

Introducing Atlas: A Visual Development Tool for Creating Web Apps - sant0sk1
http://carsonified.com/blog/web-apps/introducing-atlas-a-visual-development-tool-for-creating-web-apps/

======
alttab
I myself was absolutely amazed at this demo. It makes me feel like I'm not
innovating at all!

At the same time, this isn't exactly new. GWT did something similar with Java
(although it wasn't necessarily as polished) and as others have stated there
are similar things.

I guess the question is - do people really use this, how often, and do THEY
make money?

~~~
jonmc12
They extended apple's dev environment and then built an online iWork suite.
They are likely going the 37 signals route until Apple offers them a check
they can not refuse.

~~~
alttab
That's a great point. And this is something I've been thinking about recently.

It is as if some start-up business models are merely based on creating
technology that either another company will want to buy outright because it
runs parallel to their goals and portfolio - or because larger competition
doesn't want to have to pay dearly for not buying them out while they could.

Acquisitions don't result in lasting innovation in my eyes - it increases
proprietary code bases. Early exits are like leaving a cash poker game after
your first big hand, the fun was just beginning.

I hope to see more and more "start-ups" use less and less VC funding (we do
realize that it is the VCs who have the winning scenario here, RIGHT?), say "F
U" to acquisitions, and stay around long enough to make a sustainable
difference.

~~~
gord
Actually I hope Apple take an enlightened approach to this, and see it as a
valid migration/coexistence/hybrid strategy, rather than get heavy. Its the
ultimate complement to them.

------
83457
"With Atlas what we are going to give you by default is a server that runs
Cappuccino. So we have javascript running in the server. We have the same
stack end to end. So you know you write your front-end code in javascript. You
write your back-end code in javascript. Everything just works."

I've always viewed Cappuccino and Atlas as front-end only tools so this part
of the presentation (Q&A) was surprising. Does anyone know where I can find
more information about the server side of things?

~~~
boucher
<http://narwhaljs.org>

------
gord
What just happened?

beautiful, beautiful piece of art and engineering.

Id seen some of the RaphaelJS demos, so I knew this was coming.. but honestly
was expecting this stuff to become a product in about 2 to 3 years time... and
this guys integrated the whole shebang.

I just want to see the same thing happen with data - people will realize that
most data is a graph and not a table, when and only when we can demo something
that's fluid, has the same qualities of immediacy and usability and solves a
real problem [for which the spreadsheet is the current workaround]...

Each component of this might have been done before, but the combination is a
new new thing we all knew was just around the corner.

------
axod
Watching the RSS reader example, seems like a single button "Expand to
container size, and set anchored all round and grow shrink
horizontal/vertical" would be useful :)

------
whyleyc
I was at the talk - the demo was excellent.

I spoke to Francisco afterwards and he said that the resulting code would be
able to run across both Mac & Win32 platforms, which I thought was nice.

~~~
aidanf
I assumed from watching the video that the code it generates is objective-j or
cappuccino code, and that it would run in the browser. Is this correct?

~~~
aidanf
From the questions part of the video it appears that all the code that it
generates is javascript and html.

~~~
tlrobinson
Sort of. Cappuccino and Atlas run in normal web browsers, no browser plugins,
using JavaScript to build up and manipulate the DOM. But there is almost no
HTML (or CSS) involved, and Atlas does not generate much code at all.

The interface files that Atlas creates are essentially freeze-dried archives
of the interface objects. IMHO this is a better solution than code generators.

------
mrduncan
280North might be my favorite YC company. Here is another intro video on Atlas
- <http://280atlas.com/>.

I unfortunately don't have a chance to watch the video right now but I'm going
to go ahead and say congrats to the 280North guys anyway because their stuff
always amazes.

~~~
mrduncan
Looks like they've updated the Atlas website since I posted that last link -
the video is here now: <http://280atlas.com/what.php>

------
Readmore
These guys are awesome! I'll definitely check out the 'pay-in' beta ;)

~~~
boucher
The beta program is partly about getting early feedback, it's partly about
keeping our future customers happy while we finish the product, and it's
partly an experiment in how open we can be and how much people will want to be
part of the process.

------
ique
I really wonder how game-changing this will be. Of course most sites on the
web aren't meant to be application but rather information presentation.

But it does seem like a huge step toward liberating developers from writing
front-end code. The biggest possible downside I see to it that it could also
liberate us from writing truly beautiful apps and we'll have a million apps
that look like the standard interface.

It would be awesome to see some demos of apps not looking like 280 Slides.

~~~
boucher
I agree that most web sites are not applications, and this tool is not for
them.

Atlas is going to make it pretty easy to customize the standard controls, so I
wouldn't be all that concerned about cookie cutter interfaces.

