Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
GUI Operating Systems Social Networks Linux

Jolicloud 1.0 Has an HTML5 UI 99

Posted by timothy
from the blink-tag-considered-harmful dept.
kai_hiwatari writes "Jolicloud 1.0, a Linux based OS for netbooks, was launched a few days back. In this new release, the developers have completely replaced the old interface based on Ubuntu Netbook Remix in favor of a new one based on HTML5. Jolicloud 1.0 also features a new syncing feature using which you can sync installed applications across all your systems running on Jolicloud. Other interesting features includes new app center, social stream, etc."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Jolicloud 1.0 Has an HTML5 UI

Comments Filter:
  • by suso (153703) * on Saturday July 17, 2010 @08:33PM (#32940154) Homepage Journal

    Why does it have cloud in its name? Just to attract attention or is there some related feature?

  • having tried... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by mewshi_nya (1394329) on Saturday July 17, 2010 @08:33PM (#32940156)

    having tried jolicloud beta, I wholeheartedly look forward to the finished product. The UNR-based GUI was nice, but if i wanted UNR, I'd freakin' run UNR on it.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 17, 2010 @08:46PM (#32940192)

      Earlier this morning I took a shit. Yesterday I had burritos for lunch, so you can imagine how it turned out. I couldn't flush it all down, so feel free to tell your friends at Jolicloud that they can come by and scoop up what's left. They can use it as the basis for Jolicloud 2.0.

    • having tried jolicloud beta, I wholeheartedly look forward to the finished product. The UNR-based GUI was nice, but if i wanted UNR, I'd freakin' run UNR on it.

      Not if you had an EEE 701 at 600MHz. Jolicloud includes the hack to overclock your 701 to 900MHz like the later-model units which had zero hardware changes from the early ones (except sometimes coming with a different SSD AFAIK?)

      I, too, am seriously annoyed about this rolling release nonsense. What's really sad is that when they added the 1.0 teaser to the update app, it was too wide so it created a scrollbar. So now not only do I see a teaser for an OS I can't download, but it mars the appearance of the updater app to remind me of just how annoyed I am when I see it, which is every day whether I am using the machine for anything or not. It has the most uptime of any of my current systems (40 days... I install updates, unlike some of you bastards) and it's one of the most polished Linux distributions I've yet seen. The fact that it's a re-polished Ubuntu is fairly irrelevant except in its benefits.

  • by Spazntwich (208070) on Saturday July 17, 2010 @08:49PM (#32940210)

    Cloud html5 app syncing is great, but I'm curious if they've got 4g back compatible web 3.0 blueface interballs technology for the kind of futureproof idevice demands the superuser of yestermorrow is sure to be told he needs.

    Now the kicker, does it run beowulf? Last time I tried to stync my grendel module .99x was torn to pieces before the crowdsourced beta swarm could move to India.

  • by MadGeek007 (1332293) on Saturday July 17, 2010 @09:06PM (#32940268)

    Jolicloud 1.0 Has an HTML5 UI

    Jolicloud 1.0 Has a HTML5 UI
    There. fixed it for you.
    Source: http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/591/01/ [purdue.edu]

    • Re:Headline (Score:5, Funny)

      by Spazntwich (208070) on Saturday July 17, 2010 @09:09PM (#32940290)

      This is truly an historic post.

    • by MadGeek007 (1332293) on Saturday July 17, 2010 @09:13PM (#32940308)
      Darn! that should have been a comma. Oh well, no one will miss a few pixels of a difference. Oh wait...
    • by lordmetroid (708723) on Saturday July 17, 2010 @09:16PM (#32940330)
      However if you want to make a statement stand out as something a little bit more emphasized, the use of the wrong article is a commonly occuring phenomenon. At least that is how I have figured it out.
    • Re:Headline (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 17, 2010 @09:16PM (#32940334)

      No. You're wrong. Read the note at the bottom of your source:

      Note: The choice of article is actually based upon the phonetic (sound) quality of the first letter in a word, not on the orthographic (written) representation of the letter.

      Because HTML is an abbreviation, you say the name of the letter 'H', and not the 'H' sound itself. Because the name of the letter H begins with a long 'A' sound, "Jolicloud 1.0 Has an HTML5 UI" is correct, and "Jolicloud 1.0 Has a HTML5 UI" is not.

