[HN Gopher] The End of Applets
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       The End of Applets
        
       Author : cfarre
       Score  : 49 points
       Date   : 2021-03-18 09:37 UTC (13 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.infoq.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.infoq.com)
        
       | anthony88 wrote:
       | Even if Applets are no longer used in the browser, they are a
       | good candidate for a plugin system. That's what I did in some of
       | my software: just provide a file or url and you have another
       | software running in my software.
       | 
       | Searching for "extends JApplet" returns more than 50,000 results
       | on github.com. SwingSet2 for example is also using the class
       | JApplet. Removing the 6 classes will break some stuff, including
       | all my desktop apps.
        
       | njacobs5074 wrote:
       | I will not miss them one bit. I worked at Sun back in the mid-90s
       | evangelizing and building customer solutions with applets.
       | 
       | They were terrible then and quite frankly I'm surprised that they
       | lasted as long as they did.
        
         | jerf wrote:
         | A lot of 1990s web technology is only comprehensible through
         | the lens of absolutely enormous amounts of money being poured
         | into it because some people saw a chance to displace Microsoft
         | by getting a runtime onto everyone's system that didn't depend
         | on them. This money ran _way_ ahead of engineering 's
         | understanding of how to build a system like this, so we got
         | stuck with some deeply suboptimal decisions because some suits
         | needed this tech _now now now if not yesterday_ to compete with
         | Microsoft.
         | 
         | Even Javascript itself is the product of that, because Brendan
         | Eich was given like a week to produce the counterproposal to
         | having Java as the main runtime in the browser. Certainly no
         | matter how you slice it after decades of experience we were
         | going to have some opinions about how to fix it, but how many
         | of the JS "WTF"s could have been avoided if he'd been given so
         | much as, let's say, _two_ weeks?
         | 
         | Reading anything about Netscape in those days shows that A: the
         | engineers were smart and experienced and worked miracles with
         | what they were given (IMHO, far beyond anything the suits had a
         | right to expect from them) but B: ultimately they simply didn't
         | have anywhere near enough _time_ to do the sort of work the
         | suits were demanding. Ye olde  "can't make a baby with 9 women
         | in one month" struck them hard... no matter how many people
         | they could throw at the problem, you just can't bring up an
         | entire tech stack like that in an all-fired tearing hurry and
         | expect good _business_ results.
         | 
         | I'm deeply unconvinced that if Java itself had not been lifted
         | by this tide that it would be the #1 programming language
         | today. It certainly has _some_ neat advantages over C++, but it
         | has a lot of massive deficiencies too, and I can assure you
         | that some of them are so obvious that I could see them in the
         | language as a computer science senior with already a couple
         | languages under my belt in 1999. The amount of tooling around
         | Java to overcome those deficiencies remains quite staggering.
         | 
         | I find it amusing that ultimately, Sun was correct. The browser
         | _could_ be used to lever Microsoft out of its desktop
         | dominance. Just not without about another 15-20 years of
         | development. And when that development finally occurred... it
         | was ultimately _Microsoft_ that produced the web-based office
         | suite anyhow.... yup, desktop Office dominance successfully
         | displaced! By Microsoft.
        
           | abraxas wrote:
           | What killed of Microsoft's near hegemony on all personal
           | computing was them losing the mobile wars. Until then they
           | had a total dominance over the browser. IIRC IE6 had more
           | than 90% market share some of which competed with older
           | versions of IE.
           | 
           | Everyone should be cheering on this stumble because we came
           | within inches of MSInternet that worked on IE only powered by
           | the ActiveX controls or whatever other proprietary bullshit
           | Redmond wanted to foist on us.
        
             | pjmlp wrote:
             | Ironically they won the tablet wars due to Google not being
             | able to move Android beyond phone apps in bigger screens.
             | 
             | Outside iPads, almost everyone doing serious work on the go
             | is using Windows tablets in some form, either proper
             | tablets, or hybrid laptops with turnable screens or
             | detachable keyboards.
        
             | jerf wrote:
             | Oh, yes, I agree. I thought about that but thought it would
             | just overcomplicate my point. I just think it is... ironic?
             | humorous?... that ultimately the whole big rush to displace
             | Microsoft was indeed based on correct logic... it's just
             | that I can't imagine how it could have ever worked out for
             | them by, let's say, 2005. The tech stack simply wasn't
             | there and I can't see what would have changed that fact,
             | even in hindsight. The web has nearly killed the Microsoft
             | office suite... with Microsoft's web office suite.
        
       | DonHopkins wrote:
       | How is this sad?
        
         | corty wrote:
         | There is a whole heap of applets for educational content, e.g.
         | interactive simulations of experiments and such. Those are
         | still useful but unlikely to be ported to Javascript, similar
         | to lots of Flash content.
         | 
         | If the Java VM weren't as botched and insecure as it is,
         | applets would still be with us, at least as an important part
         | of internet history and retained tools and knowledge.
        
           | toyg wrote:
           | The Java VM is not particularly insecure, its browsers
           | interfaces are (or rather were).
        
             | corty wrote:
             | The JVM itself shipped with a ton of vulnerabilities, e.g.
             | in vendored ancient versions of libjpeg and similar stuff.
             | Those didn't only affect applets but all Java client and
             | server side applications that presented e.g. image
             | processing as an attack surface.
             | 
             | Also, vendoring the JVM itself by virtually all java
             | applications lead to those vulnerabilities being
             | exploitable for ages, even after they were publicised and
             | fixed in the latest version. In that regard, the JVMs were
             | usually in worse shape than the browsers' applet interface
             | which was updated far more regularly.
        
             | 2sk21 wrote:
             | Agree - almost every week, new exploits were being
             | discovered, even back in the 1990s!
        
             | cesarb wrote:
             | No, other than the bytecode validation bugs, IIRC the
             | security issues were mostly in the JVM's sandbox. It used a
             | blacklist model in which each "dangerous" operation was
             | supposed to call the security manager, which would check if
             | the calling code had permission to do the operation; but
             | there were often holes in these checks, usually chaining
             | several innocent operations and making use of Java's
             | powerful reflection, which allowed an applet to trick
             | "trusted" code in the JVM into doing the supposedly
             | forbidden operations.
        
           | DonHopkins wrote:
           | You have a good point: Ken Perlin still has a whole lot of
           | great educational Java applets on his page, which he's been
           | developing and using educationally since the very early days
           | of Java.
           | 
           | https://mrl.cs.nyu.edu/~perlin/
        
         | ketzu wrote:
         | The word sad doesn't appear on the linked article right now, so
         | maybe it got changed or it is an editorilized submission title?
         | Maybe it was inteded as sarcastic? It's hard to tell.
        
         | noobermin wrote:
         | For people old enough to remember the late 90s and early 00s it
         | does feel like the end of an era.
        
           | anthk wrote:
           | I lived thru that. Applets died in late 00s.
        
           | dakna wrote:
           | At least people stopped using applets for web site navigation
           | fairly quick. The transparent 1px spacer GIF lived for much
           | longer.
        
       | AndrewStephens wrote:
       | I could write a book on the missteps that killed applets. The
       | idea of applets was great and very forward-thinking - self-
       | contained pieces of functionality to provide UI that HTML
       | couldn't. Web Components are a similar idea 20 years later.
       | 
       | And Java was a good bedrock to build applets on - a safe language
       | that runs everywhere in a VM.
       | 
       | But the implementation was terrible - let me count the ways:
       | 
       | * Performance was awful. Java applets performed OK (and sometimes
       | excellently if you put the work in) once they got started but the
       | initial start-up cost of standing the VM was just woeful. Your
       | browser would freeze for 10-20 seconds while MBs of JVM were
       | slowly loaded and JIT'ed. People started to avoid sites with
       | applets for this reason. Sun never even tried to fix it, and in
       | fact told people it was for their own good because your CPU might
       | have changed since last time the Applet was loaded.
       | 
       | * The GUIs were ugly. People back then complained endlessly about
       | the Applets looking non-standard, which was true. Big a far
       | bigger problem was that they were just hideous. Poor default
       | fonts (and bad font rendering), bad default colors, bad fit-and-
       | finish. Sure you could spend time making everything look nice,
       | but it was a huge effort. Sun did try to fix this but with
       | limited success.
       | 
       | * Security. The original idea was good - perfectly sandboxed
       | executables. But Sun fell to the pressure from people who should
       | have known better to provide ways of calling out to native DLLs.
       | This was a terrible idea and was the source of many, many
       | security problems. Browsers were wise to disable applets
       | entirely.
       | 
       | * Failure to respond to competition. People wanted video on the
       | web and tried to use Java, but the Java graphics stack was pretty
       | slow for that kind of thing. Flash came along with its bad but
       | usable codec built in and everyone jumped ship. A missed
       | opportunity.
       | 
       | If Sun had fixed these problems I might be typing this comment
       | into a Java Applet text control with formatting and spell-
       | checking right now.
        
         | cogman10 wrote:
         | I don't think security was approached correctly at all, even
         | from the beginning.
         | 
         | The problem is they ran in an environment where only
         | "dangerous" APIs were blacklisted but otherwise you had pretty
         | much full access to all JVM features and capabilities. A
         | blacklist approach does not work for security. It only takes
         | one hole. With an expansive API like the JDK, that ended up
         | being a horrible game of whack-a-mole to try and patch holes as
         | they come up.
         | 
         | Applet security would have been much better done as a
         | completely separate runtime from the standard JDK with only the
         | APIs that make sense for applets. That, however, is a lot
         | harder to pull off (at least initially).
         | 
         | Agree about everything else, though. Applets were in the right
         | place at the right time but poorly executed. So poorly that
         | techs like flash ate their lunch. (And I don't believe flash
         | was particularly well executed, just better than Applets).
        
       | le-mark wrote:
       | The most fun I had with applets was the java4k gamescompetition
       | that for a few years required the entries to be applets. At the
       | time I thought there was something really cool about deploying a
       | game on a static html page that anyone could click on and play.
       | Of course actually getting the java plugin installed was usually
       | the challenge.
       | 
       | Obviously the entire plugin api turned out to be a "bridge to
       | far"; security was terrible, complexity and inter-op, and
       | useability were all atrocious. Not just applets but flash and
       | silver light as well
        
         | mavelikara wrote:
         | For me, the most memorable use of Applets was Fabio Ciucci's
         | visual effects ones.
        
       | als0 wrote:
       | Just a random thought. Are there any obstacles to running Java
       | applets in a browser's WASM environment using API emulation and
       | static recompilation?
        
         | duskwuff wrote:
         | Depends on the complexity of the applet. The Javascript
         | security model is a bit different from the Java model, so some
         | complicated applets won't work right.
        
       | EamonnMR wrote:
       | Before flash came to dominate browser games, there where Applets.
       | The tooling wasn't there in the same way it was for flash, so it
       | wasn't the same explosion of creativity. But there was some fun
       | stuff out there, arcade clones, etc. I did a writeup of how to go
       | and relive some of that fun:
       | http://blog.eamonnmr.com/2020/03/playing-a-90s-web-game-in-t...
        
         | aimor wrote:
         | Thanks for this writeup. I remember fondly a handful of applet
         | games.
         | 
         | Most vivid was Urbanoids, another one of Karl Hornell's
         | applets: http://www.javaonthebrain.com/java/warp15/
         | 
         | There was a fun collection at the Applet Arcade:
         | https://web.archive.org/web/20020604024000/http://theshadowl...
        
       | k__ wrote:
       | Why not reimplement it in WebAssembly?
        
         | iso1631 wrote:
         | Somethings have value in existence but not enough value to re-
         | implement.
        
           | pjmlp wrote:
           | People even pay for it.
           | 
           | https://leaningtech.com/cheerpj/
        
         | flohofwoe wrote:
         | Cheerp has a solution for this, don't know how well it works
         | though:
         | 
         | https://leaningtech.com/cheerpj/
        
       | layer8 wrote:
       | Java Web Start/JNLP/IcedTea is a good replacement if you don't
       | need direct integration of a Java UI into a web page. Integration
       | with web applications is still possible by having the Java
       | application run a service on localhost that the web app can
       | communicate with. That can be used for web apps that require
       | access to OS services that browsers don't provide but the JVM
       | does.
        
       | pjmlp wrote:
       | They are quite alive,
       | 
       | https://leaningtech.com/cheerpj/
       | 
       | http://teavm.org/
        
       | recursivedoubts wrote:
       | And the rebirth of hypertalk:
       | 
       | https://hyperscript.org
       | 
       | I live, I die, I live again
        
         | duskwuff wrote:
         | play "click.wav"         visual effect dissolve slow to grey
         | visual effect barn door open to page         go to page
         | "https://example.com/"
        
       | simonh wrote:
       | What's the status of J2ME? It still seems to exist although I
       | can't find any evidence of it being updated in the last 10 years.
       | When it came out, I was expecting it or a close derivative to end
       | up being pushed as a browser technology as well. It seems like it
       | would have been much better suited to it than Applets ever were.
        
         | anta40 wrote:
         | I always think that J2ME is practically stuck since most of
         | BlackBerry users (which are J2ME-powered devices) switch to
         | Android.
         | 
         | Turns out I'm wrong. It seems that Java ME is still being
         | updated:
         | https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/embedded/javame/embe...
        
       | flohofwoe wrote:
       | Confusing title, because Java Applets are already dead since
       | around 2015 when Google and Microsoft removed NPAPI support from
       | their browsers (and Firefox followed in 2018).
       | 
       | This news is just about the removal of some leftover applet-
       | related APIs in the JDK, hardly news-worthy IMHO because you
       | couldn't do anything useful with those APIs anyway for quite a
       | while.
        
         | 2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote:
         | The user interface of my current (still in development) project
         | uses Java Applets and Internet Explorer.
         | 
         | It blows my mind they're still full speed ahead on this stuff
         | when it's been deprecated for over 5 years.
        
           | commandlinefan wrote:
           | My first thought when I read the title was that it will be 20
           | years before even 80% of Java users upgrade to the version of
           | Java that doesn't support Applets.
        
           | kevin_thibedeau wrote:
           | Pretty clear indication you're on a sinking ship with a blind
           | captain.
        
           | maxerickson wrote:
           | IE is still available as an Edge add on, it will never die.
        
           | panzagl wrote:
           | If I had to guess I'd say your project is either a control
           | panel for some sort of network-attached device (e.g. a NAS or
           | UPS) or else the configuration manager for a server blade
           | chassis. I could paper a wall with the number of IA waivers
           | I've had to get to keep some ancient browser/java/flash
           | version around so I could access some config thingy to
           | hardware we bought years ago...
        
       | Angostura wrote:
       | So farewell, then, Tumbling Duke
        
       | micro_cam wrote:
       | For a second I thought this was going to be about the 101 year
       | old maker of Aplets and Cotlets candy that also just announced
       | they are shutting down https://www.king5.com/article/news/aplets-
       | and-cotlets-closes...
        
       | helsinkiandrew wrote:
       | If only the conversations between Sun and Netscape had gone a
       | little differently back in the day, and we'd had a single
       | language/system in the browser - 'java' integrated with HTML and
       | decent JVM sandbox shipped in every browser. Things would have
       | looked very different today.
       | 
       | I think better, perhaps a few less web frameworks and paradigms
       | atleast.
       | 
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20070916144913/http://wp.netscap...
        
         | jasode wrote:
         | _> If only the conversations between Sun and Netscape had gone
         | a little differently back in the day, and we'd had a single
         | language/system in the browser _
         | 
         | Brendan Eich said there were discussions with Sun (e.g. Bill
         | Joy) and Marc Andreessen and all agreed[1] there should
         | _deliberately_ be 2 languages instead of 1 in the Netscape
         | browser:
         | 
         | (1) an "easier/simpler" scripting type of language LiveScript
         | aka Javascript
         | 
         | (2) a "professional" compiled type of language like Java for
         | more complex applications
         | 
         | So, it wasn't an accident, or case of NIH Not Invented Here, or
         | corporate bickering.
         | 
         | What they didn't foresee in 1994 is that the non-professional
         | Javascript would end up adding more (pro) features that it
         | enabled it to eliminate the need for Java Applets.
         | 
         | [1] deep link to B.E. explanation:
         | https://youtu.be/krB0enBeSiE?t=24m30s
        
           | DonHopkins wrote:
           | >So, it wasn't an accident, or case of NIH Not Invented Here,
           | or corporate bickering.
           | 
           | Maybe that's what Brendan Eich claimed at some point in time,
           | but it certainly devolved into corporate bickering pretty
           | quickly.
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19837817
           | 
           | >Wow, a blast from the past! 1996, what a year that was.
           | [...]
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19846280
           | 
           | [More links and excerpts at the link above, but here is the
           | timeline summary:]
           | 
           | >Ha ha! Yes, the launch of Javagator was a lot like watching
           | the Space Shuttle Challenger blow up.
           | 
           | >Such glorious plans they had, then Sun and Netscape started
           | bickering about who was going to be on top...
           | 
           | >But Rhino, Mozilla and Phoenix eventually rose from the
           | ashes of the Javagator Disaster.
           | 
           | >December 30, 1997: Netscape sharpens Javagator plans [...]
           | 
           | >February 26, 1998: Netscape's Java browser in doubt [...]
           | 
           | >February 26, 1998: Whither Crawls Netscape's Javagator?
           | [...]
           | 
           | >April 3, 1998: Will Javagator be reborn as Jazilla? [...]
           | 
           | >Fortunately, Netscape's Java Rhino JavaScript engine managed
           | to make it out into the world: [...]
           | 
           | >Javascript Jabber: 124 JSJ The Origin of Javascript with
           | Brendan Eich [...]
           | 
           | >Brendan Eich:
           | 
           | >And Netscape had acquired a company called Digital Styles
           | that was known for rendering engines of some kind. And they
           | started doing a next-generation engine in '97 I think based
           | on Java. And they thought, Netscape's doing the Javagator,
           | Netscape and Sun are going to kill Windows, Java's going to
           | be the future on the client side. Let's build a Java engine.
           | When Java got the plug pulled from it in late '97, when the
           | Electrical Fire JVM that Waldemar Horwat was building at
           | Netscape got cancelled, when Sun went away because Netscape
           | was basically going out of business slowly, the team that was
           | doing this Java engine, this Java web engine, rendering
           | engine called Raptor said, "Oh, we better rewrite it in,"
           | maybe it was called Xena, I forget. They said, "We better
           | rewrite it in C++." And then they said, "Let's sell it to
           | Mozilla."
           | 
           | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16354069
           | 
           | >[...] MSFT was even afraid of AOL, Oracle, and others
           | teaming up to offer a home appliance (eg. a net PC) at low
           | prices and undercutting the PC industry. Of course, those
           | partnerships and alliances never did work out. Sun and
           | Netscape hated each other, for example. [...]
           | 
           | Ain't that the truth! The bitter irony is that a bunch of the
           | Sun-hating Netscape programmers went over to AOL after the
           | acquisition, just to be mis-managed into the ground by a
           | bunch of "Alliance" managers from Sun.
           | 
           | https://www.cbsnews.com/news/aol-woos-netscape-employees/
           | 
           | >Case told the Netscape workers that after the merger is
           | completed next spring, stock options will remain valuable,
           | their sabbatical program will remain in place, and their
           | corporate culture will remain intact.
           | 
           | >"Maybe you joined the company because it was a cool
           | company," he said. "We are not changing any of that. We want
           | to run this as an independent culture."
           | 
           | Pffff!!!
           | 
           | http://www.zdnet.com/article/a-year-ago-friction-behind-
           | aol-...
           | 
           | >Netscape cancelled a project to develop a Java version of
           | Netscape Navigator with Sun Microsystems Inc. because
           | Netscape couldn't afford it, according to Kannegaard.
           | Kannegaard's claims are at odds with the story Netscape told
           | publicly about the reason it killed its so-called Javagator
           | product. "It was explained to me that after Microsoft in
           | their [Netscape's] words undercut their business, they could
           | not afford to continue the project, so they had to reduce
           | their engineering resources and cancel this project,"
           | Kannegaard said.
           | 
           | >That is not the story Netscape told the general public.
           | According to a story in ZD Net's sister publication, PCWeek
           | published Feb. 26, 1998, Netscape said it was pulling back on
           | Javagator in hopes of getting help from Network Computer
           | manufacturers such as Sun and Oracle Corp.
           | 
           | Meow!!!
           | 
           | https://www.cnet.com/news/aol-layoffs-slam-sun-netscape-
           | alli...
           | 
           | >After the layoffs, iPlanet will largely be a Sun satellite.
           | As of last July, only one-third of iPlanet's approximately
           | 3,000 employees were from AOL, Sun Chief Financial Officer
           | Mike Lehman said. Lehman has further said that Sun largely
           | owns iPlanet's intellectual property.
           | 
           | Owch.
        
