First of all I'm sorry for my forceful language. I was in a rush and needed to get lunch
> Sorry, I don't have time to go into the specifics of all the APIs that modern browsers have started supporting since 2014, but they're a lot.
> Why are you comparing public transportation with web standards? Web standards evolve about 100 times faster than public transportation.
Web browsers and public transit are both infrastructure that everyone relies on. And we have a responsibility to think carefully before we make big changes that can harm, or even inconvenience people. And I think that too often, we make the wrong choices for the wrong reasons. We take for granted that things like ATM machines, or door knobs will remain pretty much the same. The are infrastructure, too.
And the language used to describe these changes are often misleading. Slashing the number of buses that service a neighborhood is an "optimization". Or like downgrading a proposed light rail line to a bus rapid transit, and then finally to a regular bus line. And then selling it to the public as some sort of improvement.
I strongly dislike when people use the word "progress", to imply some sort of change is an improvement. Donald Trump bulldozing low income housing in order to replace them with gaudy luxury condos would be called "progress".
I do not think that much of the changes that we have experienced could be called "progress".
I don't think that updates are "upgrades". And often times this language is used deceptively, to hide value being subtracted, and features being removed.
> I don't see why you'd lose it. More modern browsers will still be able to interpret old code (http://info.cern.ch/)! The problem is the other way around: old browsers can't understand new code. Also, although I take it that you don't like updating your software, if something doesn't work if you updated your router firmware or software you might find out that it starts working again. You can also keep an older browser installed if you need to access some specific software, but I don't think it's a good idea to use an obsolete browser as your main browser, if anything for security concerns.
Um, if I update my software, I might find that features are removed or radically altered. Like when Cisco decided to completely change the operating system on their routers, to one which had far fewer features, and would phone home to them[1]. There are too many examples to list, but, just off the top of my head, most Android updates remove useful features. iOS is so awful, that Apple goes through amazing lengths to force users to update. Do you really think they're doing it out of concern for the user experience? They're doing it because users are less likely to complain if you don't give them a choice.
> Then, I find it hard to understand how you believe that things have gotten worse, since all browsers follow the standards now, most things are open source and build on open technologies.
Yes, I am happy about that. However, websites themselves are as awful as ever, in new ways. We've taken everything bad about Flash, and baked it into html5. Just as many pigheaded assumptions are made about the end user's computer setup as in the late 90s. We're actually regressing in a lot of ways. I've actually seen popups when I try to load a webpage, telling me that I need to have higher resolution. That is geocities crap.
> Judging by your tone and attitude, I actually agree with you on this one.
I guess we have different visions of what the web should be. And your vision is winning.
> Sorry, I don't have time to go into the specifics of all the APIs that modern browsers have started supporting since 2014, but they're a lot.
> Why are you comparing public transportation with web standards? Web standards evolve about 100 times faster than public transportation.
Web browsers and public transit are both infrastructure that everyone relies on. And we have a responsibility to think carefully before we make big changes that can harm, or even inconvenience people. And I think that too often, we make the wrong choices for the wrong reasons. We take for granted that things like ATM machines, or door knobs will remain pretty much the same. The are infrastructure, too.
And the language used to describe these changes are often misleading. Slashing the number of buses that service a neighborhood is an "optimization". Or like downgrading a proposed light rail line to a bus rapid transit, and then finally to a regular bus line. And then selling it to the public as some sort of improvement.
I strongly dislike when people use the word "progress", to imply some sort of change is an improvement. Donald Trump bulldozing low income housing in order to replace them with gaudy luxury condos would be called "progress". I do not think that much of the changes that we have experienced could be called "progress".
I don't think that updates are "upgrades". And often times this language is used deceptively, to hide value being subtracted, and features being removed.
> I don't see why you'd lose it. More modern browsers will still be able to interpret old code (http://info.cern.ch/)! The problem is the other way around: old browsers can't understand new code. Also, although I take it that you don't like updating your software, if something doesn't work if you updated your router firmware or software you might find out that it starts working again. You can also keep an older browser installed if you need to access some specific software, but I don't think it's a good idea to use an obsolete browser as your main browser, if anything for security concerns.
Um, if I update my software, I might find that features are removed or radically altered. Like when Cisco decided to completely change the operating system on their routers, to one which had far fewer features, and would phone home to them[1]. There are too many examples to list, but, just off the top of my head, most Android updates remove useful features. iOS is so awful, that Apple goes through amazing lengths to force users to update. Do you really think they're doing it out of concern for the user experience? They're doing it because users are less likely to complain if you don't give them a choice.
> Then, I find it hard to understand how you believe that things have gotten worse, since all browsers follow the standards now, most things are open source and build on open technologies.
Yes, I am happy about that. However, websites themselves are as awful as ever, in new ways. We've taken everything bad about Flash, and baked it into html5. Just as many pigheaded assumptions are made about the end user's computer setup as in the late 90s. We're actually regressing in a lot of ways. I've actually seen popups when I try to load a webpage, telling me that I need to have higher resolution. That is geocities crap.
> Judging by your tone and attitude, I actually agree with you on this one.
I guess we have different visions of what the web should be. And your vision is winning.
[1] https://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/06/29/1425210/cisco-pushi...