      • by TaoPhoenix (980487) <TaoPhoenix@yahoo.com> on Sunday July 18, 2010 @01:29AM (#32941114) Journal

        Bravo

      • by JAlexoi (1085785) on Sunday July 18, 2010 @05:47AM (#32941622) Homepage
        Well in Ireland people call the H letter as /het/, therefore from an Irish perspective a HTML5 UI is 100% correct, but in US H's name is pronounced /et/ therefore an HTML5 UI is correct from your perspective...
        Damn it's hard to remember that there are other cultures outside of US, right?
      • by Timmmm (636430) on Sunday July 18, 2010 @06:35AM (#32941744)

        Hooray! Now we just need to stop all those people saying "an historic", which is especially weird because I bet they don't say "an house" or "an horse" or "an history of over-correction".

        I think it results from primary school teaching of "rules" like "i before e except after c", or "an goes before vowels", which people then go on to apply blindly.

      • by nobodie (1555367) on Monday July 19, 2010 @04:27AM (#32948264)

        Grammar and language Nazi here, the poster above is correct about the use of the indefinite article and Letters. The difficulty comes with the use with the "h" as the initial letter in a word such as the previous poster who says "an" historical. This is still disputed by the old school fools who learned a written standard for something that governs a spoken standard. In other words, if the "h" is written then its sound value need not be considered and you can make a rule that holds across all situations. If the "h" is spoken then you have the difficulty of two variant pronunciations (each calling a different article-- "a" or "an") that can appear with the same spelling. This possibility mind-fucks (this is a classical linguistics term first used by Ferdinand de Saussure in his famous thirteenth introductory lecture on semiotics) the prescriptionists who insist that all rules must apply equally and completely in all situations. All other situations create the kind of linguistic diversity up with which they will not put.

    • Re:Headline (Score:1, Troll)

      by quickOnTheUptake (1450889) on Saturday July 17, 2010 @09:30PM (#32940382)
      You are truly a dumbass.
    • Re:Headline (Score:5, Informative)

      by R.Mo_Robert (737913) on Saturday July 17, 2010 @09:43PM (#32940416)

      I don't do prescriptivist "grammar" (I'm a linguist and value language as it is actually used, and many prescriptivists "rules" don't even make sense), but even if you do follow their advice, note:

      Note: The choice of article is actually based upon the phonetic (sound) quality of the first letter in a word, not on the orthographic (written) representation of the letter.

      Therefore, "an HTML5," as in the original headline, is correct, unless you really pronounce the letter "H" as something other than "aitch" (which, in all fairness, a minority of speakers in Britain and other places do). But note also the status of the sound /h/ itself isn't readily identifiable as a consonant or vowel--in fact, some consider it only a breathy version of the vowel it precedes or to be a segment marked only for phonation type and not place or manner (as with "real" consonants). I'll refer you to Ladefoged & Maddieson (1996) or any of Ladefoged's other phonetics books for more.

      • Re:Headline (Score:1, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 17, 2010 @09:55PM (#32940454)
        ...

        you must be a ton of fun at parties.

      • by value_added (719364) on Saturday July 17, 2010 @10:58PM (#32940684)

        In the immortal words of Eddie Izzard [youtube.com]:

        Now, You say 'erbs' and we say 'herbs' because there's a fucking 'h' in it!

        The French have institutionalised a prescriptive approach to their language. For them, the "h" in "herbe" is silent. The English, by contrast, have institutionalised an aversion to all things French, so it's entirely possible they started aspirating their "haitches" in spite. At least that's my theory. ;-)

        So which pronunciation is correct? I'd suggest both are. To say "none" seems a bit inane. I'd like to believe that somewhere between an overly rigid approach, and language as spoken in Idiocracy (the logical conclusion of your "non prescriptive" posturing), is a compromise, one that most adults in the room can agree to. Following (or advocating) established rules is how we get along, yes?

        • by R.Mo_Robert (737913) on Sunday July 18, 2010 @02:02AM (#32941190)

          Following (or advocating) established rules is how we get along, yes?

          This thinking shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how language is acquired. It is not something we have to "learn" by explicit instruction; it is something that children simply pick up on and discover the rules (i.e., grammar, although nonlinguists often use this term for a variety of nongrammatical entities) of for themselves. In fact, if you've been around linguistically developing children (I mean really young, not elementary-school aged), you'll notice that explicit teaching or correction does no good. Of course, I'm talking only about first language acquision; acquisition of a second language as an adult is a different story.