           | agumonkey wrote:
           | The two programming languages could still have been
           | orthogonal to the presentation layer. Java with Dom or
           | Livescript with Dom. I guess it was impossible to foresee
           | dom/css being sufficient for complex applications though.
        
           | mettamage wrote:
           | In many cases user or players (video games) involvement is
           | really tough to predict. IMO, the best people for that are
           | game-designers and their method is to play test. In other
           | words, we can't predict how users react to particular
           | technologies.
        
           | kalleboo wrote:
           | The biggest problem with Java was that it sucked. Java took
           | too long (and too much RAM) to initialize, was too slow to
           | add features, and had too poor developer tools to become the
           | runtime for the web.
           | 
           | Instead Flash took that spot! Only because Flash eventually
           | also ended up sucking too bad (on mobile) did we get the
           | Javascript revolution.
           | 
           | If Java sucked less and developed at the same pace as Flash
           | did, but was open enough that the browsers could implement
           | their own <applet> runtime replacements (for instance if Java
           | was more important for the web than for the server, Google
           | may have bought Sun instead of Oracle), we would probably
           | live in a very different world today.
        
             | corpMaverick wrote:
             | From what I remember. IE was the dominant browser. And they
             | refused to upgrade their JVM. I believe it stayed 1.1 for
             | years. So basically, MS knee caped Java.
        
             | jasode wrote:
             | _> Only because Flash eventually also ended up sucking too
             | bad (on mobile) did we get the Javascript revolution._
             | 
             | If "mobile" means the Apple iPhone release in 2007 not
             | supporting Flash, I disagree.
             | 
             | The Javascript _revolution for serious apps_ was arguably
             | started by ~2000 Microsoft 's XMLHttpRequest() api which
             | other other browsers like Netscape immediately copied. This
             | started the AJAX _dynamic_ web page era ~7 years _before_
             | 2007. When retrieving new data for a webpage is no longer
             | tied to a user refreshing with F5 key or a HTML form
             | submit() button, it enables a more desktop-like paradigm of
             | apps such as:
             | 
             | - 2000 MS Outlook for Web
             | 
             | - 2004 Google Maps, Google GMail
             | 
             | - 2005/2006 Google Docs & Google Sheets (acquisitions)
             | 
             | These were the type of groundbreaking Javascript apps that
             | convinced many that the often-dismissed "toy language" was
             | viable for complex work. The later innovations such as 2009
             | Node.js runtime on the server side and 2008 V8 performance
             | optimized js engine in Chrome just further cemented
             | Javascript's domination. The Javascript mindshare momentum
             | was already unstoppable long before Steve Job's declared
             | that Flash sucked.
        
               | agumonkey wrote:
               | flash was adressing another side of that coin,
               | presentation/appeal/multimedia
               | 
               | ajax was big but at best it meant slightly more dynamic
               | business application, flash made only videos and freeform
               | graphics ubiquitous (for better or worse)
        
               | ungzd wrote:
               | Multimedia died in late 90s. No one no longer wanted to
               | read text in tiny unscrollable unsearchable rectangle
               | with "real book-like" page flipping animation and
               | colorful textured background. All these things looked
               | garish and vulgar long before "web 2.0" and mass
               | javascriptization.
               | 
               | Flash was only good for games, short animated movies and
               | tolerable for videos and audio (before web video
               | standards).
        
