[Silhouette]

Try this FPS demo

It's an interesting demo, but all it really proves as far as viability goes is that today's web apps could keep up with what id and co were producing on the desktop more than a decade ago. There is a long way from that to running a AAA quality FPS in-browser.

Apart from high performance apps, the top 10 successful tech businesses in the last 10 years have been web apps.

I'm curious about what measure you're using there.

Looking at the data from the Fortune Global 500 for 2012[1]:

The most profitable tech companies are mostly in hardware and/or consultancy: Apple, IBM, Samsung...

The only primarily software company that keeps up with Apple is Microsoft, coming in at numbers 3 and 4 respectively (both at 20-something billion USD in profits).

The top primarily web company is Google, coming in at number 18 with under $10B, still nothing to be sneezed at of course but in no danger of walking away with the prize any time soon.

The web company you mentioned, Facebook, isn't in the same division in financial terms. Nor are the likes of Salesforce.com or the assorted darlings of the web app world.

Imagine Facebook launching as a desktop app. You buy a CD at Target, and install it, connect, and type in the app to communicate. It's a laughable idea.

Why can't I just do what I do with most other desktop software today: buy it on-line, download the installer, and run it?

[1] http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/

[chrisringrose]

The FPS demo is just that: a demo. It's not made by a game company. It's not made by iD. It's a demo made to run on as many desktops as possible, unlike anything by iD, which pushes graphics to the limit. Graphics are your issue with this demo? A game company can make an HTML5 FPS with amazing graphics. There is no reason why they can't.

To clarify: the top 10 successful new tech businesses. And not necessarily financially, but that have the most impact. Also, this is a discussion about software. Sure, IBM has made a ton of money compared to Facebook. They have long-term contracts with governments and businesses worldwide; making money for IBM means waking up tomorrow. But they're boring. They're the successful company that makes all the screws; vital to the world, hugely profitable, but boring. I'm talking about new tech software companies you've actually heard of, and use their service every single day. When anyone talks about new startups, they inevitably mean a web-based company.

Okay, so Facebook launches as a downloadable EXE? What about Amazon, or Twitter? Everyone has to install it to use it. There has to be a Mac version, and a Linux version. Then the iOS and Android versions. Everything is native apps. This is a terrible ideal world you live in.

[Silhouette]

The FPS demo is just that: a demo. It's not made by a game company.

Sure, I realise that. I'm just saying, maybe it won't be quite as soon as you're thinking that we see high performance web apps.

When anyone talks about new startups, they inevitably mean a web-based company.

Not around here (Cambridge, UK) they don't. There are plenty of tech start-ups just down the road from me, many spun off from connections to the university and research done there. Some of them make web apps, of course, but most of them don't.

I suspect, with no offence intended, that you're probably seeing through the kind of HN-vision I mentioned in another post.

Everything is native apps. This is a terrible ideal world you live in.

I'm certainly not arguing that everything should be done with native apps. In fact, in my first post to this discussion[1], I argued rather strongly against making native apps for things where a web app works fine.

There are pros and cons to each approach, and I'm just saying that I don't think arguing that desktop apps are dead makes any more sense than arguing for building native apps on every platform so you could use a simple on-line database when a single web app would do just as well or (by my original argument) perhaps better. There is plenty of room for both approaches, and as always, we should choose whichever tool best does any given job.

[1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4988159

[chrisringrose]

Well at least I knocked you down from saying we'll never see FPS in the browser to okay-maybe-but-not-all-that-soon. Perhaps I can take you one step further, and inform you that a browser-based FPS on Facebook has over a million active players. https://www.facebook.com/appcenter/uberstrike?fb_source=sear...

I saw your previous comment earlier, and even gave it an up-vote. I'm new to Hacker News, but perhaps some day I'll have the right to down-vote; and when I do, I won't use it simply because I disagree with someone.

[chrisringrose]

Furthermore, the number one selling laptop on Amazon.com right now is a Chromebook: http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Electronics-Laptop-Comput...

In other words, the number one selling laptop today can't run any desktop applications - just web apps. I'm a developer, and I simply can't ignore this.

It's time to focus our efforts on fixing the obstacles web apps face, instead of doubling-down on desktop/native apps because they're easier to make, or run slightly faster.