          Keep in mind, however, that my beef with prescriptivism should not be interpreted as advocating a free for all. In many contexts, such as academia, there is a value in so-called "standard English," although I think of that as more of an abstraction than a concrete entity, which itself is also constantly changing. However, much like the white heterosexual male in a patriarchial society, this notion needs no defending; thus, I was defending only the other side. :)

          But back to the "rules," it's important to note that no variety of English is inherently superior to another. What is considered the "standard" variety is arbitrary (and by "arbitrary," I usually mean "decided by social factors, like who has more power or more speakers"). Prescriptivism is a slightly different notion, but it's enough to say that many "rules" perpetuated by self-proclaimed "grammar experts" (i.e., prescriptivists) are, in fact, completely made up, imported from Latin grammar (and thus not really applicable to English), or attempts to suppress change. They are often more a source of confusion than anything, and they all rely on the fallacy that one English is "good" and another is "bad."

          PS - Pronouncing the /h/ in "herb" is probably more of a spelling pronunciation (where people change the original pronunciation over time as they apparently think, "This letter is here, so I better prnounce it!"), whereas the novel /h/ in the name of the letter "H" is probably a surfacing of some desire for uniformity in letter names, many of which begin (or end) with their usual sound--although I suppose this is a similar hypercorrection to the likely "herb" story. But I doubt the French had anything to do with it--language change takes time, and it's rarey, if ever, deliberate. :)

      • by Count Fenring (669457) on Sunday July 18, 2010 @12:05AM (#32940876) Homepage Journal

        I don't do prescriptivist "grammar" (I'm a linguist and value language as it is actually used, and many prescriptivists "rules" don't even make sense)

        I'm curious - if "prescriptivist" grammar isn't valuable, than how would you propose written language be taught, paying specific attention to the problematic requirement of readability and precision between people with different dialects, upbringings, and educations.

        Also, a version that doesn't end up with the U.S. speaking in txt-speak would be nice.

        • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 18, 2010 @01:11AM (#32941064)

          Prescriptivism does not have such things in mind, and often is in fact contrary to such objectives, mostly by teaching that constructions that are in wide use and are perfectly sensible are, in fact, Bad and Wrong and will get you sent to grammar hell.

    • by trapnest (1608791) <janusofzeal@gmail.com> on Saturday July 17, 2010 @10:12PM (#32940524)
      Note: The choice of article is actually based upon the phonetic (sound) quality of the first letter in a word, not on the orthographic (written) representation of the letter. If the first letter makes a vowel-type sound, you use "an"; if the first letter would make a consonant-type sound, you use "a."

      An HTML is correct.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 17, 2010 @10:45PM (#32940632)

      Don't lose your netbook, for you may become an hero in the tragedy!

    • by daveime (1253762) on Sunday July 18, 2010 @09:23AM (#32942254)

      You say erb, and we say herb ... because there's a fucking 'h' in it.

      Hello, not ello.
      High, not igh.
      Herb, not erb.
      Honour, not onour (or even onor).

      This whole 'unsounded h' nonsense wouldn't exist if you yanks would learn to pronounce words properly.

      • by drinkypoo (153816) <martin.espinoza@gmail.com> on Sunday July 18, 2010 @09:52AM (#32942400) Homepage Journal

        This whole 'unsounded h' nonsense wouldn't exist if you yanks would learn to pronounce words properly.

        American pronunciation (what a stupid word, where did the 'o' go? why is there a nun in there? wait, there's a joke here someplace) is closer to the British English at the time of the split than modern British English is, because Brits deliberately laid on their goofy accents to sound less like Americans and the whole thing just sort of stuck. Indeed, our pronunciation tends to be better than yours (for example, we know how to spell and say "Aluminum" in accordance with the namer's wishes and similarity to the names of other elements) except in the midwest where faces are too full of cheese curds and the like for proper diction.

        • by daveime (1253762) on Sunday July 18, 2010 @10:43AM (#32942640)

          According to whose wishes ???

          In 1807, Davy proposed the name aluminium for the metal, undiscovered at that time, and later agreed to change it to aluminum. Shortly thereafter, the name aluminum was adopted to conform with the "ium" ending of most elements.

          Aluminium was also the accepted spelling in the U.S. until 1925, at which time the American Chemical Society decided to use the name aluminum thereafter in their publications.

          So yet again, it turns out it was Americans who decided they had to be different to everyone else and bugger about with the language.

          You only have to look at the names of the other Group 13 elements to see the problem ...

          Ga = Gallium
          In = Indium
          TI = Thallium

          See anything common with the naming ?

      • by tehcyder (746570) on Tuesday July 20, 2010 @11:27AM (#32965070) Journal
        Nobody I know (in the UK) pronounces the h in honour except Parker in Thunderbirds.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 17, 2010 @09:08PM (#32940282)

    It seems to be already slashdotted ;(

  • by Aladrin (926209) on Saturday July 17, 2010 @09:22PM (#32940350)

    You can't really call it 'launched' when only select people have it. You can't DL it yet (it's still the pre-release available for DL) and if you already have it, you have to wait for them to allow you to upgrade.

