Startup 280 North on Thursday released a new online programming language that promises to bring Mac-like software to the web.
Called Cappuccino, the programing language will allow developers to bring the look and feel of Mac OS X desktop apps to online apps. 280 North promises that online apps will have drag ‘n drop, copy and paste, undo and redo, and document saving functionality simply by pointing your browser at a URL.
A major trend in the development of Web 2.0 functionality is toward applications that work within your browser as opposed to relying on desktop programs that live on your hard drive and use up CPU resources every time you call on them. Cappuccino will let designers create apps like 280 Slides, the highly regarded presentation application the 280 North shop released in June to showcase the framework’s robust capabilities.
Unlike the Cocoa-based native application programming environment for Mac OS X, Cappuccino doesn’t expect its developers to know any HTML, CSS, and JavaScript - the languages used traditionally for standards-based web development. Cappuccino’s Objective-J works in every major browser, is completely extendable and comes with useful language features not available in JavaScript.
280 North co-founder Ross Boucher says “Cappuccino is an attempt to restore control of the language and basic building blocks of web development to the developers” and is quick to point out that it’s not about building web pages. “Cappuccino is about building applications - think 280 Slides, GMail, Meebo,” he says. “We believe the future of the core technologies of the web should not be in the hands of a select minority and that no one company [should] control the destiny of any other.”
Cappuccino is being released as open source software under the lesser general public license which Boucher and his colleagues hope will build a strong open source community around the development platform. “We believe in the importance of getting the entire community involved, so that we can experiment and move forward at our own pace.”
In addition to the 280 Slides site, Cappuccino developers have a Flickr Photo Demo and a Puzzle Demo to showcase the platform’s capabilities.
 
 
Written by Lonnie Lazar on September 4th, 2008 with no comments.
Read more articles on Software and Web.
Or maybe, in the best Super Hero tradition, it started out that way.
Written by Lonnie Lazar on September 2nd, 2008 with no comments.
Read more articles on Humor and Software and Web.
The hilariously named VPILF.com — a site devoted to Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin — is made on a Mac, which is excuse enough to mention it here.
More importantly, Palin supports the teaching of creationism in public schools, according to Wired.com.
Written by Leander Kahney on August 29th, 2008 with no comments.
Read more articles on Web.
I’ll have a full, detailed review of the new 3G iPhone in a few weeks, but here are some first impressions based on Apple’s (AAPL) announcement today.
The Biggest Pluses
Speed: Because the biggest problem with the original iPhone was the slow AT&T (T) network, moving the device to the much faster 3G network, while no surprise, will have a huge impact. This is especially true since data already show that it is by far the most heavily used smart phone for Web surfing. It means that you won’t have to search for a Wi-Fi network to do decent Web surfing.
Price: Less than one year after it was introduced at a hefty $599 price, the 8 GB model of the iPhone will now be two-thirds cheaper, at just $199.
Third-party programs: Until now, in order to get third-party programs on an iPhone, you had to hack it. Now, there will be hundreds of them coming soon, and the handful that were demonstrated by Apple looked impressive, from blogging-on-the-go, to news and sports, to games and even medical software.
The Biggest Minuses
Still locked to one carrier: Even though the greater speed is a huge deal, it only matters if you have good AT&T reception. If AT&T’s coverage in your area is poor, the iPhone is still a bad choice, because Apple, unlike its competitors, doesn’t sell it through multiple carriers in one market.
Still missing some features: They haven’t added a real way to cut and paste, or to save files, other than emailed photos. And there still isn’t any MMS capability–the ability to instantly send or receive media files over the phone network without resorting to email. There’s also no instant-messaging program, though third-party developers are likely to offer these.
Still has a wimpy camera: The original iPhone camera was OK, but, given the phone’s brilliant screen and tight integration with computer photo software, it could stand to be better. It isn’t in this new model.
Written by Walt Mossberg on June 9th, 2008 with no comments.
Read more articles on 3G and AAPL and ATT and Apple and Instant Messaging and Mossblog and Software and T and Walt Mossberg and Web and email and iPhone and network and price and wi-fi.
As regular readers know, I have frequently attacked the U.S. wireless phone carriers for exerting near-total control over what phones, software and services American consumers can use on their networks. In fact, since 2005, I have dubbed the carriers “the Soviet ministries,” for inserting themselves between the producers of mobile hardware and software and the people who might want to use these products. My most recent essay on this topic, called “Free My Phone,” ran in The Wall Street Journal and here on Mossblog only last month. You can read it here.
So it’s only fair that I commend Verizon Wireless for its announcement this week that, starting in the second half of 2008, it will allow “any device” and “any application” to run on its cellphone network, without any restriction, or interference. The only requirement, Verizon says, will be that the devices–phones, computers, anything else–must meet a “very minimal set of technical requirements” to show that they can run on the Verizon network without damaging the network or other devices or services that run on it.
This new, open approach won’t replace Verizon’s current walled-garden system, with its heavy controls. It will exist alongside the current system, as a sort of parallel universe.
Still, this is potentially a huge step, a sign that perestroika has arrived among the Soviet ministries that rule the American cellphone industry. If Verizon Wireless does what it is promising, it could be even more significant than Google’s plan for an open cellphone operating system and its creation of a coalition of companies to support it. The reason is that anyone, not just the companies belonging to a particular alliance or group, should be able to build a phone, a data device, a software program or service, and run it on Verizon’s strong, fast, extensive network.
But, as the saying goes, “the devil is in the details.” And there are a couple of details of the company’s plan that could diminish the sweep and importance of its new commitment to openness.
First is the question of what Verizon means when it says a product must pass a sort of certification to run on the network. In a conference call explaining the plan, Verizon officials insisted that the testing and certification process would be much simpler and less onerous than the hoops companies must now jump through to get onto its network. They also promised the certification process would be “relatively short” and that the fees for certification would be “surprisingly reasonable.”
But until we learn the details next year, we won’t know if the certification process will be a mere technical formality, or a barrier to entry.
Even more worrisome is another issue: user pricing. Verizon officials made clear that, because they won’t be able any longer to limit the types of devices and applications that will run on their network, they will be applying “usage-based” data pricing. While they said this pricing would be “competitive,” any system that charges by the kilobyte or megabyte could be a real deterrent to the blossoming of the wireless Internet that Verizon’s open plan promises.
To be sure, Verizon has real concerns here. The bandwidth available on the cellphone networks is much more limited than that on landline networks. If somebody starts running Internet TV networks, or Web servers, or massive online games over the Verizon network, it could put a serious strain on the system.
But there’s a difference between setting higher fees for truly unusually high usage and erecting a payment system where everyone pays by the byte for even simple, common tasks like email, Web browsing, casual gaming, instant messaging, or simple video or audio streaming.
Taken to its extreme, that kind of metering could–intentionally or unintentionally–kill off the kind of innovation Verizon Wireless says it wants to encourage. That’s because the kind of innovative devices, software and services people are hungering for aren’t about making better voice calls. They’re about using the Internet, consuming those bytes that Verizon wants to meter.
So, let’s give credit where credit is due, but let’s watch how those details play out in the coming months. Verizon Wireless should be praised for giving up some of the control that was stifling wireless innovation in America, in my opinion at least. But, just how praiseworthy the move will be depends on some things we don’t know yet.
Share
Written by Walt Mossberg on November 30th, 2007 with no comments.
Read more articles on Hardware and Mossblog and Software and Verizon and Walt Mossberg and Web and bandwidth and cellphone and email and internet and meter and network and online and wireless.
« Older articles
No newer articles
