Apple Adopting SproutCore for Web Applications

[aforty]

Your understanding of the technology here seems very fuzzy indeed. What I was talking about was HTML 5.0, which already gives coders the ability to embed videos in web pages a la Youtube.

The SproutCore stuff is JavaScript which is also already supported by all the browsers out there and is not something proprietary from Apple (as you seem to be implying by your "javascript-include" comment.) Flash is still a good solution for animations and advertisements but now (relatively) lousy for video embedding and really poor for rich web application development given that it's proprietary and only really works well on Windows.

If you were creating a web site today, and all you wanted was to embed video, the HTML way is clearly the way to go. If you want rich functionality that's seamless across browsers, then JavaScript would be a good choice now for that given these new SproutCore tools.

What I am saying is that since web sites are dynamic and are redeveloped over and over again, if you want to target the "bleeding edge," all those millions of new iPhone users, as well as all those millions of new Mac users .... you might want to drop the use of Flash and use combinations of these standards based technologies instead.

You're missing my point entirely. I agree with you completely. Bleeding edge and "Web 2.0" has long ago moved away from Flash and I'm not doubting that Javascript/CSS is the future of the web. I refuse to use/learn Flash and I'm doing everything using Javascript/CSS, and besides wanting to use CSS3 everywhere, it is still the best way to present the web IMO and the most compatible.

My point, and only point, is that many many sites *right now* still use Flash. So if Apple wants to present the web as it is *now* using the iPhone, it will need Flash from Adobe.

 

[shawnce]

My point, and only point, is that many many sites *right now* still use Flash. So if Apple wants to present the web as it is *now* using the iPhone, it will need Flash from Adobe.

Curious about which sites? ...and then even if the iPhone supported flash would those sites even work well in the iPhone form factor and input metaphor?

 

[pcorajr]

I don't think you have any grasp of what you're talking about or what you read.

Every web browser comes with flash. It's a standard that can be counted on, and unlike Quicktime, browsers can detect the exact version of flash you have and navigate you directly to the download if needed.

You are wrong. Flash is not a standard and I know for a fact that no browser comes with out of the box flash support. I suggest you re check you info before you look like an idiot.

Flash is a resource hog. This is why mobile flash sucks. Not only are you stuck with a very stripped down version of flash but one that eats you mobiles cpu cycles. Flash is to adobe what ActiveX is to Microsoft, their best offering of crap.

 

[aforty]

Curious about which sites? ...and then even if the iPhone supported flash would those sites even work well in the iPhone form factor and input metaphor?

I'm talking about the Nike's and other big companies of the world. I'm talking about the numerous movie promotional sites popping up on almost a daily basis. I'm not arguing that these sites are particularly compelling but the average user likes these sites and will be looking for a familiar experience/look from their desktop computers. Big companies are slow to adapt and Flash will likely be around for a long time.

 

[GGJstudios]

The type of site that benefits from Flash and can't be recreated in JS:

http://vidal.jp/360snap/

There is no need to create macrumors.com in flash, it's an information heavy, news site. But for building unique online experiences that aren't just about pictures + text, you need Flash.

That site is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. HORRIBLE user experience! Wait 30-45 seconds (on a DSL connection) for something to load, annoying music, no indication as to what the site is about or why I would want to stay around and wait for it to finish loading. After the screen captures, I closed it without waiting any more, so I still have no idea what the site is about. If they were wanting to do business with me, or educate me or solicit any kind of support from me, they lost their chance! A perfect example of technology not being used to benefit the consumer!

Because you CAN do something with a technology, doesn't mean you SHOULD!

 

[InLikeALion]

The type of site that benefits from Flash and can't be recreated in JS:

http://vidal.jp/360snap/

There is no need to create macrumors.com in flash, it's an information heavy, news site. But for building unique online experiences that aren't just about pictures + text, you need Flash.

Did that do anything besides rotate a big 360 degree pic/vid of various characters? I didn't spend much time there, but that was all I noticed. If not, I don't see why that couldn't be easily created calling (enter choice of vid codec here) videos and playing them full browser within an html/css styled environment.

If there was more to it than that I'm sorry I missed it. Your point is valid that there is currently no open standards way to create some flash presences. But your example (again, assuming I didn't miss hidden interactivity) highlights what us standards proponents are trying to point out: often flash is used in circumstances in which it didn't need to be there or bring anything to the table above what some html/css/javascript could have brought.

 

[elppa]

That site is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. HORRIBLE user experience! Wait 30-45 seconds (on a DSL connection) for something to load, annoying music, no indication as to what the site is about or why I would want to stay around and wait for it to finish loading. After the screen captures, I closed it without waiting any more, so I still have no idea what the site is about.

