Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

- Which Unix or Linux would that be?

- Interesting that you think desktop computing is an anomaly. I must have imagined the whole PC revolution thing then...

- Also interesting that you think that the current split in HTML5 standards is going to lead to good things. Care to explain how?



>Interesting that you think desktop computing is an anomaly. I must have imagined the whole PC revolution thing then...

I think he was referring to desktop computing being an anomaly in that the predominant OS is not nix based.


Which Unix or Linux would that be?

It's not which. It's Unix and Linux as a whole.

Interesting that you think desktop computing is an anomaly. I must have imagined the whole PC revolution thing then...

Apparently you don't know what anomaly means.

Also interesting that you think that the current split in HTML5 standards is going to lead to good things. Care to explain how?

That's not what I said, you're putting words in my mouth. I said it's not necessarily bad.

But personally, I trust Mozilla and Opera; if they felt the creation of the WHATWG was important for the development of web technologies, then it's a good thing as far as I'm concerned.


Ok at the risk of being further down voted, I am going to have 1 more crack at this.

It's not which. It's Unix and Linux as a whole.

This is exactly my point, I don't believe there is a Unix or Linux as a whole. Sure, there are Unix-like and Linux-like OS's out there and if you know 1 then you can easily adapt to using another. That is the point, you have to adapt. That is why unified standards are a good thing, you ideally only have to develop once.

Uhm, Unix and Linux do own the world. Desktop PCs are an anomaly in the computing world

I know exactly what anomaly means. We are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I would argue that before the Desktop PC revolution, computing was niche and elitist. Desktop PC's opened the world of computing to everyone and hugely accelerated the take-up and rate of innovation in all things computing. Additionally this Desktop PC revolution was driven by IBM, Intel and Microsoft, not Unix/Linux.

But personally, I trust Mozilla and Opera; if they felt the creation of the WHATWG was important for the development of web technologies, then it's a good thing as far as I'm concerned.

I am not going to argue this one as I am not going to be seen as bad mouthing Mozilla or Opera, especially as I am a huge fan of Firefox and have great respect for both companies. Perhaps I am just old and scared of change but I fail to see how forking or branching HTML5 standards can possibly be a good thing. Browsing and HTLML5 in particular is an important foundation in future development and I just hate to see standards possibly diverging in this.


This is exactly my point, I don't believe there is a Unix or Linux as a whole. Sure, there are Unix-like and Linux-like OS's out there and if you know 1 then you can easily adapt to using another. That is the point, you have to adapt. That is why unified standards are a good thing, you ideally only have to develop once.

I fear the stagnation caused by lack of competition much more than the adaption required to move from Linux to BSD or MacOSX, but to each his own. We've seen what happens when there's only one browser in town; an OS has the potential of being much worse.

I know exactly what anomaly means. We are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one. I would argue that before the Desktop PC revolution, computing was niche and elitist. Desktop PC's opened the world of computing to everyone and hugely accelerated the take-up and rate of innovation in all things computing. Additionally this Desktop PC revolution was driven by IBM, Intel and Microsoft, not Unix/Linux.

There's nothing to disagree with, it's a fact. Desktop PC were "a deviation from the common rule, type, arrangement, or form" in that they didn't use a UNIX/-like OS.

I agree that they opened the world of computing to everyone and etc, but that's irrelevant to my point.

I am not going to argue this one as I am not going to be seen as bad mouthing Mozilla or Opera, especially as I am a huge fan of Firefox and have great respect for both companies. Perhaps I am just old and scared of change but I fail to see how forking or branching HTML5 standards can possibly be a good thing. Browsing and HTLML5 in particular is an important foundation in future development and I just hate to see standards possibly diverging in this.

We probably wouldn't have an HTML5 standard if it wasn't for the WHATWG fork; Mozilla and Opera proposed the W3C - who were caught on XHTML 2.0 - to continue the work in HTML and they were shut down, so they formed a new group and did it themselves.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: