Disable View source

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Gosh Thomas, did you decide to mark my stuff for homework?

In a sense. If you would like to remember, I discovered that you posted
with a nonexistent e-mail address that only looked OK in January, and
therefore I had to decrease your score. Since I happen to have observed
recently that your From header, albeit unchanged, conforms to Internet
Standards now, I found it appropriate to adjust my scorefile again (maybe
I should write a regularly called script to automate this). The articles
you posted since then were still marked as unread of course and I wanted
to catch up on those. I thought you of all people would appreciate that.

I'll reply to just this one.

That would be a pity.

I was commenting on Ed's request to hide source code and suggesting that
supplying binary executables was one way of 'hiding' the source.

I consider it has failed because getting users to download binary files
for use over the web as a general method of providing functionality on
web sites has been tried but is extremely rare.

They *are* rare. But has the distribution method *failed*? No.
Take Google Earth for example.

[...]

True, however Java applets do not require ActiveX/COM per se.

I'm not suggesting that they do, I'm suggesting that ActiveX and Java
are technologies that can be used for applets. They aren't necessarily
mutually exclusive, or dependent, or the only technologies available but
they are probably the most common and best known.

As you already know that, why do you say that Java applets are rare or even
mistrusted per se? For they are not. Take the numerous Java-based Web
chats for example.

As in "X Window System", e.g. X11. I think you knew that.

I see. Since I am using a recent newsreader application on top of the
"X Window System Version 6.8.2 (Debian 6.8.2.dfsg.1-11 20051129054125
David Nusinow <[email protected]>)" now, and X-Forwarding is very
much alive even for Windows systems, that statement is not true either.


Regards,
PointedEars

 

[RobG]

RobG wrote: [...]

Gosh Thomas, did you decide to mark my stuff for homework?

In a sense. If you would like to remember, I discovered that you posted
with a nonexistent e-mail address that only looked OK in January, and
therefore I had to decrease your score. Since I happen to have observed
recently that your From header, albeit unchanged, conforms to Internet
Standards now, I found it appropriate to adjust my scorefile again (maybe
I should write a regularly called script to automate this). The articles
you posted since then were still marked as unread of course and I wanted
to catch up on those. I thought you of all people would appreciate that.

Of course!

That would be a pity.




They *are* rare. But has the distribution method *failed*? No.
Take Google Earth for example.

It has failed in the sense that it is rarely used in comparison to
scripting or even the standard set of plugins (flash, shockwave, media
players).

Google Earth is interesting, but will it change the paradigm? We'll
have to wait and see on that I think, the 'wow factor' is wearing off
rapidly.

[...]

2. Applets (Java, ActiveX) - rare, mistrusted

[...]
As you already know that, why do you say that Java applets are rare or even
mistrusted per se? For they are not. Take the numerous Java-based Web
chats for example.

Fine, but as a general mechanism for adding functionality to web pages
they aren't much used. Java tends to be mistrusted because many users
do not differentiate between it and ActiveX.

I see. Since I am using a recent newsreader application on top of the
"X Window System Version 6.8.2 (Debian 6.8.2.dfsg.1-11 20051129054125
David Nusinow <[email protected]>)" now, and X-Forwarding is very
much alive even for Windows systems, that statement is not true either.

Good for you, but if you wish to deliver some functionality over the web
to a general audience, would you choose to use X simply to stop others
looking at your source code?

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

[...]
2. Applets (Java, ActiveX) - rare, mistrusted

[...]
As you already know that, why do you say that Java applets are rare or
even mistrusted per se? For they are not. Take the numerous Java-based ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Web chats for example.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Fine, but as a general mechanism for adding functionality to web pages
they aren't much used.

But they are.

Java tends to be mistrusted because many users do not differentiate
between it and ActiveX.

That is *their* problem, not something that is a valid argument against
using the technique. A valid argument would be runtime efficiency, for
example.

Good for you, but if you wish to deliver some functionality over the web
to a general audience, would you choose to use X simply to stop others
looking at your source code?

While I am against Closed Source in general, whether I would use X here
to accomplish Closed Source anyway would depend strongly on the field of
application. It is probably unwise to allow visitors of a fair to read
the source code of a Web-based invention presented there, for example.


Regards,
PointedEars