It's also worth pointing out that most people don't have the ability or
resources to create beautiful interfaces. Those people will get something that
looks good by default.

------
auston
I've seen similar technology before, from a company called Tibco, about 4
years ago. I believe it was called GI Builder.

Edit: Not as impressive, but I believe it's the same concept -
<http://media.tibco.com/gi/2_create_gui.swf>

~~~
boucher
Certainly the idea is not new. But we do believe this specific implementation
(which has a lot to do with the design of the underlying framework) is miles
ahead of other offerings.

~~~
auston
Yeah definitely, you guys are head & shoulders above the competition - but you
are not available, where can I get it / work with it? In Feb it will have been
a year since you've announced demo'd it.

edit: I see you guys just changed the 280atlas site.

~~~
natemartin
Well, you can start playing with the framework from here:
<http://cappuccino.org/>

And they just announced that Atlas will be available November 15 in beta for
$20.

------
yu
HTML JavaScript, front/ back-end, desktop/ web app... well defined technology
for commercial applications.

Internet / web application platform is not likely to go away.

Lightly developed on NeXT Obj-C, spring controls ~20 years ago. Glad seeing
good NS ideas being adapted and extended.

------
rogerthat
I don't have a chance to watch the video right now but I'm curious to know
when Atlas is launching, if anyone knows the date.

Also, I see from the comments on carsonified that they're going to charge $20
for the IDE. If anyone watches the video, I'd be interested to have that
verified.

~~~
boucher
We have not released a price tag or date for Atlas 1.0. We have announced a
developer beta program, which will give interested parties early access, for a
nominal fee of $20.

~~~
falsestprophet
You should consider a Dutch auction for a fixed number of slots. That may be
interesting enough to attract more media attention.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_auction>

------
madebylaw
One of the big barriers for me to consider the web replacing the desktop is
device support for the browser. Does anyone know of a way for web applications
to talk to devices like digital cameras, video game paraphernalia, music
instruments? Will atlas solve this problem?

~~~
tlrobinson
Atlas/Cappuccino doesn't solve this problem, because it's constrained by what
the browser provides us. However it's possible to integrate custom plugins to
do these sort of things, if absolutely necessary.

Picurio (YC W09) has a browser plugin to allow uploading of photos directly
from your digital camera. The GUI frontend is built with Cappuccino and
integrates with this plugin. <http://picurio.com/>

------
jawngee
It might be amazing, but I had to turn it off when he said the web was better
than the desktop, which is patently not true. The desktop still gives a vastly
superior user experience, while the web is still trying to ape it.

~~~
jawngee
I'm not certain why I'm being knocked down other than calling out a
Y-Combinator guy for being wrong.

He equates desktops to VHS and the web as DVD, the only problem is there is a
clear superiority of DVD over VHS (greater resolution, more features, compact
form factor) where there is no clear superiority of the web over desktop in
terms of usability and features.

If someone can name me one app that is better than the desktop equivalent,
please do so.

Flickr is no where near as useful for image cataloging and management than
many desktop equivalents. It wins in sharing for sure, but not actual
functionality.

Outlook (and I'm sure the xobni guys would agree) trumps it's online version
by a mile. Gmail still lags here as well.

Video editing ... Jumpcut? Yeah right.

Audio editing ... show me one that supports high end audio effects or plug-
ins.

Image editing ... Aviary < Photoshop. Aviary < most freeware image editing
tools.

Google docs - ever press the tab key when editing a doc? Dragged and dropped
an image into the document?

I could go on and on, but you get the point.

If you are going to bring a metaphor and present it as the truth, there had
better be some truth to it.

Atlas is cool, but derivative of all that came before it: Delphi, Interface
Builder, Visual Studio, Dreamweaver, Visual Basic, RealBasic, etc. Sure it
runs in the browser, sure you can target the desktop. I dunno, color me
unimpressed.

But, listen, if you're going to downvote me at least come correct.

~~~
voidfiles
I think you are getting knocked down because you don't want to recognize that
some people may disagree with you.

You said that outlook is better then gmail. While you might be able to make an
argument when you compare it side by side one one machine. You would be
mistaken in making that comparison. Gmail kicks ass for me not just because I
feel it can replace outlook, but I can have my gmail, on my iphone, I can
access it from any computer that has a web browser, I can access it from the
linux command line using lynx, or links. Can outlook do that.

