> Yes, on paper XUL is great, but it was based on old UI ideas, we had to make tons of hacks to work around those old ideas, and performance was not on par with what overly-optimised HTML could achieve.
Criticizing the quality of something by saying it’s from “old ideas” is a total non sequitir. Old is not the same as bad (there are plenty of great ideas that are old) and modern is not the same as good.
The pointlessness of just saying XUL is old is underlined when you suggest replacing it with HTML. HTML is even older than XUL and a pretty good idea.
And by the way whatever you replace(d) XUL with will be an old idea soon too.
Criticizing the quality of something by saying it’s from “old ideas” is a total non sequitir. Old is not the same as bad (there are plenty of great ideas that are old) and modern is not the same as good.
The pointlessness of just saying XUL is old is underlined when you suggest replacing it with HTML. HTML is even older than XUL and a pretty good idea.
And by the way whatever you replace(d) XUL with will be an old idea soon too.