ambassador at fourthworld.com
Mon Jun 22 14:52:21 EDT 2020
William Prothero wrote:
> Probably HTML5 would be better, ultimately. But, I look at the HTML5
> postings, limitations, and quirks and it would most likely require me
> put me over the interest level that would be required.
If your app doesn't depend on server tech beyond downloading, a web app
That said, I hear you on this:
> I’m fine with programming in livecode, but I don’t think the payoff
> for me to get into HTML5 is worth what I would get out of it. My
> programming is a combination of personal apps that I can use (like
> managing my 6 water meters and fruit tree drip system) and updating a
> plate tectonics app that students at UCSB use. My two sons are both
> 5’th grade teachers, one of whom uses chromebooks in his school, so
> collaborating with him on a nice app for his students is attractive,
> but only so far.
business opportunity merits it, it can be rewarding (oh the joys of
never needing to genuflect at an OS vendor's app store, or give up a
third of your revenue for the privilege of their control).
And because the nature of the browser is so radically different from
native app development, I agree that attempting to port LC stacks to the
web via the Emscripten option is pretty much a non-starter for most
things people have ever made in LC.
I haven't yet deployed to a Chromebook so I have nothing to offer there
with regard to LC compatibility. But with the core of Android well
represented in ChromeOS, I would hope it's no more difficult than
deploying to a tablet. Please keep us posted with what you learn.
Fourth World Systems
Software Design and Development for the Desktop, Mobile, and the Web
Ambassador at FourthWorld.com http://www.FourthWorld.com
More information about the use-livecode