> the evolution of the web is absolutely essential for the survival of free & open computing.
I don't understand the connection. How many of the web services we use are open source? A native program I buy may be closed source, but it runs on my computer and storage and is updated on my terms. I can even legally crack it if that's what it takes to keep it running (as far as I understand German laws). If I use an open-source OS and an open-source web browser to access a standards-based HTML5 web service, what interesting freedom do I have?
Now, Metro may offer a better deal by encouraging local HTML5 apps. But I still think the Open Web is something that underdog browsers should care about, neither users nor developers.
Openess has many layers - this is about Microsoft dictating to developers what they can and cannot do on their platform.
On the web everybody is welcome. If you don't like any of Google's services, you can create your own clone, and people can use it by just entering an URL in a browser.
Now imagine for a second how 2012 would look like if Microsoft banned Firefox because it "duplicates existing functionality" or other such invented guideline for the good of their app store ... because that's the direction Microsoft and Apple are taking us. And btw, just so you know, Firefox or Chrome cannot run on top of Metro.
If I use an open-source OS and an open-source web browser to access a standards-based HTML5 web service, what interesting freedom do I have?
You have the freedom to use a site built by anyone, anywhere in the world, for any purpose, using any tools or process they like. If you limit yourself to these new appstores you can't run anything that wasn't approved by the gatekeeper.
And if you think Microsoft or Apple abuse their authority now just wait until they have nothing to fear.
In my view, locked down desktops and web apps are just two different ways of taking away freedoms.
The difference is that web apps give you something in return. They allow you to run software without having to buy and support all the required hardware.
A desktop restricted to running apps from an App Store takes away freedoms without providing anything of any additional value for competent users.
I think the really critical difference is that Apple and Microsoft can't tell me what "apps" I may or may not run on the web but they do demand this privilege on their mobile devices and seem to be making moves towards insisting on it on the desktop too.
I don't understand the connection. How many of the web services we use are open source? A native program I buy may be closed source, but it runs on my computer and storage and is updated on my terms. I can even legally crack it if that's what it takes to keep it running (as far as I understand German laws). If I use an open-source OS and an open-source web browser to access a standards-based HTML5 web service, what interesting freedom do I have?
Now, Metro may offer a better deal by encouraging local HTML5 apps. But I still think the Open Web is something that underdog browsers should care about, neither users nor developers.