    It's not launched. It's in preview.

  • by westlake (615356) on Saturday July 17, 2010 @09:26PM (#32940364)

    Jolicloud.

    Tell me why the geek's mind turn to mush when it comes to marketing his projects.

    Is it "all the sugar and twice the caffeine" in his Jolt Cola?

    • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 17, 2010 @10:48PM (#32940650)

      Yeah, they should have named it PatriotFireXL eh? Hint - maybe they're not marketing it for /you/. Imagine that.

      Meanwhile their blog announcement [jolicloud.com] is entertaining:

      Imagine an operating system centered around interacting with your friends.

      Sounds like Linux so far. Especially the imaginary friends.

      Imagine never having to worry about updates and software installs.

      Sounds like Ubuntu.

      Imagine that all your machines are automatically synchronized with one another. Imagine having your Internet ecosystem natively integrated to your machine, with all the coolest apps at your fingertips.

      My "Internet ecosystem natively integrated"? Whoa. I think my head just exploded rainbows & unicorns.

      But it's an interesting enough idea, and it's nice to see somebody putting the whole package together in Open Source instead of just talking about it.

  • HTML 5 Apps (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Toonol (1057698) on Saturday July 17, 2010 @09:31PM (#32940384)
    I worry that this will be like Java apps; a way to make UIs and performance even worse. HTML is great, and HTML 5 is a clear improvement; but it certainly is nowhere near the performance, stability, and ease of use of an application designed a little closer to the hardware.

    I've seen many decent programs ruined as companies tossed the client software they had written in C++ or even VB, and move to web-based UIs. Programming things in HTML 5 that would be best written in any of a dozen other languages will just stigmatize HTML 5, kind of the way you get a sinking feeling in your stomach when you fire up a new program and realize, while it's churning, that it's written in Java.
    • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 17, 2010 @09:59PM (#32940474)

      Yes, of course, how wrong were we.

      Now where can i download the Facebook native application for Ubuntu x86

    • Re:HTML 5 Apps (Score:5, Interesting)

      by SanityInAnarchy (655584) <ninja@slaphack.com> on Saturday July 17, 2010 @10:44PM (#32940622) Journal

      it certainly is nowhere near the performance, stability, and ease of use of an application designed a little closer to the hardware.

      That depends what you're looking for. There are certain things I use Web applications for that I don't want anywhere near my hardware, or even my OS -- HTML makes a nice sandbox.

      In that sense -- in the sense of, hey, here's a cool toy I want to try out for a few minutes (which covers 99% of the apps in any of these newfangled "app stores") -- HTML actually wins for all of these. With a decent browser, performance comes close enough, and the speed with which the application is "installed" is unmatched. Similarly, it's much easier to just try it out for a few seconds and come back later -- and since it's sandboxed for me, it makes my machine much more stable than if I'd been using native equivalents.

      Even where native apps win, they are losing ground.

      Stability? That's a joke -- when was the last time a website segfaulted? Then again, native apps work without an Internet connection -- but HTML5 lets web apps do that, too.

      Ease of use? Everyone knows how to use a website, and websites provide things like tabs, bookmarks, history, keyboard shortcuts, extensions, even user scripts. Often, apps have a requirement for functionality like this, and they end up rebuilding something a browser is already very good at -- for example, JDeveloper's online documentation seems to emulate a web browser full of tabs, with back and forward buttons, hyperlinks, etc, but I can't open a new link in a new tab at all, and I can't use keyboard shortcuts to switch tabs, close tabs, or go back/forward. I certainly can't bookmark things.

      These are all solved problems on the Web, and what's more, by using a standard Web interface, you no longer have to get this right yourself -- if a user doesn't like how tabs work in your "application", they can simply download a new browser.

      Performance? You gave Java as an example -- I have few complaints about the performance of Java itself. The main places Java loses are boot time (waiting for a JVM to fire up) and poorly-written apps. I've been forced to develop Java in school and now for an internship, using Eclipse and JDeveloper, and the difference between the performance of those IDEs, as applications, is like night and day -- Eclipse launches quickly and I've never had it lag or crash, while JDeveloper takes forever to start, the UI lags constantly, and after extended use, it almost inevitably grinds to a halt or outright crashes.

