Apple will drop support for HTML in the upcoming version of its iPhone OS, slated for release this summer. According to people familiar with the matter, the removal of HTML support from Cupertino's mobile Safari browser is outlined in the Developer Program License Agreement for the upcoming iPhone OS 4.0, to be used not only in …
Aww -- you got me. Well done, sir!
Paris because she's foolish.
I guess it's only fair
Microsoft "steal" Apple's GUI ideas so Apple just and go and steal Microsoft's entire way of doing business.
I miss the old internet so much....
When we could simply access knowledge from every corner of the planet instead of having to figure out why this web page doesn't show up properly on my browser. I am afraid the unifying beauty of the big web is not the main goal anymore. Sigh...
I'm on the Apple Developer Program and...
... iHTML is absolutely amazing. It's like nothing you have ever seen before. I'm breaking the NDA you agree to when joining the Apple Developer Program telling you this but you will not believe what they've done. They've got tags that you put around text that makes them bold! You can also make them italic! And if you use both tags at the same time, your text is bold and italic!
I'm sure you're all as blown away by this as I am. Apple are being very strict with iHTML, so far the only iHTML page I've had approved said "Steve Jobs is God". I tried to get "Apple OSX is pretty good" approved on a page, but Apple said I needed to remove the word "pretty" before I could get approval. It's a really hard process!
RTFA Fan Boy
They don't have <marquee> and <blink> technology yet, although it may take HTML Professionals a bit to miss those two Crown Jewels.
(Loved your post BTW))
Bit of a leap isn't it?
"A recent Netcraft survey reported that worldwide web hostnames peaked at 240 million in January 2010, but has since sunk to just over 200 million, prompting speculation that Apple has been working behind the scenes to begin the transformation of web properties from HTML to iHTML."
I don't see the connection to Apple. I fail to see why simply recoding web pages should cause 40 million hostnames to vanish, so please explain the connection.
It seems far more likely to me that either somebody's flawed survey techniques were fixed without admitting the earlier mistake or that domain registrars have finally got round to purging the auto-generated "use and dump" domain names created by bot herders.
it's all-too believable.
The problem with Apple...
...even today, of all days...
...this could be true.
I really did believe this for a minute.
You almost got me...
I almost thought this was an April Fool. Shame on me!
You should not give St Steve such ideas
Do not give the St Steve of Cupertino such ideas even on the first of April. You never know - it may catch up.
I have been honing my iHTML skills in preparation for the global adoption of the tech. Being slightly ahead of the curve with this may just give me the advantage I need. I am looking forward to a bright future.
18:05gmt... so it doesnt' count that my blood started boiling ;)
That is all...
I agree epic fail!
It would have been better if you'd announced that they've pre-empted Opera finally appearing on the iPhone by moving Mobile Safari from HTML to Apple's own native binary format, routing all traffic through Apple's proxies for compression to achieve the 5X typical speed boosts that previously were only enjoyed by Opera Mini users. Except Apple would claim their system makes pages load 40X faster.
Then you could have quoted Jon von Tetchzner as saying it was a blatant rip-off of Opera Mini, highly suspected to have been reverse engineered from the files (many of which were confidential) submitted to the Apple iStore for assessment and that he would be complaining to the EU. To add insult to injury, you could have added that Apple also quietly refused Opera Mini its place on the iPhone.
Greystripe business sense
Suprised Greystripe didn't pointed out the business sense of moving all adverstising to iHTML (TM) as the only people you would ever want to do business with would have iApple devices. This would allow advertisers to avoid the hoy per loy.
PS. This only count before noon.
The server side language that could...n't
Exactly could .... but wasn't.
Looks like abandonware now - last release 2007...
And sadly I have a client who still uses the stuff )-:
Whoa, creepy screaming dude really doesn't sell it to me.
Neither does the fact that World+Kitten uses PHP (except those sadly still stuck with ASP).
I freaked out for a second. Good one.
Your ability to watch porn on Apple products will be restored!
Outside of the envelope
Going forward iHTML is the clearly best way to retrofit your code and future proof your backwards compatible name servers. The current HTML model is way to complex for today's hardware and lends itself to cable friction burn when downloading large files over 10kg per square hectare.
Personally I can't wait for Apple to release it's iUSB cable so I can hook up my brain to iTunes and filter out bad thoughts.
Can do better
You had me going until the middle of the headline. Seriously guys. That was not too subtle was it? Nice article nonetheless.
What makes many people ...
Fall for this is that it really sounds like something Apple (iApple?) would do.
very obvious that it was a joke but i could not resist thinking that apple is the only company arrogant and insane enough to do such thing.
So unfair on Apple
So unfair on Apple again, of course, it is up to Jobs to decide what can be shown on his divine devices and who has the right to do so.
And for those who think it has anything to do with the first of April I would like to point out that that was already covered with the CERN story.
fooled? then you don't know Apple.
Anyone fooled by this for a moment simply does not understand Apple. Tight control of the user experience, yes. A totally proprietary app infrastructure, yes. But also energetic promotion of and conformance to standards for content formats: HTML, video, audio all in standard formats. They are actually the first large company I am aware of to have done this. Right back to the 1960's all large hardware and software makers played lip service to standards while vigorously modifying, extending and fudging so that their customers would pay dearly for switching. Microsft above all.
Apple's rigorously standard conforming browser development is open sourced and used by RIMM, Nokia, Google Chrome and others.
I remember back in the days of the Mac Plus... the office at my school had terrible problems because the PCs were hooked together using Novell (in the days before TCP/IP was popular) and the Apples used AppleTalk. The two systems couldn't talk to each other. No probs, just swap disc... oh, wait, that's a funny one that is variable speed and won't work with anything else either.
Standards now, but not always. Unless you count making your own.
Get people hooked on iHTML 1.0, then...
... 10 months later, discontinue iHTML 1.0 and unleash iHTML2.0 which requires all new hardware in order to function. Sit back and rake in the $$$$
Is is bad that this didn't seem unbelieveable.
Honestly, having read this if it was any other day than april 1st, this wouldn't have been a huge shock. Its pretty much following apple's corporate strategy to restrict access to their platforms. So who knows, maybe come april 1st 2011, we'll be seeing the deployment of required iHTML protocol for the iphone/ipad devices....
@Gordon Henderson: LOL! I read your comment I checked the name against it and thought, "Surely there aren't two people mad enough to still be using it?!" ;)
HTML5 and Flash
They have to ban HTML because HTML5 will do just as well as Flash, and they don't support Flash because they want you to buy an app for the things that Flash does for free in websites, games, nifty other services, etc.
Don't give Jobs any ideas!
- Product round-up Six of the best gaming keyboard and mouse combos
- Opinion So, Apple won't sell cheap kit? Prepare the iOS garden wall WRECKING BALL
- LinuxCon 2014 GitHub.io killed the distro star: Why are people so bored with the top Linux makers?
- Opinion IT blokes: would you say that LEWD comment to a man? Then don't say it to a woman
- 6 Obvious Reasons Why Facebook Will Ban This Article (Thank God)