<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Everything is dead, except Apple and the Web</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sauria.com/blog/2007/04/13/everything-is-dead-except-apple-and-the-web/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sauria.com/blog/2007/04/13/everything-is-dead-except-apple-and-the-web/</link>
	<description>Open Source, Modern Programming Languages, OS X, Photography, and ...</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 21:14:26 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: bowerbird</title>
		<link>http://www.sauria.com/blog/2007/04/13/everything-is-dead-except-apple-and-the-web/#comment-2930</link>
		<dc:creator>bowerbird</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 15 Apr 2007 21:58:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sauria.com/blog/2007/04/13/everything-is-dead-except-apple-and-the-web/#comment-2930</guid>
		<description>why won't your site reflow the text when i resize my window
to be as narrow as i would like it?  i consider this to be a bug.
-bowerbird

p.s.  you don't have to post this, but i had to ask it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>why won&#8217;t your site reflow the text when i resize my window<br />
to be as narrow as i would like it?  i consider this to be a bug.<br />
-bowerbird</p>
<p>p.s.  you don&#8217;t have to post this, but i had to ask it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gabe</title>
		<link>http://www.sauria.com/blog/2007/04/13/everything-is-dead-except-apple-and-the-web/#comment-2776</link>
		<dc:creator>Gabe</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Apr 2007 00:20:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sauria.com/blog/2007/04/13/everything-is-dead-except-apple-and-the-web/#comment-2776</guid>
		<description>Kim: That hardware you speak of runs software, and those services &lt;em&gt;are&lt;/em&gt; software. So I fail to see how this leaves no room for open source.

As Ted said, this is where open source is truly interesting—as a collaborative means of producing and composing this software and these services, where everyone sharing helps everyone win.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kim: That hardware you speak of runs software, and those services <em>are</em> software. So I fail to see how this leaves no room for open source.</p>
<p>As Ted said, this is where open source is truly interesting—as a collaborative means of producing and composing this software and these services, where everyone sharing helps everyone win.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kimberly</title>
		<link>http://www.sauria.com/blog/2007/04/13/everything-is-dead-except-apple-and-the-web/#comment-2766</link>
		<dc:creator>Kimberly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2007 20:59:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sauria.com/blog/2007/04/13/everything-is-dead-except-apple-and-the-web/#comment-2766</guid>
		<description>Whether you agree or not, there has been (it seems) a whole lot of talk these days about the death of Microsoft.  Just the fact that people are thinking this way is a big sign of a sea change.  (Shelly Palmer has written similar things about Microsoft's current irrelevance -- see &lt;a href="http://advancedmediacommittee.typepad.com/emmyadvancedmedia/2007/02/cracked_windows.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;"Cracked Windows"&lt;/a&gt; on Medias 3.0.)

As for Open Source, I think we're also seeing the rise of new hardware.  And hardware that connects to services.  That combination, currently, leaves no real room for open source. 

- Kimberly</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Whether you agree or not, there has been (it seems) a whole lot of talk these days about the death of Microsoft.  Just the fact that people are thinking this way is a big sign of a sea change.  (Shelly Palmer has written similar things about Microsoft&#8217;s current irrelevance &#8212; see <a href="http://advancedmediacommittee.typepad.com/emmyadvancedmedia/2007/02/cracked_windows.html" rel="nofollow">&#8220;Cracked Windows&#8221;</a> on Medias 3.0.)</p>
<p>As for Open Source, I think we&#8217;re also seeing the rise of new hardware.  And hardware that connects to services.  That combination, currently, leaves no real room for open source. </p>
<p>- Kimberly</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: rick</title>
		<link>http://www.sauria.com/blog/2007/04/13/everything-is-dead-except-apple-and-the-web/#comment-2761</link>
		<dc:creator>rick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2007 19:47:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sauria.com/blog/2007/04/13/everything-is-dead-except-apple-and-the-web/#comment-2761</guid>
		<description>The notion of "lowered expectations" when dealing with web apps is a key point. We could end up with two tiers of apps as a result: the low-end web-based and the "pro" version that requires a download/installation.

You could argue that a stratification/simplification of the UI would provide a way to manage webapp complexity - but so far I've seen complex UI's be pretty tricky to implement in JS and rather slow to use.

Ed's got a point, but I think Graham's point was more that their business models are going to change. Office, Windows, Servers and Services make up different portions of their business. This mix will end up changing.

PS: Ed: you're supposed to switch them. If they're only running Web and Mail they don't need anything but Firefox and Thunderbird - and they run everywhere!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The notion of &#8220;lowered expectations&#8221; when dealing with web apps is a key point. We could end up with two tiers of apps as a result: the low-end web-based and the &#8220;pro&#8221; version that requires a download/installation.</p>
<p>You could argue that a stratification/simplification of the UI would provide a way to manage webapp complexity - but so far I&#8217;ve seen complex UI&#8217;s be pretty tricky to implement in JS and rather slow to use.</p>
<p>Ed&#8217;s got a point, but I think Graham&#8217;s point was more that their business models are going to change. Office, Windows, Servers and Services make up different portions of their business. This mix will end up changing.</p>
<p>PS: Ed: you&#8217;re supposed to switch them. If they&#8217;re only running Web and Mail they don&#8217;t need anything but Firefox and Thunderbird - and they run everywhere!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ed</title>
		<link>http://www.sauria.com/blog/2007/04/13/everything-is-dead-except-apple-and-the-web/#comment-2758</link>
		<dc:creator>Ed</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2007 18:51:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sauria.com/blog/2007/04/13/everything-is-dead-except-apple-and-the-web/#comment-2758</guid>
		<description>Paul Graham needs to step outside of his tech savvy circle of friends and visit an average, non-geeky family where "Internet Explorer" equals "The Internet" and "Outlook (Express)" equals "e-mail" and then decide if Microsoft is dead.  I don't think they are dead.  I just think less people pay attention to what they are doing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Paul Graham needs to step outside of his tech savvy circle of friends and visit an average, non-geeky family where &#8220;Internet Explorer&#8221; equals &#8220;The Internet&#8221; and &#8220;Outlook (Express)&#8221; equals &#8220;e-mail&#8221; and then decide if Microsoft is dead.  I don&#8217;t think they are dead.  I just think less people pay attention to what they are doing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
