Apple's HTML5 'standards' hype debunked
Apple is hyping HTML5 again, this time with a new website purporting to show open web development in action. But the company's standards-following rivals have pointed out the Jobsian site is peddling nonsense. Today, Apple posted an HTML 5 Showcase demonstrating video, graphics, and typography built with HTML5, the related CSS3 …
"CSS is a member of a family of related HMTL5 technologies that includes Web Workers to run tasks in the background of a browser, Web Storage to store string data in a key-value pair database, and Web Sockets for server communications."
Correction: CSS is not part of HTML5.
At no point does it say CSS is part of HTML5. It says it is a related technology.
It says "related HMTL5 technologies".
It says it is a "related HTML5 technology". By any normal parsing of English prose, both related and HTML5 are adjectives and modify the expression to their right, which makes CSS an HTML5 technology (related to something mentioned earlier). Now, if the article had said "related-to-HTML5 technology" then you might have had a point, but I'd hope the El Reg style manual would barf at such phrasing.
Also to blast Flash whilst using bloated languages like Javascript and CSS? Heh.
Duly piss off Apple.
Actually, JavaScript and CSS are not at all "bloated". In fact, have you seen the performance gains for JavaScript in browsers lately? They are actually compiling it to native code.
Your ignorance is astounding.
These web standards are open, reliable, highly secure, and efficient......and not finished
HTML5 - not finished (and a loooong way off)
CSS3 - not finished, and yet loads of web devs seem to be jumping on the bandwagon, without thinking 'hmm, i wonder why I have to prefix everything with -moz- or -webkit-'.
'tards.
Well these "standards" a first of all only recommendations. Secondly they only become recommendations once they have been implemented fully. ie in bout 10 years time... It's a bit of a chicken and egg situation really. It's why we had all the proprietory browser tags in the 90s. The standards took to long to adapt to the real world.
http://www.scribd.com/document_collections/2473917
seems much better than the earlier embedded Application.
What is HTML 5 bringing to the party that will displace flash, apart from a video tag? Flash was around before youtube, it has not always been about playing videos, and I suspect its uses will evolve into more than that.
When Stevey boy wonder (it's what he likes me to call him) says HTML5 will replace flash, is he just talking video?
I really do not understand this. I haven't had time to look into what will actually be there in HTML 5, so maybe there's a whole host of additional features, but I can't see it providing the functionality as easily as that I can currently get from silverlight (and I assume flash).
Flash is a dead end.
HTML5 video is actually integrated into the browser rather than running as a separate application. That opens up for totally new possibilities interacting with video. You can use CSS, SVG, JS, etc. to interface with the video!
Only the ignorant think that Flash is all about video
The next set of standards will allow developers to drop the flash plugin for video players, audio players, complex animation, 3D graphics and even the plugin itself (I've seen Javascript RENDERED flash - authored by an Ads agency).
Does anybody still do anything with flash on the web other than videos and games (and third rate websites)? So yes, on the web, flash is all about video. And games, but that's less important than video.
I think Apple have a valid point and HTML5 and open standards are the future, and Safari is a VERY complete and capable HTML5 implementation, but cheap tricks such as using browser sniffing to prevent the page running in other browsers are just that, a cheap trick, and don't do them any favours.
They're worse than that. They create a presumption of dishonesty around whatever it was that Apple were trying to say. Unless someone now steps forward and provides evidence to the contrary, the only reasonable assumption is that Safari's HTML5 support is actually inferior to its competitors and Apple have had to cheat.
I thought Apple were supposed to be *good* at marketing?
They are good at marketing.
Downside: pisses off a few techies.
Upside: gets great unwashed to click "Download Safari" button en masse.
It's the great unwashed they're after. They know damned well that those with enough savvy to spot the con aren't their target customer base anyway. The likes of us don't need "just works", aren't prepared to pay extra for it or put up with the straightjacketing. We're quite happy to save a few quid and go with "will work perfectly well if treated with a bit of common sense".
Definitely. Apple figured out a long time ago that anyone who knows anything about technology will avoid their products like the plague. What they saw was the path Nintendo was taking in the gaming community. Namely, screw the community, we'll go after everyone else without a brain.
Apple products are like a Wii... kind of fun when drunk at a party, but severely technologically inferior, with a high possibility of breaking something or embarrassing yourself during use.
On top of all of that though is their "hey if we lie to their faces they'll be too stupid to know" marketing style. They use the exact same tactic as virus and malware users do. "If we throw a little popup up and say WARNING YOU MUST DO THIS and make it look all official, people will download whatever damaging software we choose".
..you remember? The one that said it needed IE8 to experience the WONDER of the new site? The one that could be tricked by futzing with your user-agent string?
Wonder if a Firefox (or worse, Konqueror with all its Linux connotations) browser user ended up winning that $10k?
Interoperability my arse.
The really stupid thing is that the same demos are available from the safari developer website without the browser check: http://developer.apple.com/safaridemos/
All work find on Chrome for instance (apart from the video one that needs a quicktime codec - why not the much lauded h264?). Apparently Firefox also works quite well.
Someone should explain the meaning of the word standards to whatever marketing wonk thought this was a good idea.
I just tried the link provided. They must have changed it since Friday as it is now doing a Safari check when you try to run a demo. This was on my Windows/Firefox box at work.
...for the poor guys in the office.
Would you want to be the one explaining to Skeletor that HTML5 isn't what he thinks it is, is a year off being completed and actually most Flash video is using h.264 at the moment anyway.
...then you're ordered to produce a showcase site demonstrating how great HTML5 is.