      Similarly, Chrome, Konqueror, and Firefox seem to all be written in C/C++, and of these, Chrome launches faster than Konqueror, and every single website I visit seems faster in Chrome than in Konqueror, even though both have common roots in KHTML/WebKit -- even though Konqueror uses Qt, which is already loaded all over my system, and Chrome uses gtk.

      The difference isn't the language, it's the developer.

      I've seen many decent programs ruined as companies tossed the client software they had written in C++ or even VB, and move to web-based UIs.

      There are many possible reasons for this. Probably the top two are throwing away their existing codebase (and thus, their competitive advantage), and trying to take something fundamentally non-Web and push it into the Web, instead of trying to re-think the application from the ground up as a web application.

      It could also be that you had a kneejerk reaction to an otherwise decent interface. It could even be that your browser sucks. Which applications are we talking about?

      But of course...

      Programming things in HTML 5 that would be best written in any of a dozen other languages will just stigmatize HTML 5...

      Maybe at first, the way VB, PHP, and Ruby are all stigmatized because there are so many novice programmers flocking to them. Java, perhaps even more so, as universities seem to have largely embraced either Java o

      • by MichaelSmith (789609) on Sunday July 18, 2010 @12:53AM (#32941008) Homepage Journal

        when was the last time a website segfaulted?

        Let me check my logs.

      • Re:HTML 5 Apps (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Nursie (632944) on Sunday July 18, 2010 @01:54AM (#32941170)

        It doesn't matter too much to me whether it's java that's slow or if it's that 90% of java developers suck. The end result is the same, a lot of people will deliberately avoid using it. Hell, if 90% of java developers suck badly enough to make slow, bad programs then perhaps that's a flaw in the JVM/Java too.

        Probably not though, it's likely more reflective of Java being the default language these days.

        Oh, and FYI, websites cause browsers to fault relatively frequently, unfortunately, because you can't avoid having native code *somewhere*, and browsers are not written perfectly.

        • by SanityInAnarchy (655584) <ninja@slaphack.com> on Sunday July 18, 2010 @12:43PM (#32943302) Journal

          It doesn't matter too much to me whether it's java that's slow or if it's that 90% of java developers suck. The end result is the same, a lot of people will deliberately avoid using it.

          Not necessarily -- again, do people notice or care what language an app is written in when it works? I deliberately avoid PHP, and I've been accused of avoiding it because stupid people develop in it. People also rip on Rails all the time -- "Rails can't scale" is the phrase.

          But people use Twitter and Facebook, and no one cares what those are written in.

          Oh, and FYI, websites cause browsers to fault relatively frequently, unfortunately, because you can't avoid having native code *somewhere*, and browsers are not written perfectly.

          While true, how frequently is "frequently"? And how much is the damage?

          It's been at least six months, maybe a year, since I've seen anything crash all of Chrome. It's definitely been a few months since I've seen anything crash a tab. It's been less than a week since I've seen my native email client (KMail) crash, and it seems like there's always something.

          Yes, native code has to be involved at some point. Browsers can and do crash. But it certainly reduces the amount of native code quite a bit.

          I don't know about you, but I see my own Ruby scripts crash a hell of a lot more often than I see the Ruby interpreter crash, and I see my little C utilities crash much more often than my Ruby scripts.

          • by Nursie (632944) on Sunday July 18, 2010 @02:45PM (#32944088)

            Well, you can cut out as much native code as you like if you have a dislike for it.

            Me, I'm a C programmer and I write performance-critical server code. It doesn't crash all that often because myself and my team are competent.

            We see other teams doing things in java that take massive amounts of memory and processor to get near what we can do on pretty standard hardware and ... well ... there are advantages to coding natively.

            (But I'll don't really understand how python can start in a heartbeat when java takes so long...)

            • by SanityInAnarchy (655584) <ninja@slaphack.com> on Sunday July 18, 2010 @09:56PM (#32946688) Journal

              Me, I'm a C programmer and I write performance-critical server code. It doesn't crash all that often because myself and my team are competent.

              I'll take your word for that. And yet...

              We see other teams doing things in java that take massive amounts of memory and processor to get near what we can do on pretty standard hardware

              Were those competent teams?

              And these aren't the only things to look at. I don't think Java is that much of a penalty anymore -- in some cases, it's even faster -- but I'm also a Ruby developer. I care about my code being fast, but only to a point -- if my code is slower than yours by a constant factor of 100, say, well, hardware is a lot cheaper than developers. If my code is exponentially slower than yours, that's not the language, that's my fault.

              there are advantages to coding natively.

              What are they, on the server side?

              But I'll don't really understand how python can start in a heartbeat when java takes so long...

