On the cutting edge (fwd)

[Roy Tennant]

This was originally posted to a semi-private mailing list to which I 
belong and I received the author's permission to repost it. I thought 
Web4Lib readers may find it interesting and useful. It is written by Cary 
Gordon. 
Roy


______________________________________________________________________________

I thought that I would share my latest techno-adventures with this group.
The press has been rife with the latest in news from the browser wars, but
it is becoming clear that except for some very particular situations, we
are down to two--Netscape and Microsoft.  The current round of surveys seem
to show Netscape with between 85 and 90 percent of the market, Microsoft
with 3 to 5 percent and the rest of the field with less than a percent.
These figures are drawn from online reports which use the "USER-AGENT"
server query to determine the accessing client agent, but there is no
guarantee that they do not contain subtle biases, like favoring "Netscape
enhanced" sites.  Accepting that, the trend seems to be that Netscape is
holding or gaining, and Microsoft is steadily gaining while the rest of the
field is fading.

The third most popular browser family, MacWeb and WinWeb, seem to have
slowed development after having changed hands several times.  Mosaic,
having been dropped by commercial ISPs and online services, appears to be
languishing and, while the commercial version from Spry is still under
development and is still included with some "bookstore" internet pckages,
the recent decision by the now AOL owned GNN to bundle Netscape does not
bode well for its future.  Curiously, AOL has made a very significant deal
with Microsoft to use the MS Internet Explorer browser as the basis for
online services delivery.  With 5 million (!) registered AOLI alo users,
this is very good for Gates & company.

For those of you who have not experienced both these browsers, they are
very similar in performance and share a couple of key characteristics,
notably the ability to use "plug-ins" which are similar to helpers but with
a much tighter degree of integration into the browser.  The hottest plug-in
at the moment seems to be "Shockwave" from Macromedia, the maker of high
end multimedia applications including Director.  This plug enable the
browser to play highly compressed multimedia files as an integral part of
the page.  These files can contain sound, amimation, internal and external
links and can be highly customized.  They can also stream (begin playing
before the download is complete).  The downside is that creating the files
requires a $1200 (for the new version 5.0) program.

The second hottest group of plug-ins fall in the area of VRML or virtual
reality modeling language.  The cleverest implementations of these allow
the viewer to wander through virtual spaces which can be created either
from photographs (with Apples Quicktime VR) or with CAD and animation
software.  These have great potential for everything from games to online
galleries and real estate sales, but their current level of performance is
disappointing when used with a modem connection.

Other interesting plug-ins include one for Adobe which allows Acrobat
documents to be embedded in pages.  These documents can contain active
links.  A competing plug-in called Envoy lags behind the Adobe offering.
Similarly, RealAudio has reinvented its popular streaming sound player as a
plugin.

A plug-in called Crescendo! from LiveUpdate plays embedded MIDI (musical
instrument digital interface) files.  Most of the examples that I've heard
so far sound a lot like a combination of technopop and elevator music
rendered on a very cheap keyboard, but the concept seems to hold merit.
The free version, unfortunately, does not use data streaming, so you must
wait for the file to be downloaded before hearing it.  I don't think that
their enhanced version for $20 has gotten a lot of takers.

My favorite plug-in to date is LightningStrike.  This software enables the
transfer of .gif images and image maps in a highly compressed form.  The
images at their site appeared to be between one tenth and one sixth of the
normal size, but they still had the .gif89a benefits like progressive
display.  The only problem is that there is no information available at the
site to indicate how to create these compressed file.  Perhaps it is a
strategy to put all of those unloved Crays and CDC Cybers to work.

The most chatted up features in the current Netscape browsers (and soon to
follow in the MS browser) are Java and Javascript (formerly LiveScript).
Java applets are sort of like plug-ins on demand.  Java is, at its essence,
a superset of the C++ programming language with hooks to browser code and a
facility for transporting itself over the net.  The applets created in Java
can do just about anything that the programmer is clever enough to get them
to do.  This brings up the most current Java-related issue.

CERT, the international organization charged with monitoring internet
security issues and responding to security crises, issued an alert bulletin
last week regarding current Java implementations, specifically including
Netscape.  The Java programming rules specify that applets must never
access directories and/or machines other than the directories linked to the
directory containing the applet (this is a minor simplification).  Since
Java is a programming language and some programmers, believe it or not, are
evil hackers from Hades, the onus for enforcing this rule falls squarely on
the browser and its creators.  CERT has recommended disabling Java-enabled
browsers.  This has produced a yawn heard round the world, but your mileage
may vary.

Unlike Java which requires a "may the force be with you" commitment to
programming, Javascript lets page creators use a fairly simple command
structure to implement very useful events including client side forms
processing, client side image maps and those nifty little marquees that run
through the status line.  Not only do the client side functions reduce the
load on the server and heighten server security, but they allow personal
page creators who might lack access to cgi functions on their servers to
set up full function sites.

All this and free too?  Well, not really.  The new wave of browsers bring
with them a very high demand on the user's computing machinery.  While they
will run on a 286 machine (with gobs of memory), they thrash and lag on
anything short of a 486.  Still, processor speed is much less important
than memory.  Each plug-in and applet has its own memory needs, so
Netscape, fully loaded, can use every bit of a 16 meg (physical ram)
machine's capacity and a mondo power user with a fast connection would
probably want to consider another 32 meg for use as a RAM disk.

Speaking of connections...  Well, maybe later.

Please let me know via email <cgordon at cerf.net) if you consider this
information clear and useful or a redundant waste of bandwidth.

<a href="mailto:cgordon at cerf.net">Drop me a line!</a>

(c)  Cary Gordon 1996, all rights reserved.