Don't. Let fly like Jobs.
HTML 5 is a half baked techology right now. The spec is not completed never mind implemented. Flash does have some problems. But it is still very useful. Especially to advertisers. And for us it is very useful for streaming video. And it is cross platform.
Flash won't be dead for maybe another 5 years.
Open means whatever Jobs wants it to mean.
Also Flash will be on Android, MeeGo, Windows Phone and other platforms.
is that supposed to be a good thing?
of course the iTards will lap it up, I mean why would tha nice Mr Jobs feed up with untruths? However anyone with ANY common sense will ask how comes this does not work with Opera 10.5 when it's WAY more HTML5, CSS3 and SVG compliant than any Apple offering (and any Mozilla or Google offering for that matter too)
We can all agree that HTML5/CSS3 is a work in progress. Apple have created a showcase that presents the _potential_ that this emerging standard is capable of, but instead of giving a little credit where credit is due, other browser vendors start bitching that Apple locks them out by browser sniffing. Well there's a bloody good reason: other browsers don't yet support HTML5/CSS3 to the same level as Safari and Apple, quite rightly IMO, don't want the users to experience a broken demo. Most users wouldn't understand why it didn't work when using their preferred browser
The point about H.264 is a complete red herring: the article seems to imply that only H.264 videos can be used with the new <video> tag. Crap! You can use WebM and Theora if you want and no doubt other formats will make an appearance. Why shouldn't Apple showcase the very video format they helped create?
Rather than whinge like a bunch of snivelling schoolkids, why don't Mozilla, Opera et al create their own showcases? Let's see how good their support for these new standards is. Perhaps some enterprising developer might care to try and create a vendor-neutral version of Apple's showcase so we can truly compare how well current browsers handle these new standards. I suspect it won't be as good as Safari.
=:~)
I switched Firefox's user agent string to appear to be an iphone 3 and most of it worked just fine. It did spit an error telling me I needed quicktime and to download it, which is odd since it actually is installed. If something else didn't work, I didn't find it during my brief test. There you have it, all anyone has to do to make a "vendor-neutral" version is strip out the user agent sniffer from the javascript file. Besides, if it didn't work in other browsers it would be more impressive to point out those things that don't work and say "X, Y, & Z" are much cooler when viewed with Safari... I wonder why they don't.
...that most of these 'Apple Bashers' are Anonymous Cowards?
Gutless.
Anonymous critique is one of the foundations of free speech.
However I quite happily bash apple with my name visible for all to see.
And then when they find out they can post they will, always supporting Apple.
Thats why I am scared they will do similar to this and Adobe bashing and fanbois plus the casual market will just take it as truth.
You miss the point somewhat. Apple is promoting a luxurious vision of an open Internet with clear sane standards that "just work"...
...using a video codec that is "free for now" (you can't underestimate the levity of those final two words, "for now")...
...and it only works (without dicking around) on Apple's own Safari browser. The fact that a comment below mentions that it (mostly?) works by screwing with the UserAgent suggests that this is a fairly deliberate bit of pro-Safari advertising being passed off a a public service announcement. The hypocracy is rather comical.
As for a vendor-neutral version - firstly didn't other commentator say it tried to look for Quicktime? Oh, wait, is that a plug-in I see? If you wanna play H.264 why not just do it like 99% of the web and use Flash? <grin> But more importantly, would Apple waive copyright and such over a properly open reworking of their demo? After all, they could have done exactly that themselves. So either their webdevs are too lame to try, or there's a not terribly well hidden agenda thing going on.
As do I.
Nonsense.
If the demo is broken then the whole notion of HTML5 as a proper open standard is broken. The fact that other browsers and other vendors aren't locked out is the entire point. The only thing such a demo demonstrates is the potential for Apple to abuse and subvert standards.
The other browser vendors are rightfully annoyed.
....direct question to me to see if that's my real name? Duh.?
A sane person might just conclude that it's a sarcastic point. Posting under a pseudonym does somewhat undermine your point about A/C's.
I'll agree that I don't know why so many people use A/C nowadays, but I'd guess it may be something to do with being at work.
Re the article: To me it's an underhanded tactic, other browsers support HTML 5 so why limit it to Safari? Oh... of course, to try and trick users into downloading Safari because it's the only standards compliant browser.
And nothing of value was lost.
Bash Macworld bloggers all you want, and I'm fairly neutral on bashing graphic designers (some semi-professional competition between myself and a few of them lately)...
...by why bash the gay community on this? That's just downright unnecessary. And frankly offensive.
May I say go fuck yourself. as long as your ass is within three inches of your willy of course...
thats all.
nK
Yaaay! Perpetuating negative stereotypes in a cheap attempt at argumentative point-scoring!
WHAT A GUY!!!
Did the original post for this tangent get deleted? I must protest most strongly if so.
I believe it is every person's undeniable right to prove their own sub-intellect, and should not be protected by silencing.
nK
But most of it works ok in Chrome with a user agent switcher, and isn't that much more exciting than various jquery demos.
At least sites like http://www.chromeexperiments.com have the good grace to let you give them a go in your browser of choice, or kindly explain why it won't work.
Well, except for the VR part. If there's any user-agent sniffing, it's looking for WebKit, not Safari specifically. Apple's own guidelines strongly encourage checking browser capabilities dynamically, not by sniffing.
Seems like Apple is getting to be more and more like Microsoft, and Jobs is finally channelling more and more of whatever it was Gates was channelling. Possibly Hastur, although some might argue for Yog Sothoth. Ego the size of a planet, and ethics undetectable by a quantum microscope.
