There isn't a single technical reason to prefer a standalone client to a web client because you can make them look and feel the same.

If you are able to provide the specifics on why you prefer a standalone client, I think that would help a lot of web developers.

I know for me, the ability to resize various frames of the standalone clients is useful and none of the web servers I've played on gave you the flexibility to do that.

Doesn't the browser takeover many of the possible hotkey combinations? Like on Nova.gs when I right click on things it brings up a browser, not the app. Isn't it similar for alt-key combinations?

There are too many reasons to list. But the most prominent reason that comes to me right now is this:

I currently have over 100 tabs open in my browser. For about a month, it was around 150. This is kind of a lot, even for me. But, it's almost never less than 50. Even using extensions that help to manage this mess of tabs, it is still a lot, and a browser-based site just gets lost in the mix.

Right click can be easily changed. As an example, look at this website that even allows you to select the theme you would like for your menus: http://www.javascripttoolbox.com/lib/contextmenu/ (right click on default theme/windows xp theme/etc). If right click is something you believe a go server should have, you are not restricted because you are in a browser. It's as easy to implement in a browser as in a standalone app.
I'm not 100% sure about the hotkey combinations, some might be restricted. Nova already allows several and apps like the gmail editor allow things like ctrl+b to turn on bold, etc. I can check if a specific hotkey is modifiable if you want.



I might be mistaken, but I believe frames were first introduced in web browsers and then found their way to some standalone clients. They have fallen in disuse lately. Here is a complex example with many resizable frames: http://layout.jquery-dev.net/demos/iframe_local.html . The flexibility to change the layout of these frames is even easier in a browser than in most languages.


As a developer, one of the worst things people often do when they are giving feedback is believing some things are not possible. Yes, web apps have a certain feel because that's what users are expecting on a webpage and developers try to match that expectation. However, if you believe that something should work differently, then just say so. Web developers do not have their hands tied as some of you might think.

If you are doing 100 other things, maybe it's not the time to be playing go. Besides, you could also open the game in a new window to keep it separate.

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

Sorry, but that must be like the dumbest reason for wanting a stand-alone client. No offense.

If this really is a problem for you, do what I do - download another browser and dedicate it to be a Go client! You can set it up any way you want, adjust window size, even make sure when you open it it automatically logs you in. For all practical purposes, it then *will* be a stand-alone client application for your favorite server.

For example: if you have 150 tabs open in Firefox, download Chrome and use it specifically for Nova. Or vice versa. Case solved. Really really really easy. Almost a du-uh.

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

If you're downloading a program just to run nova, why not download nova instead of a web browser?

There are only so many good browsers, this is only as useful strategy as long as you keep finding more browsers for each important web only app that you want to be able to access with out scrolling for tabs. It is a useful strategy but really a solution. You probably should have thought about what you were actually suggestion before you called it a dumb reason.

A few reasons:

• there is *no* 'Nova' to download, and
• my solution potentially allows you to use the same 'client' for multiple servers, even simultaneously, which is always nice, and
• it makes things much simpler for the server programmers - so hopefully we have better server, which is always nice, and
• the same 'client' works the same on all platforms, which is nice,
• and so on...

But most importantly - we already have servers with stand-alone clients. Why not try something different?

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

We are not talking about different application for each possible service out there you can use over the web. We are talking specifically about Nova, and generally about a Go server. And if the reasons that stops you from using Nova is that you have too many tabs open on your browser - its a dumb reason, sorry.

Since the guy does have 150 tabs open without getting too bothered by that, I assume using most/all other stuff via a single browser and tabs does not bother him too much. Or he would not have 150 tabs open at the same time. So - what's your point?

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

My point is that the more people adopt your attitude the more difficult it is to use a computer in an efficient manner. It's easy to say "oh it's not a big deal, you can use one more browser", but if everyone says that I obviously won't have enough browsers.

I don't understand that. If more people use Nova via a dedicated browser it will be less efficient? I don't see how this can be supported.

Or do you mean that if more people used different browser for all the web applications they use? In this case - I certainly agree with you. But, as I said, this is not what we are talking about. We are talking about a particular solution to a particular problem. Problem: I have 150 tabs open on my browser and this makes it awkward to use Nova. Solution: use dedicated browser for Nova, case solved. The problem was never the 150 tabs and how to reduce this load, this is another story, possibly way outside the scope of this forum.