              I probably spoke too soon:

              $ time java Hello
              Hello, world!
               
              real 0m0.116s
              user 0m0.060s
              sys 0m0.010s
              $ time python -c "print 'Hello'"
              Hello
               
              real 0m0.019s
              user 0m0.010s
              sys 0m0.010s

              What's remarkable is how little difference there is with JRuby:

              $ time ruby -e "puts 'Hello'"
              Hello
               
              real 0m0.009s
              user 0m0.000s
              sys 0m0.010s
              $ time jruby -e "puts 'Hello'"
               
              real 0m0.377s
              user 0m0.320s
              sys 0m0.050s

              So yeah, Java is slow to start, but it's really not as bad as I thought.

              • by Nursie (632944) on Tuesday July 20, 2010 @12:40AM (#32960418)

                On the server side you have the advantages of speed and control.

                When you're already working on pretty big iron and you're trying to squeeze a few more percent out of it, it seems to be the way to go. Or in my experience it is.

                I think the attitude that hardware is cheap (which is indeed true) has turned out a lot of java programmers that just don't think about speed and efficiency. Even the ones who are otherwise competent. Though some of the ones I encounter are finally getting better at stopping memory leak in their code. Or should I call it memory proliferation? Same effect really.

      • Bravo (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 18, 2010 @06:14AM (#32941684)

        One of the smartest comments on this topic i have seen for a while now.

        I've seen some awesome applications written in Java, Flash, and HTML5.

        You can't blame a language for awful applications written in them, it is the awful developers who throw around hacks, broken and messy, completely unoptimized code who are to blame.
        And they aren't the only ones to blame either, STANDARDS are to blame as well. Some standards are pretentiously over-complex for the sake of readability, or "super cool new coding" standards.*
        In the case of JavaScript? HELL NO. Compress that thing and keep an uncompressed version, with a link to it in the source at the top if an outside person wants to view it. (if you want them to)

        This is a whole new platform just starting off. Forget HTML4 (even if there was some decent applications for that), HTML5, new JS extensions and CSS3 are years worth of changes, still changing at that.
        Websockets, offline support, JS workers, transforms, semantic web (no more DIVs, YAY), countless other things.

        The only problem we have to suffer is Microsoft, and some small disagreements with the people behind the standards and browsers.

        *An example being the stupid hatred for things like GOTO.
        So many people use GOTOs without them even realising it, like when it is disguised as another command for a special cases like BREAKs and CONTINUEs inside loops, exit statements, errors, several others.
        So many people waste time making awful chains of IF statements that could easily be condensed just by using GOTO. (there was an example on here back when one game from Humble Indie Bundles sources were looked at, hell, Linus himself defended his use of GOTO in the Kernel pretty well too)
        I've seen people with outright hatred for GOTOs despite the fact that the very computer they were using uses more GOTOs in a second than they have probably had hot dinners in their life.
        GOTO is not evil, GOTO is just used for stupid reasons most of the time by sub-standard developers.

        • by SanityInAnarchy (655584) <ninja@slaphack.com> on Sunday July 18, 2010 @12:54PM (#32943386) Journal

          You can't blame a language for awful applications written in them, it is the awful developers who throw around hacks, broken and messy, completely unoptimized code who are to blame.

          I should've thrown in a caveat...

          You can blame a language for shortcomings in the language. As an example, maybe it's been resolved recently (though I doubt it), but when every single flash video player, including YouTube, brings my system to its knees trying to play 1080p h.264, but the same video plays flawlessly in mplayer or VLC -- or when a small video takes 50% CPU for Flash to play, and 0.2% CPU for mplayer or VLC -- that's definitely an issue with Flash.

          It's possible that everyone is doing it wrong (including YouTube), but does that really make sense?

          Yes, I've seen some brilliant Flash apps. I've even seen some brilliant PHP apps. But I certainly didn't mean to claim that all languages are equal. All I'm saying is to make sure you're evaluating the language itself, and not just people screwing it up.

          An example being the stupid hatred for things like GOTO.
          So many people use GOTOs without them even realising it, like when it is disguised as another command for a special cases like BREAKs and CONTINUEs inside loops, exit statements, errors, several others.

          I suppose I'm also using GOTO when I make a function call?

          I get what you're saying, but I'd also much prefer cases like break, continue, exception handling, and ad-hoc return statements than a general-purpose goto. All of these goto-like tools have well-defined semantics, they're easy to reason about, and easy to design for. Goto itself, especially mixed into any modern language, is going to be messy.

