I'm fine with ssh in a browser. I used Chrome SSH Extension for many years to connect to a VM running tmux. And I use RDP if I truly need a remote desktop. However, it (browser SSH) not a replacement for, it's an augmentation of, the OS-level ssh client.
Turning this around. Let's take the idea of using WASM to put a full environment in the user's browser. This is a logical idea, after all- WASM exists to make it possible to write applications in Not-Javascript and deploy them in a browser. IE, don't stop with SSH: you should have a web server, a shell, multiprocessing, scripting languages, everything necessary to host VSCode server and a self-hosted compilation toolchain in a browser. Full linux user space in a browser, enough to compile ChromeOS and boot into a browser running linux
What have you achieved? A very expensive (in terms of porting cost, CPU usage, and deployment size) inner platform that does what an OS does already. But it's inside the browser, with a patched version of code (because WASM always trails native apps), with each sub-application maybe linking in its own TCP stack. So it will always trail innovations in desktops, since it's not a full replacement for the existing system. So it makes the world more complicated and exposes more surface areas for security management.
"""The inner-platform effect is the tendency of software architects to create a system so customizable as to become a replica, and often a poor replica, of the software development platform they are using. This is generally inefficient and such systems are often considered to be examples of an anti-pattern."""
Like I said elsewhere, I'm not completely opposed to the idea of the browser as a complete and fully functional application container for an inner platform. And I want to encourage creative people to try new technologies, especially WASM to explore the idea of "how much can we move to the browser". However, I see the container as the mediator of the network, not the application.
Comments
I'm fine with ssh in a browser. I used Chrome SSH Extension for many years to connect to a VM running tmux. And I use RDP if I truly need a remote desktop. However, it (browser SSH) not a replacement for, it's an augmentation of, the OS-level ssh client.
Turning this around. Let's take the idea of using WASM to put a full environment in the user's browser. This is a logical idea, after all- WASM exists to make it possible to write applications in Not-Javascript and deploy them in a browser. IE, don't stop with SSH: you should have a web server, a shell, multiprocessing, scripting languages, everything necessary to host VSCode server and a self-hosted compilation toolchain in a browser. Full linux user space in a browser, enough to compile ChromeOS and boot into a browser running linux
What have you achieved? A very expensive (in terms of porting cost, CPU usage, and deployment size) inner platform that does what an OS does already. But it's inside the browser, with a patched version of code (because WASM always trails native apps), with each sub-application maybe linking in its own TCP stack. So it will always trail innovations in desktops, since it's not a full replacement for the existing system. So it makes the world more complicated and exposes more surface areas for security management.
Talking about inner platforms (and in case there's one person left who hasn't seen it): https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/the-birth-and-death...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inner-platform_effect
"""The inner-platform effect is the tendency of software architects to create a system so customizable as to become a replica, and often a poor replica, of the software development platform they are using. This is generally inefficient and such systems are often considered to be examples of an anti-pattern."""
Like I said elsewhere, I'm not completely opposed to the idea of the browser as a complete and fully functional application container for an inner platform. And I want to encourage creative people to try new technologies, especially WASM to explore the idea of "how much can we move to the browser". However, I see the container as the mediator of the network, not the application.