But lets assume you have a good point, for argument's sake, and the user already uses all the available browsers and each of them already has maxed out its tabs, say - 150 open tabs on each. Lets say - 5 browsers (IE,FF,GC,O,S) - this makes it what? 750 tabs open at any given moment. Well then - I say: close a few tabs! Or if you absolutely cannot imagine your life without 750 tabs open at any given moment - play on KGS instead. Its not like there are no alternatives out there, and good alternatives.

I still say the argument is dumb. Really - no offense, its the argument that is dumb, you are all very very smart.

There are some good reasons to want a stand-alone client. Too many open tabs on your browser is *not* one of those reasons, in my book.

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

No offense? Are you kidding me?

It's taking all my will power to self-censor myself here because of just how worthless your remarks are.

Well, ok, Mr.150-tabs. Thanks for controlling yourself. See you on Nova or KGS or wherever.
Hope we can have a good game then, since apparently there is no will on your part to have a good discussion here.

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

See where we go with these ad-hominem attacks and talking in third person about folks who are present here and calling folks “dude” or “that other guy” or “Mr XY” and other demeaning stuff. As much as I often see your points, I dislike the way you try to convey them. Hurt people just enough and your point is … lost.

You know who you are, my friend Thought about sending this as a PN, then thought about reporting, but then I remembered that those would both be trick plays, and we’re here for practise, no?

Greetings, Tom

_________________
“The only difference between me and a madman is that I’m not mad.” — Salvador Dali ★ Play a slooooow correspondence game with me on OGS?

I don't know how you could possibly have a good discussion with anyone when your first inclination is to dismiss their perspective as dumb.

My reason for mentioning my tab count was not because I do not know how to deal with tabs, nor to be judged for my admittedly extreme technology use case. It was simply one reason why I would prefer a standalone app to a browser-based app. I believe it was in this very thread that I actually raved about how good Nova is, so obviously my tab usage does NOT stop me from playing on Nova, as you seem to assume in one of your posts.

And that is the last I will say about that.

Edit:

Now, let's all get back to discussing how good nova is.

I assume you are talking to me. A few points in case it is so. If you are not talking to me, I just made a dumb post.

• Pretty much everybody knows who I am, never made it a secret. You can see my name and email right on my website, not to mention SL and other places.
• Calling people 'dude' is a term of endearment, not demeaning. I call my close friends like that a lot, it just comes out naturally. Sorry you see it otherwise, did not expect this can be viewed this way.
• Calling him 'Mr.150-tabs' was maybe a little hostile, my apologies, lost my temper slightly there - but at this point I know not much more about him other than the 150 tabs thing. He did not provide anything constructive in his post at all, other than convey he was angry at me. If he explained why he needs so many tabs opened and why he cannot use another browser - and if those were good reasons - you would see myself being the first calling my argument 'dumb', quite possibly. Alas, this did not happen.
• Calling an argument 'dumb' (something I still stand by, until I know more) is not 'ad hominem'. Ad Hominem is attacking the person, not the argument - which I have not done. so please do not put this in my mouth. The guy might be the smartest person I ever met, I don't know him - but this does not mean that this particular argument is not 'dumb'. Even the smartest people make 'dumb' arguments, and don't I know it - just look at my posts, I make them a lot. usually discussions happen to straighten things out. But when people see 'ad hominems' behind every bush, it is hard to discuss anything.

Other than this - sorry if I have offended you or anybody else. Probably should have paid more attention to PC and call the argument something else. Can we just bulk-replace 'dumb' by 'not-very-convincing-and-weak-and-easy-to-solve'?

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

Sorry you see it like that.
I did not really dismiss your perspective - which I assume is much more than just what you said. As you say below, and which are all good things.

The argument, as you stated it, was 'dumb' to me. And yes, as a 'dumb' argument, I have dismissed it. Since this was the only argument you gave as an answer to the question posted, I assumed that either this is the only argument you have, or it is the strongest argument you have. So I can see where it all could have spilled over to 'your perspective'. In both our minds.

I could/should possibly have been less blunt about it. Except that I just watch CNN and hear about the stupid political situation in here now, and a thought occurred to me - if we all just spoke more bluntly and with less beating around the bush we might have been better off in this country. In case anybody wonders - I mean the US. Somebody should call those senators and representatives idiots to their faces, and in public - maybe then it would sink in. This experience shows that maybe it is a dumb idea I had, but if you never try you never know, right?



Amen to that!

_________________
- Bantari
______________________________________________
WARNING: This post might contain Opinions!!

Don't worry, Bantari. Who knows what's really important vs. what the media portrays to be important?

_________________
be immersed