have a positive to supplant it.
>> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Mark Hahn <m...@hahnca.com> wrote:
>>> > I have never found negative comments to be helpful,
>>> I respectfully disagree. Informed opinions should be welcome here.
>>> 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
>>>>>>>> > http://groups.google.com/group/nodejs?hl=en?hl=en
