| I would expect to hear something like that not from a respected tehnologist but rather from yet another "cool kid". He could just say "JavaScript is awesome" on a single slide and that wouldn't tell much less than what the whole presentation did. > First they said JS couldn't be useful for building rich internet apps Who said it is? Rich - yes. Anything near to match complexity of the desktop apps - never(think Photoshop). > Then they said it couldn't be fast Benchmarks, maybe? > Then it couldn't do multicore/GPU Webworkers are nice, but you can add bindings to all of this stuff for virtually any programming language. > JavaScript's parser does a more efficient job... than the JVM's bytecode verifier. Figures again? > No view source How viewing at minified JS is going to help me? Especially in the light of what he had on his previous slide: function f() {
L0:
g();
L1:
if (p)
goto L0;
o.m();
goto L1;
} Good luck "view source" on what he calls "the assembly of the web". Then the screenshots of 3D games that presumably use WebGL - that just doesn't cut it. Just about every game demo I tried out on my previous generation hi-end ATI graphics card had performance issues. And the level of graphics is comparable to what native games had 10 years ago. That's a joke. > Typed arrays Until they add records so that I can declare an array of any type efficiently don't even bring this up. This is an ad-hoc solution. |
I can't make a printing press in C++, but why would I want to?
Photoshop was made during an era where computers were used to make media for physical printing. You would take a picture with an analog camera, digitize it, manipulate it in Photoshop, and then have it ready for print. "Save For Web" is the closest you get to using Photoshop for publishing to the web, and you'd have to admit it's a bit of an afterthought in the whole experience.
Software doesn't exist on it's own. It exists in an input and output environment, beyond just mice and monitors. It exists to capture information, manipulate it, and then republish it.
In many ways, memegenerator.net does a better job of consuming, manipulating, and publishing content for the web than Photoshop does.
Photoshop will probably not go away. There are still printing presses and there are avenues to publish things made with them. Media tends to gain a lot of inertia by the time it gets to the point of being a household name. However, this inertia doesn't really impede some other form of media from gaining it's own momentum. Photoshop is busy being Photoshop, not memegenerator.net.
If you ask my opinion, I'd say there is plenty of ground somewhere between memegenerator.net and Photoshop and there is no better language and environment to create these tools than the environment where they will be published: JavaScript running in a web browser.