          I don't think it would bother me that a language supports goto at all. Take eval -- I almost never use it, but I insist on it when looking for a language.

          So many people waste time making awful chains of IF statements that could easily be condensed just by using GOTO.

          An example would be helpful. I'd say, if you have awful chains of if statements, you're probably at the wrong level of abstraction -- a case would be better, but a higher level of abstraction (objects, methods) would probably be better still.

          I've seen people with outright hatred for GOTOs despite the fact that the very computer they were using uses more GOTOs in a second than they have probably had hot dinners in their life.

          That's pretty irrelevant. I also hate using malloc/free myself, though I realize whatever garbage collection system I'm using is doing that all the time. I also don't really like to use hexadecimal in my code, certainly not binary, but, well...

          I agree that GOTO isn't evil, and I'd also agree it should be irrelevant when choosing a program -- I certainly don't search through Slashcode for gotos, and then refuse to use it if I find one. But it is dangerous, and should be avoided until you know how to use it properly -- and even then, it should be avoided, because you're going to have to work with other developers.

      • by loufoque (1400831) on Sunday July 18, 2010 @08:34AM (#32942046)

        With a decent browser, performance comes close enough, and the speed with which the application is "installed" is unmatched

        I'd quite like to have one of those.
        What are those magic browsers you speak of?

        On Linux, all of them are slow (except maybe Opera).

  • by Anonymous Coward on Saturday July 17, 2010 @09:34PM (#32940394)

    Chrome is really snappy on my netbook as well, but what I'm really waiting for is for someone to write an extension for chrome/chromium so I can use it as a file manager. I used to love konqueror just for that.

  • by GNUALMAFUERTE (697061) <almafuerte.gmail@com> on Saturday July 17, 2010 @11:11PM (#32940726)
    "I'm a modern man, a man for the millennium. Digital and smoke free. A
    diversified multi-cultural, post-modern deconstruction that is
    anatomically and ecologically incorrect. I've been up linked and
    downloaded, I've been inputted and outsourced, I know the upside of
    downsizing, I know the downside of upgrading. I'm a high-tech
    low-life. A cutting edge, state-of-the-art bi-coastal multi-tasker and
    I can give you a gigabyte in a nanosecond!

    I'm new wave, but I'm old school and my inner child is outward bound.
    I'm a hot-wired, heat seeking, warm-hearted cool customer, voice
    activated and bio-degradable. I interface with my database, my
    database is in cyberspace, so I'm interactive, I'm hyperactive and
    from time to time I'm radioactive.

    Behind the eight ball, ahead of the curve, ridin the wave, dodgin the
    bullet and pushin the envelope. I'm on-point, on-task, on-message and
    off drugs. I've got no need for coke and speed. I've got no urge to
    binge and purge. I'm in-the-moment, on-the-edge, over-the-top and
    under-the-radar. A high-concept, low-profile, medium-range ballistic
    missionary. A street-wise smart bomb. A top-gun bottom feeder. I wear
    power ties, I tell power lies, I take power naps and run victory laps.
    I'm a totally ongoing big-foot, slam-dunk, rainmaker with a pro-active
    outreach. A raging workaholic. A working rageaholic. Out of rehab and
    in denial!

    I've got a personal trainer, a personal shopper, a personal assistant
    and a personal agenda. You can't shut me up. You can't dumb me down
    because I'm tireless and I'm wireless, I'm an alpha male on
    beta-blockers.

    I'm a non-believer and an over-achiever, laid-back but
    fashion-forward. Up-front, down-home, low-rent, high-maintenance.
    Super-sized, long-lasting, high-definition, fast-acting, oven-ready
    and built-to-last! I'm a hands-on, foot-loose, knee-jerk head case
    pretty maturely post-traumatic and I've got a love-child that sends me
    hate mail.

    But, I'm feeling, I'm caring, I'm healing, I'm sharing-- a supportive,
    bonding, nurturing primary care-giver. My output is down, but my
    income is up. I took a short position on the long bond and my revenue
    stream has its own cash-flow. I read junk mail, I eat junk food, I buy
    junk bonds and I watch trash sports! I'm gender specific, capital
    intensive, user-friendly and lactose intolerant.

    I like rough sex. I like tough love. I use the "F" word in my emails
    and the software on my hard-drive is hardcore--no soft porn.

    I bought a microwave at a mini-mall; I bought a mini-van at a
    mega-store. I eat fast-food in the slow lane. I'm toll-free,
    bite-sized, ready-to-wear and I come in all sizes. A fully-equipped,
    factory-authorized, hospital-tested, clinically-proven,
    scientifically- formulated medical miracle. I've been pre-wash,
    pre-cooked, pre-heated, pre-screened, pre-approved, pre-packaged,
    post-dated, freeze-dried, double-wrapped, vacuum-packed and, I have an
    unlimited broadband capacity.

