
Introducing TogetherJS - conductor
https://hacks.mozilla.org/2013/10/introducing-togetherjs
======
ldn_tech_exec1
There is a 363 point discussion on this 26 days ago:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6415210](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6415210)

~~~
alecsmart1
Shouldn't HN automatically remove duplicate links? I was surprised to see this
on front page again.

~~~
neeee
This one is [https://hacks.mozilla.org/2013/10/introducing-
togetherjs](https://hacks.mozilla.org/2013/10/introducing-togetherjs), the
other is [https://togetherjs.com/](https://togetherjs.com/).

------
mikegioia
This looks great but it seems they have no plans to support Internet Explorer
([https://togetherjs.com/docs/#browser-
support](https://togetherjs.com/docs/#browser-support)). That's a shame
because most of our users who need this level of support all use IE :/

~~~
Mikeb85
Who cares. It's IE which needs to catch up to the standards Mozilla and Google
are implementing. It's not like Windows users will be left out in the dark,
they can always install Firefox.

Tell your users to use a real browser, or write a letter to Microsoft telling
them to get with the times...

Even the University I attend doesn't support IE with their web-apps. They
support Firefox...

~~~
mcphilip
It's comments such as this that bubble up to the top of the comment chain that
often makes me wonder if only a minority of HN users have deployed to
enterprise environments with rigid infrastructure policies.

In my more cynical moods I wonder what percentage of users have non-novelty
code in production at all.

~~~
Mikeb85
Fair enough. If you need to support outdated browsers because of someone
else's technology choices, that's a differentiating feature for you and your
business, and I respect that (and I hope you're charging a decent amount as
compensation for the fact you're supporting their older technology).

But if you're interested in the advance of technology, especially when it's
pushing the boundaries, a little bit (or a lot) of idealism is a good thing.

Plenty of people make a (from what I hear) very lucrative living programming
in COBOL, and I respect them for it. Lots of people still program in Fortran,
which is awesome. But that doesn't mean we should be limited to COBOL and
Fortran because someone else is...

------
csantini
Jesus, how much I waited for this! :O

Literally just deployed, absolutely love it:

[http://hackurls.com/#&togetherjs=global](http://hackurls.com/#&togetherjs=global)

One liner copy-paste for community on your website. I can finally talk in real
time with my users and understand why the use my website.

~~~
csantini
eheh it's really cool, but the user list goes a bit crazy with too many users

~~~
breck
Short term fix: if you zoom out you can see the full menu.

~~~
csantini
yes!

------
aroch
Previous discussion (before the official announcement)
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6415210](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6415210)

------
hrjet
What worries me, and I realized this only after trying TogetherJS, is that
Websockets don't require a special permission in browsers! So any website with
JS enabled is now going to be able to do peer-to-peer? Could this be a can of
worms, security-wise?

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
1\. WebSockets allow real-time client-server communication. They do not allow
P2P and have to follow the Same Origin Policy.

2\. WebRTC allows P2P. Can't see how it's a security issue.

~~~
esrauch
Websockets are not subject to Same Origin Policy. In Firefox it is subject to
a "must use wss:// if on a [https://](https://) page", but that's all.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
Where did you get that from? They are indeed subject to it, unless CORS is in
effect.

~~~
esrauch
Sorry about the delay, I didn't see your reply until now. I assume you went
see mine.

If you do a search for "websockets cross origin" every result says they are
allowed. I currently have something running that is doing cross domain
websockets and it works perfectly fine on FF and Chrome without any special
effort.

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
And if you read each, it says only when using CORS.

------
mntmn
I am building an actual service using technology like this (but we wrote our
own, not TogetherJS). It's cool, but don't forget that this is really a
"utility" and it's the mix of factors and features that you build on top of
this that make an actual product out of it. I'm currently compiling a
(somewhat biased) feature-by-feature comparison on creative realtime
collaboration tools. Feel free to comment and suggest more products to
compare!
[https://docs.google.com/a/mnt.mn/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AunvDU...](https://docs.google.com/a/mnt.mn/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AunvDUrA7ThUdHZKcGx2WXZCSjUySWU4TkVreHp2Q2c&usp=drive_web#gid=0)

~~~
aray
A bit meta, but I think it's really telling that you're using a google doc
(also a great collaboration tool) to compare.

~~~
mntmn
That's totally intentional, we didn't want to implement a spreadsheet. Yet. ;)
I made a list of use cases under the main table that clearly states Google
Docs as currently the best tool for tasks like spreadsheets, Word-like
document authoring and such. I'm well aware of NIH.

------
veganarchocap
That's incredible! Already got it working on a project, just... wow!

------
nichol4s
I'm very excited to see so much enthusiasm for TogetherJS.

We are currently building something similar and plan to release that next
week. It has lots of similarities but we target a somewhat different market.
Some of the differences, you do not need to write a single line of code and it
will even work with advanced application that require sign in without sharing
security tokens.

We plan to release Surfly next week, but people who are interested in trying
it out can msg me and can get a beta account.

~~~
dirkk0
Will this be open source, too?

~~~
nichol4s
No, it will be a free online service.

------
newsreader
Too bad it doesn't support IE10. I was already brainstorming how to implement
but will have to wait for something else...

~~~
rallison
That isn't entirely true. The audio chat won't work in IE10, and IE10 support
isn't a priority, but most everything else will probably work:
[https://togetherjs.com/docs/#browser-
support](https://togetherjs.com/docs/#browser-support)

Edit: Ok, looking at the issues tracker, it looks like the current IE bugs
basically break togetherjs on IE10. As such, hopefully this issue gets some
attention:
[https://github.com/mozilla/togetherjs/issues/812](https://github.com/mozilla/togetherjs/issues/812)

------
Kiro
Is WebRTC better for real-time apps (drawing, games) than WebSockets?

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
WebRTC is peer-to-peer, WebSocket is client-server. WebRTC _might_ be a better
choice for certain types of game.

------
filipedeschamps
Had to be made with Node.js ;)

------
nadee013
This is a really nice :) Firebase added firebase integration[0] to this, I
hope that would be really cool.

I'm not there could be an possible integration with Meteor too.

[0] -
[https://github.com/firebase/togetherjs](https://github.com/firebase/togetherjs)

~~~
ianb
I'm hoping we turn that Firebase fork into a pluggable interface for
TogetherJS to exchange messages via other systems. Once that is in place I'm
guessing Meteor would be simple too. Most of the Firebase support is in this
one commit, and it's notably pretty small:
[https://github.com/firebase/togetherjs/commit/fdb11887c63342...](https://github.com/firebase/togetherjs/commit/fdb11887c633426a39514820baa88438a1d892be)

~~~
arunoda
This is nice. I might give this a try around this weekend :)

------
drcongo
Am I the only person that gets an SSL cert mismatch on this site?

------
createcode1
Need IE support please

