Marc Canter posts some additional thoughts on my query about whether a blog browser is that revolutionary.
A few key points to respond to:
The idea of a blog-browser or new kind of NON HTML based browser has been around for a while and something Dave has talked about and evangelized - for many years. I myself have hated HTML since it's inception
This is precisely what we launched with Macromedia Flash Player 6, defining the emerging category of rich clients, that can both live within and outside the web browser; which offer radically richer user experience than what HTML can provide, and which use a web services-based architecture to integrate with remote data and logic (is that micro-content?).
In fact Dave has requested (on multiple occasions) that MacroMedia create a browser with Flash - so that text could be rendered pretty and anti-aliased (among other reasons.) But needless to say nobody at Macromedia understood what Dave was talking about.
It's not true that Macromedia didn't understand this idea. We've continued to improve the richness of text and document-centric abilities in Flash, and will continue to do so. Because the object model is rich enough for text, forms and XML, there are now projects delivering full XHTML and XForms support natively in Flash.
Additionally, though, there's no reason to try and bury HTML. For a huge range of document-centric content and applications, it has enormous advantages that will continue to play a role in the Internet client landscape.
As for including a full HTML browser/renderer in Flash, it would kill the ubiquity (and thus viability) of the Flash runtime by bloating the download and install to the point where it would take 3 years to achieve ubiquity instead of the 12 months that it takes now. IE and Mozilla do the job of HTML fine, and there's no need to try and replace or integrate this.
10:17:09 AM 
|