    I'm a rude dude, but I'm the real deal. Lean and mean! Cocked, locked
    and ready-to-rock. Rough, tough and hard to bluff. I take it slow, I
    go with the flow, I ride with the tide. I've got glide in my stride.
    Drivin and movin, sailin and spinin, jiving and groovin, wailin and
    winnin. I don't snooze, so I don't lose. I keep the pedal to the metal
    and the rubber on the road. I party hearty and lunch time is crunch
    time. I'm hangin in, there ain't no doubt and I'm hangin tough, over
    and out!"
  • Looks promising (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Great Big Bird (1751616) on Sunday July 18, 2010 @01:23AM (#32941092)
    Based on the video, it looks like it has potential. But there are many things that are just a poor user interface. An example would be the speed that it takes to start up. GIMP just looks out of place. Note that I am comparing this to an iPad – and for good reason – this resembles the same target market to me.
  • by crf00 (1048098) on Sunday July 18, 2010 @04:10AM (#32941438) Homepage

    This is why ChromeOS is gonna be so rocks and rule the world. HTML5 is clearly blurring the distinction between a web app and a desktop application, and you can see that it is definitely possible to do almost everything with just a browser using HTML5 and javascript.

    There is this trend of replacing traditional GUI interface with web interface, even though the application itself is a desktop application. Such examples are Freenet, Transmission, Yacy, and so on. Some other applications are using web interface as well even they are not a website, such as the router administration interface, and Chrome's internal downloads and other configuration interface.

    What we can see is that it is actually much more easier and portable to build desktop applications using web interface. HTML5 has become so powerful that it can be used to build almost all traditional applications that solely use the GUI APIs to build their interface. Text editor, video player, office suite, instant messaging, POS, and business suite can all be built using web interface and may have even richer interface. The only kind of applications that can't be built using HTML5 is those that build custom GUI components that use lower level display interface rather than the GUI API, such as Photoshop and other image/video/audio editing software, and games with a lot of interaction.

    Some of you may complain saying that "ok web interface is cool, but I want to use that fucking application offline and I don't want to store things on the cloud". The solution is actually pretty simple - just install the web server on your computer! With what I call "client side server", you can get the best of both world: offline application with web interface. Some applications certainly do this (Freenet etc) by starting their own server, but if we can standardize this and bring everything together, we do can build a pretty powerful desktop that is completely built on web interface.

    In summary - ChromeOS + client side server = killer app.

    • by icebraining (1313345) on Sunday July 18, 2010 @09:54AM (#32942406) Homepage

      Why is a web interface better?

      They're *not* richer, nor they can possibly be: all the web interfaces are drawn by desktop apps, called browsers! Any restriction that affect desktop GUIs also invariably affect web GUIs.

      The opposite happens: slim, fast desktop GUIs have to be transformed into a mess of HTML+CSS+JS which are much less efficient. Nothing is faster than a simple ncurses GUI, which is more than enough for most of my apps (IM, email, network manager, text editor, etc).

      I prefer normal servers, allowing me to use a nice, slim desktop app in my computer, and a web GUI on other PCs. Like email: IMAP for most uses, webmail for the occasional external access.

      • by bananaquackmoo (1204116) on Sunday July 18, 2010 @07:34PM (#32945840)

        A WELL WRITTEN desktop app interface can be good. However it is MUCH easier to write a good web interface. Why? Its really easy to scale, size, change, async, and just about do anything. The web interface already has a framework that is easy to use and code for AND works on EVERY OS.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 19, 2010 @12:02PM (#32951958)

        I think that if you look at the dynamic in place, Web apps and browser, CSS transitions and HTML5 are going to have a improved performances. Like it or not, Javascript is here to stay. I heard the jolicloud guys are now considering using node.js on the server side. I think HTML5 is an opportunity to make linux sexy to end users. I don't beleive that gnome or ubuntu or anyone doing native stuff and trying to copy Mac will have a chance to succeed in the long term. I think the jolicloud guys have done a bold move replacing the desktop with an HTML5 front end.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 18, 2010 @08:05AM (#32941958)

    I suspect it's using Qt/KDE with webkit?

  • by Hognoxious (631665) on Monday July 19, 2010 @08:20AM (#32949300) Homepage Journal

    Anyone else think it said lolicloud?

This screen intentionally left blank.

Working...