Scobleizer: Google isn’t the only one going offline…
Salubri
· 2 years ago
Aaaw - you can tell us - we won't tell anyone! ;-)
anon
· 2 years ago
Why not just wait till tomorrow noon then?
Toph
· 2 years ago
Oh how you tease us.
YouTube? Amazon?
Haha, I have no clue...
Robert Scoble
· 2 years ago
Anon: because otherwise you wouldn't know to be back here at noon, would you?
Chris
· 2 years ago
Um, why are they stopping at javascript? Why not install a lightweight PHP interpreter in the browser module? Why limit it to javascript API and static pages? Put a PHP interpreter right in the browser! That way you can put most of the dynamicism of a website offline.
If I wasn't managing employees everyday, and working on a next gen SQL server, I'd throw my hat in the ring. I love PHP. Offline AJAX with JS just still doesn't cut it. Sorry.
Otherwise, why not just use httrack. Maybe you threw a little API in there, but come on. Billions of dollars, and they won't do client side interpreters for PHP. Zend won't do it.
Stephan Miller
· 2 years ago
Popfly? Adobe Apollo? But the PHP interpreter in a browser would be great. I vote for Chris's idea.
Ioannus de Verani
· 2 years ago
Robert: My, my, aren't you full of tasty tidbits of knowledge today.... :)
With all the talk about acquisitions, my bets are on salesforce.com - now that would be exciting!
seshadri
· 2 years ago
Zoho or Adobe
Tim
· 2 years ago
"because otherwise you wouldn’t know to be back here at noon, would you?"
Er, there's this marvellous new invention, I don't know if you've heard of it...what's it called...oh yes, RSS, that's it.
Seriously this is the dumbest post of the week :-)
"I'll be posting something cool tomorrow so be sure to come back!" "Uh, won't it be in my RSS reader?" "Well, yeah, I *guess* you could do that..."
Udo
· 2 years ago
Gears is a start, but in the long run web developer will need some kind of local server that can handle web apps and automatically sync data back to the cloud when you reconnect. Last year I spoke to someone at Intel, they were thinking along the same lines (don't know if they're still in the game, though).
A standardized package of, say, Ruby/PHP/MySQL/Webserver would be nice to have, and on top a lightweight framework that handles installation, updates and data synchronization. The downer here is the sheer size of that runtime (my guess is over 20MB even for a stripped down installer) and configuration issues. It would rock, but it's probably not gonna happen.
Trendmatcher
· 2 years ago
My bet is on Bloglines...
Diego
· 2 years ago
It has to be Microsoft, right? I mean, usually when a company announces something new you have Microsoft announcing the same thing the following day.
Trendmatcher
· 2 years ago
So, now it's saturday (at least in Europe) so tell us!
All Comments
YouTube? Amazon?
Haha, I have no clue...
Why not install a lightweight PHP interpreter in the browser module?
Why limit it to javascript API and static pages?
Put a PHP interpreter right in the browser!
That way you can put most of the dynamicism of a website offline.
If I wasn't managing employees everyday, and working on a next gen SQL server, I'd throw my hat in the ring. I love PHP. Offline AJAX with JS just still doesn't cut it. Sorry.
http://www.httrack.com/
http://spiderzilla.mozdev.org/
Otherwise, why not just use httrack. Maybe you threw a little API in there, but come on. Billions of dollars, and they won't do client side interpreters for PHP. Zend won't do it.
Adobe Apollo?
But the PHP interpreter in a browser would be great. I vote for Chris's idea.
http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz/2007/02/offline-zi...
;-)
Er, there's this marvellous new invention, I don't know if you've heard of it...what's it called...oh yes, RSS, that's it.
Seriously this is the dumbest post of the week :-)
"I'll be posting something cool tomorrow so be sure to come back!"
"Uh, won't it be in my RSS reader?"
"Well, yeah, I *guess* you could do that..."
A standardized package of, say, Ruby/PHP/MySQL/Webserver would be nice to have, and on top a lightweight framework that handles installation, updates and data synchronization. The downer here is the sheer size of that runtime (my guess is over 20MB even for a stripped down installer) and configuration issues. It would rock, but it's probably not gonna happen.