[GnarlinBrando]

> I wouldn't want the web as a platform to be that good

What? Are you so ideologically caught up that you actually wish something wont get good? It is totally reasonable to to think something isn't the right approach or a waste of time, or to not like the workflow, etc. But to actually wish that something wont get good enough to be a general solution even if it can? How does that make any sense?

[coldtea]

>But to actually wish that something wont get good enough to be a general solution even if it can? How does that make any sense?

It makes a lot of sense because things do not happen in isolation. A "good enough web platform" could bring a lot of OTHER outcomes too.

I wrote one in my comment already: all computers because Chromebooks, glorified clients.

That has other consequences: you loose control, you don't own your apps (the company does, and it can take them from you in an instant, like Google Reader), etc. Not to mention the privacy implication of ALL apps running in a web browser, getting their data remotely. Or the implications for companies and governments locking content, pushing you out, demanding a premium, etc.

[fzzzy]

I don't see that those consequences follow, at all. I see a natural evolution from where we are now to a world where people own their own servers in the cloud and run all the software on them.

Or, if you really don't want any data to go over the wire, just run all the web app servers locally.

There was a big swing from the idea that at&t would sell you a terminal that was connected to a central mainframe, to personal computers that were distributed, back to everything being centralized because the advantages of the web were compelling and centralizing things was the natural path. Things will swing back again to decentralization, but the difference this time is you will be able to access all of your data from anywhere at any time.