You should have left it on for 5 minutes longer.

Then you would have had the joys of 90% CPU usage and fan-o-rama!

I forgot it was open in the background and wondered why all the fans had kicked on on my MacBook.

Shut it and everything back to normal now.

 

[ktlx]

I should have said "sites that use flash", not flash sites. Like I said, there are 10% that use flash effectively. I'm sure for every one good flash site you develop there are 10 horrible ones that have no real reason to use flash.

Until you, or someone else, can show me "one good flash site", I think you're full of it.

 

[InLikeALion]

Sort of back on topic (and to hopefully calm the flamewar that is certainly yet to peek), has anyone been able to reach the sproutcore.com website? I've been trying since before macrumors ran the article (saw the AI write up earlier) and haven't been able to get past the server errors.

Anyone seen the site and have any first impressions, etc...?

 

[GGJstudios]

You should have left it on for 5 minutes longer.

Then you would have had the joys of 90% CPU usage and fan-o-rama!

I forgot it was open in the background and wondered why all the fans had kicked on on my MacBook.

Shut it and everything back to normal now.

LOL... you're right, my bad! I've gotten impatient in my old age! I got so used to "point and click" that I forgot with flash sites I need to "point-click-wait"! Maybe I should get rid of a RAM chip, too.... learn to slow down and remember "it's the journey, not the destination, that counts!" Oh wait! That relates to riding Harleys, not surfing the web!

 

[GGJstudios]

Sort of back on topic (and to hopefully calm the flamewar that is certainly yet to peek), has anyone been able to reach the sproutcore.com website? I've been trying since before macrumors ran the article (saw the AI write up earlier) and haven't been able to get past the server errors.

Anyone seen the site and have any first impressions, etc...?

Maybe the site was written in flash!

 

[hobbbz]

That site is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. HORRIBLE user experience! Wait 30-45 seconds (on a DSL connection) for something to load, annoying music, no indication as to what the site is about or why I would want to stay around and wait for it to finish loading. After the screen captures, I closed it without waiting any more, so I still have no idea what the site is about. If they were wanting to do business with me, or educate me or solicit any kind of support from me, they lost their chance! A perfect example of technology not being used to benefit the consumer!

Because you CAN do something with a technology, doesn't mean you SHOULD!

Alright a few things to note:

1. I found the first site I remembered that had a unique interface (without doing too much digging)

b. The site is a Japanese site so what may seem unacceptable for a load time here, breezes by over there.

4. http://www.gettheglass.com/ if you want a more obvious "You can't do this in JS"

 

[GGJstudios]

Alright a few things to note:

1. I found the first site I remembered that had a unique interface (without doing too much digging)

b. The site is a Japanese site so what may seem unacceptable for a load time here, breezes by over there.

4. http://www.gettheglass.com/ if you want a more obvious "You can't do this in JS"

The gettheglass site isn't much better. It loads faster, but I click all over it and nothing happens. No indication of what the site is for, no menu that helps me navigate. Only a "Launch Fullscreen" which I didn't want to do! And that opened a new window, which I hate! Pointless, irritating excuse for user-friendly web design!

 

[hobbbz]

The gettheglass site isn't much better. It loads faster, but I click all over it and nothing happens. No indication of what the site is for, no menu that helps me navigate. Only a "Launch Fullscreen" which I didn't want to do! And that opened a new window, which I hate! Pointless, irritating excuse for user-friendly web design!

Boy no pleasing you! The site replicates a board game so there is no real 'information' to require navigating. Once you start the game it guides you through / tells the story.

 

[wizard]

That's all fine and well but nothing is going to replace all the thousands of sites currently using flash including popular video sites such as YouTube.

On the contrary if even a small portion of the developers out there saw a stability and performance advantage here they would drop flash in a heart beat. Flash is simply a big negative in web site development and the industry is looking for a stable standardized alternative.

Dave

 

[GGJstudios]

Boy no pleasing you! The site replicates a board game so there is no real 'information' to require navigating. Once you start the game it guides you through / tells the story.

And there's no information on the home page telling me that it's a game. I don't like or play computer or web games, so the least the site could do is warn me about what it is. I think the point is, there's not a good example of a productive website that's all flash, that couldn't have been done without flash. Games are always the exception because gamers don't mind "cool stuff" just for the sake of being cool.

 

[dashiel]

The type of site that benefits from Flash and can't be recreated in JS:

http://vidal.jp/360snap/

There is no need to create macrumors.com in flash, it's an information heavy, news site. But for building unique online experiences that aren't just about pictures + text, you need Flash.

while i agree there are some sites that can't currently be recreated with standards based technology alone, that particular site wouldn't even be remotely difficult when the <video> is supported, unless i'm missing some obscure functionality. it's not even that tough today if you were open to using quicktime or other video based plugin.

now a site like http://www.redbullcopilot.com/, i agree. the vast majority could be recreated with current browser capabilities, but the dvd-like switching between six different video streams and the communication between the video and dashboard feedback would be impossible today. two years from now... who knows.

