Screaming Penguin - Source Does Matter

Maybe its just me but Longhorn and the fusion of a browser with a desktop doesnt make any sense. Whether its for fancy active desktop type stuff OR for integration client side applications. Yes I have seen some cool stuff with currect Active Desktop and RSS/RDF feeds or flash websites. Yet these are all just eye candy, they dont provide any real added functionality and they have a down side in that they remove at least part of the users control over browsing.

Maybe I dont understand or get it, but Microsoft announcing they will no longer make a standalone browser and rather will just have the web built into the desktop is NOT desirable. In fact its loathsome, screw that.

I WANT a separate browser that I can use as I wish and not to have the web incorporated into the desktop.

I also WANT the browser to be separate for web based applications. AND for client side applications, that really should be client side applications, I want a real interface and NOT a browser, a C client or a Java client? The other pro active desktop type stuff argument is that the browser isnt good for client side applications. Duh. The MS product manager for the Windows developer platform said "The browser is great for a lot of things, but when it comes to robust client side applications, it's not the best". So the point of the new active stuff with .Net, "XAML" and "Avalon" is to enable better client side applications using browser type technology?

No thanks. I dont want client side applications melded into my desktop/browser.

In reality the LAST thing I want is more client side crap involved in a web application. And more applications the need network access should be centralized rather than client side (IMHO).

Bandwidth is gaining, server side tools are getting better, developers of server side componenets are getting better and overall the server side has MUCH greater stability and control and is less of a support issue. Its simple really, its one CONTROLLED location for application logic versus each client doing it independently on their own machine with different implementations everywhere. HORRIBLE. Just like ECMAScript/Javascript, Flash and Java Applets are HORRIBLE ideas for applications so is some active desktop nonsense (dont flame me over that, sure Flash looks great, its great for marketing or brochureware, but its CLIENT SIDE, dont make it part of your actual application logic, BAD IDEA, Javascript is an even worse idea for application logic unless you use it for speed after detecting if its present AND your app still works without it AND your app verifies the results on the SERVER side, deal with it).

But the open source folks at GNOME and Mozilla disagree with me. They understand the need for some client side application platform that is integrated into the desktop and includes a browser. They offer up Mozilla Gecko and XUL combined with GNOME. (To combat XAML, .Net and Avalon.)

I guess its good that there will be alternatives to proprietary stuff but I just dont see the need in this case. I mean you can already develop client side apps with XUL and virtually nobody does it. Incroporating it with GNOME is cool, just like the eye candy on active desktop is cool for about 2.5 minutes before its totally disabled so you can get back to using the computer, but its not revolutionary or necessarily useful, IMHO.

Oh well, my lack of understanding aside the Moz and GNOME teams are working on incorporation to keep the Linux desktop "viable" in the Lonhorn world. See the linked news.com article for more.   Mozilla, Gnome mull united front against Longhorn