Elliott C. Evans writes:
>> Ultimately, it's a matter of taste. But I recommend that folks not get
>> too attached to any local apps, because the future is thin-client,
>> apps-on-demand, web-based storage, and server-side execution.
>I wouldn't bet on it. They've been promising this for years, but
>frankly, most people don't want it.
Yup. The downside of this is that your apps don't run when the
network is down, and really, nobody wants this.
Now, with really good execution (ie, client side data storage, client
side app caching with a large cache and selective persistence, etc),
this could work well. But...not there yet.
--
Joshua Kronengold (mneme@(io.com, labcats.org)) |\ _,,,--,,_ ,)
--^-- "Did you know, if you increment enough, you /,`.-'`' -, ;-;;'
/\\ get an extra digit?" "I knew," weeps Six. |,4- ) )-,_ ) /\
/-\\\ "We knew. But we had forgotten." '---''(_/--' (_/-'