 

[dashiel]

Sort of back on topic (and to hopefully calm the flamewar that is certainly yet to peek), has anyone been able to reach the sproutcore.com website? I've been trying since before macrumors ran the article (saw the AI write up earlier) and haven't been able to get past the server errors.

Anyone seen the site and have any first impressions, etc...?

http://github.com/sproutit/sproutcore/tree/master

haven't actually used it, but that's current repo
also at google code, but this apparently the new home

 

[hobbbz]

And there's no information on the home page telling me that it's a game. I don't like or play computer or web games, so the least the site could do is warn me about what it is. I think the point is, there's not a good example of a productive website that's all flash, that couldn't have been done without flash. Games are always the exception because gamers don't mind "cool stuff" just for the sake of being cool.

Ignore the fact that gettheglass is a game. It is an experience. I previously stated that information heavy sites like marumors.com don't need to be Flash. So we agree, i believe, on this point.

 

[Fotek2001]

Alright a few things to note:

1. I found the first site I remembered that had a unique interface (without doing too much digging)

b. The site is a Japanese site so what may seem unacceptable for a load time here, breezes by over there.

4. http://www.gettheglass.com/ if you want a more obvious "You can't do this in JS"

That site was even worse... Launch full screen? Please this isn't the late 90s when everyone had a tiny monitor.

With most of these Flash sites, there's nothing that technically couldn't be done using SVG, JavaScript and HTML which are all open technologies. The problem is that Adobe and Microsoft seem to have no inclination to implement or work with open technologies.

And all the fuss about SproutCore is just hype, while I'm sure it's going to be a boon to developers, there are lots of other great frameworks out there already like Aptana, Objective-J or even YahooUI.

 

[wizard]

as a flash site developer i can assure you that's quite an ignorant statement...

Oh but the man was right Flash; is the spawn of the devil and it is a sad comment on people that use or defend it. By continuing to use flash when it is obvious that a good portion of the web using population openly despises it says a lot about how you take the concerns of your user base.

Dave

 

[HyperZboy]

The type of site that benefits from Flash and can't be recreated in JS:

http://vidal.jp/360snap/

I don't really have a horse in this race nor am I an expert, but YOU just said a mouthful in that link.

I just gave up watching it laboriously and slowly load even on a DSL connection!

I think you just proved the points of all the ANTI-FLASH people for why it's so bad for us all.

Thank you. Next...

Oops, i see everyone beat me to the humor in that site.


PS: I'll admit I've seen quite a few clothing, sneaker, surfing, skateboarding sites that benefit from Flash for the KEWLNESS factor, but even some of those can be annoying after a while.

 

[portent]

The type of site that benefits from Flash and can't be recreated in JS:

http://vidal.jp/360snap/

There is no need to create macrumors.com in flash, it's an information heavy, news site. But for building unique online experiences that aren't just about pictures + text, you need Flash.

This is exactly why Flash needs to die.

Here's a hint: Most people don't want "unique experiences." Your website is not that important. Nine times out of ten, visitors want to get in, do what they need to do, and get out. Not spend five minutes staring at the "Loading...18%" screen. Not spend five more minutes figuring out which of your cool doodads can be clicked, which ones can be dragged, and which ones can be hovered over. Not spend another five minutes waiting for the page to load again because they couldn't figure out how to go back to the home screen and gave up and just clicked the Reload button.

 

[Niiro13]

Now all Apple needs is to improve Javascript rendering...

 

[hobbbz]

This is exactly why Flash needs to die.

Here's a hint: Most people don't want "unique experiences." Your website is not that important. Nine times out of ten, visitors want to get in, do what they need to do, and get out. Not spend five minutes staring at the "Loading...18%" screen. Not spend five more minutes figuring out which of your cool doodads can be clicked, which ones can be dragged, and which ones can be hovered over. Not spend another five minutes waiting for the page to load again because they couldn't figure out how to go back to the home screen and gave up and just clicked the Reload button.

Would you not consider the Apple retail stores unique experiences when compared to say, Walmart?

Which type of experience would you rather have your customers have?

I am talking about creating emotional connections between brands and users here. This is not the type of thing the gas station needs to do to sell gas but it is the type of thing a high end photographer needs to do if they want to impart something greater than the rest.

Again, you're not going to want to create an emotional bond with stock quotes, but when giving your brand a voice, it's crucial.