You need to realize that when they say desktop apps aren't as good as web
apps, I think what they are saying is that desktop apps aren't mayby the best
way for most people to use apps.

~~~
jawngee
Yeah but the guy in the video explicitly made the comparison between VHS and
DVD, and it's an incredibly poor metaphor because it's not true.

I get Gmail having more utility than say Outlook _for certain things_. But I
can access my exchange server (I use google apps for business, but used to use
exchange) in all the same places I could access Gmail which renders the point
slightly moot.

I have no issue with people disagreeing, but at least argue the disagreement
if you feel strongly enough to vote me down.

------
voidfiles
I too was impressed by the video, and the demo. The team seems like they are
building some great tools.

But that is where my fascination with 280 ends, they are taking a great
language, Javascript, and turning it into something its not. Take a look at
Objective-J its not javascript. It doesn't really even look like javascript.

As a JS developer, I am not certain I will be willing to give up JS, just so I
can use these visual programming tools.

I am going to spend the 20 bucks though, I really want to see how much of the
Objective-J I can strip out just use JS.

~~~
boucher
Stop thinking about it as "turning JavaScript into something" and start
thinking about it as adding new features to the language that were previously
missing.

Code importing is clearly a feature we can all get behind. Classes are clearly
something that almost every JavaScript library uses. We make those things
language features instead of library features.

The unique feature we add, and the reason we really have to introduce a custom
syntax at all, is dynamic message passing. Message passing enables all kinds
of cool new features, because method implementations aren't bound until the
message is received.

If you really wanted you could do this yourself:

    
    
         objj_msgSend(anObject, "message:", aParam);
    

But clearly this is much cleaner:

    
    
         [anObject message:aParam];
    

Objective-J is not compiled really, it's translated. All of it's features are
part of the Objective-J runtime, which is written purely in JavaScript. So you
can use it without using the syntax if you like. It's simply a lot more work
to do so.

~~~
voidfiles
I think its great that these guys are trying something. They have an argument,
and instead of theorizing they are going for it. I just think that its to far
away from what JS is, JS has a long history behind it, and these 3 guys are
trying to change that entire history with one broad stroke, I think that is
nearly impossible to achieve.

Besides if they feel they have something JS developers want why not take it
through the standards bodies.

~~~
boucher
I am one of those people, so no need to refer to me in the third person :)

Standards bodies are hopelessly slow. If I wanted to wait a decade to get a
new feature, I'd propose it to a standards body. I actually want to write
programs.

Part of the power of Objective-J is taking control of the language _away_ from
standards bodies. Objective-J can evolve at any pace we like, and anyone can
fork it and make their own changes.

JavaScript does have a long history, but it's an awful one. It's a history of
being a second class language that was slow and that was not used to produce
anything significant. Only recently has that changed. And there is now a
growing culture of implementing languages on top of JavaScript. Python, Ruby,
Smalltak, and others have all been written on top of JS. GWT compiles from
Java to JS. There are similar compilers for Lisp, PHP, C# and others. It seems
narrow minded to assume that only the flavor of JS that has existed for _over
a decade_ should be allowed to exist. That's why we build abstractions.

We are not rewriting history nor are we moving far away from what JavaScript
is. Most of the code you write is pure JavaScript anyway. You can do as much
in pure JS as you like. We are making the programming environment easier to
use, should you choose to take advantage of that.

------
elblanco
Cool, we are in the design stages for a web app right now and this generated
significant discussion this week.

------
yawniek
amazing demo.

and its great to see that people are working on removing the hurdles that it
takes to create web/html application.

but i wonder how this whole web app stuff breaks up once we move away from
WIMP to more task oriented applications with NUIs.

------
jpcx01
Are all the FOWA 2009 London talks online yet, or just this one?

~~~
boucher
They'll be posted here as they come online:
<http://events.carsonified.com/fowa/2009/london/content>

------
gsmaverick
Will 280Atlas also be available as a web application?

~~~
jlees
I was at the FOWA talk and I _believe_ , though I may misremember, that it was
originally intended as one; how delightfully recursive. However, customers
didn't want the insecurity of hosting their design and code online, so Atlas
became Atlas.app.

~~~
cpr
Right, 280Atlas.com became 280Atlas.app.

From what Francisco said, it sounds like they may still plan a web-based
version.

------
eli_s
This looks pretty amazing - but I wonder how 'staged' the demo is.

Often the problem with these types of high level abstractions is that there is
so much magic going on behind the scenes that customising how things work
becomes difficult and you end up getting locked into the 'Atlas' way of doing
things.

I can't wait to get a chance to start playing with this though :)

~~~
cpr
The only thing staged about the demo is the richness of the widgets they
already have available.

Other than that, it's just like Objective-C + Interface Builder (or better;
more dynamic, more portable, no compile/link/go slowdown).

So you can expect generally the same amount of work to build stuff as you
would expend building with Cocoa on the Mac/iPhone.