               | anthk wrote:
               | Eh, no. Bullshit. Computer encyclopedias like Encarta
               | were huge back in the day.
               | 
               | If any, multimedia was HUGE in late 90's. You would have
               | a CD-ROM for ANY content, hobby or knowledge branch.
               | 
               | And OFC things like Shockwave (and previously, Director)
               | made them ubiquitous.
        
               | DonHopkins wrote:
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25304202
               | 
               | Reminds me of one of Microsoft's first Dynamic HTML
               | demos:
               | 
               | There were two buttons, one labeled "Our Web Site", the
               | other labeled "Our Competitor's Web Site".
               | 
               | When you moved the mouse over the "Our Competitor's Web
               | Site" button, it would quickly slide out from under your
               | cursor before you could click it!
               | 
               | Then when you stopped moving your mouse, the "Our Web
               | Site" button would slyly slide right underneath your
               | mouse!
               | 
               | Dammit Microsoft!!! ;)
        
         | afiori wrote:
         | Potentially it would have made multiple browser implementation
         | illegal (as in the android/java lawsuit).
         | 
         | Maybe technically a better platform, but almost surely not the
         | Web we have now
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | donatj wrote:
         | Rose tinted glasses I suspect. Don't forget in the 90s the
         | average desktop wasn't powerful enough to run Java at a decent
         | speed and the JVM startup time was in the tens of seconds.
         | 
         | It's never told as such, but having been around at the time I
         | suspect JS came to be largely from Java's lackluster
         | performance.
         | 
         | I'd go so far as to say if the web had depended on client side
         | Java it may never have taken off.
        
           | commandlinefan wrote:
           | > Java's lackluster performance
           | 
           | It also had to do with Java's availability being hit or miss
           | - a lot of times, you'd have to jump through some hoops to
           | enable Java support, whereas Javascript _always_ worked.
        
           | abraxas wrote:
           | JS before V8 was painfully slow. But yeah the startup times
           | of Applets were an issue on a whole another level. I'm glad
           | we have WASM now so maybe powerful and clean languages for
           | coding web UI will be in our future.
        
         | raverbashing wrote:
         | > and decent JVM sandbox shipped in every browser
         | 
         | Javascript deserves a lot of criticism but one thing it did
         | right from the start was being lightweight enough for a browser
         | 
         | Java seems like it "weighed a ton" since its inception
        
           | helsinkiandrew wrote:
           | The JVM or the libraries? - I guess both are large.
           | 
           | But the advantage of browsers shipping with all or parts of a
           | standard Java library would be that most webapps wouldn't
           | need to ship a huge number of node dependencies, fewer
           | leftpad Node debarcles and reinvention of the wheel.
        
           | arethuza wrote:
           | I don't remember the earlies versions of Java (back in 1995
           | or so) being _that_ heavyweight. It did rapidly acquire
           | baggage though.
        
             | kalleboo wrote:
             | I remember in 1996 whenever you hit a page with a Java
             | applet, the initial JVM initialization froze my browser for
             | 30 seconds while the hard disk thrashed away. Maybe out
             | home machine didn't have enough RAM.
        
               | arethuza wrote:
               | I guess when I first used Java in early '95 the browser
               | was written in Java (HotJava) so it didn't have _that_
               | problem.
        
         | shams93 wrote:
         | Applets were a powerful tool in 1997, I was doing stuff you
         | need to use webrtc for with just applets back then, even used
         | applets for my MFA, unfortunately since I was doing this in art
         | school employers refused to hire me to do java for pay, things
         | were very skewed back then when everybody demanded that bscs.
        
       | elwell wrote:
       | I have fond memories creating Java applets in high school; mostly
       | games, physics sims... and later, a multi-calendar Google
       | Calendar interface (one of the first times I got paid to write
       | code).
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-03-18 23:02 UTC)