Apple Promotes HTML5, First iPhone Game Demo in HTML5, and More

[Arnia]

Try going full screen. The transition is choppy.

Ah, I don't full-screen things usually on my laptop. I find everything is choppy, including Flash

Except it doesn't work well in Chrome.

Another trade-off; there are benefits and disadvantages to multiple implementations. I think a lot of these arguments basically come down to which particular properties you give greater weight to. Really, it varies between projects and I wouldn't commit to any single option at any point (I'm proficient in Java, Scala, Javascript, Python, Ruby, Objective-C, C, C#, C++, Nemerle, F-Script, Prolog and even Haskell and I often mix and match languages so I have a rather broad approach to development, which should also give context to my other opinions below).

I'm actually talking about replacing Flash for certain funtionality. As long as we can't service a large percentage of customers and there is no advantage in HTML5 I just don't see the point. You've mentioned some advantages but I'd much rather maintain the code in one version instead of two built with different technologies. The notion of "degrading" to flash is a bit strange.

In a practical project, what would you use Flash for? Most of the uses I've had for Flash involve either video or visualisation. The former is handled by third-party components that eliminate the burden of dual implementation, and the latter I can do cross-browser using Protovis and SVGWeb with a nicer syntax for describing the visualisations than Flare (say) provided.

Yes. Having several languages compiled to native code seems to work on other platforms.

That they do, although not always in a straightforward fashion. There are often large differences between runtime models between languages, and APIs tend to be designed for a single runtime. Even the Common Language Infrastructure, which is a phenomenal piece of work theoretically, simply acts as a really generic model flexible enough to support OO, procedural and functional language semantics efficiently. The mismatches do still show up, requiring CLR-using languages to shift idioms. The 'nicest' attempts at such things often consist of much thicker abstraction layers such as SWI-Prolog's XPCE (constraint-based UI, using X Windows for the low-level drawing but really a separate API), LogTalk (which implements something akin to Smalltalk's message-passing based OO on Prolog systems) and Haskell's myriad UI abstractions.

So, whilst I would love to see a truly language agnostic API, I do not think it is possible. The closest attempt is the Common Language Infrastructure, and even that falls short (in spite of huge amounts of investment involving some of the greatest programming language theorists alive today).

There is nothing absolutlist about Apple intentionally screwing companies over that have invested a lot of time and money supporting iPhone OS. That is simple fact. As for the reason, we can only speculate, but I find it amazing that you are unwilling the critisize Apple because "they might have a good reason" or "the world is more complicated that you think". I don't think that "Jobs works in mysterious ways" and he is outside the concepts of human reasoning about good and evil

There is something absolutist about painting it so black and white, and presuming that Apple have intentionally hurt other companies. It is one thing for a third-party company to be caught in the middle of a decision, but to paint the decision as being for that purpose is going too far in my opinion.

I'm unwilling to criticise anyone for things which are speculated about. I am willing to say that I wish they did X instead of Y, but I wouldn't presume that I knew enough about their business to not give the impression that I was an idiot to them (which, if you're trying to convince them even indirectly through a forum they probably keep track of, seems like shooting yourself in the foot). I appreciate there is a fine line between criticism and desire, but I think it is an important line to keep in mind in convincing them of your points. It is too easy to resort to emotive arguments (like blithe comments that such-and-such is 'evil') which simply harden divisions, rather than try and bridge them by finding common understanding and convince them that your position has merit.

Well, the people I'm talking about never return to explain themselves even it you ask them nicely.

I think that's irrelevant. We're better, as people, than that.

 

[jimmyjoemccrow]

Eh? Care to provide a source?

Do I need a source? Mozilla get money from Google for the same thing, I doubt Apple would turn down that extra revenue.

 

[KnightWRX]

I started using Linux '94 (redhat briefly (4.x if i remember correctly) then slackware) and i do remember enlightenment, it was at .12 or .13 and a pure hell to compile (no packages avaliable). I used (or tried to) KDE before it hit 1.0.

Did i pass your dick measurement test or should i submit a blood/**** sample somewhere?

No, since Enlightenment never was a pure hell to compile. So you kinda failed the test.

And your comments on Konqueror show me more than anything that you didn't use seriously. It was my only browser from my days using KDE 1.x up to KDE 3.x. It was compatible, if you knew which useragents to spoof for which sites to get the right CSS sent to you.

Hence why I say going back to useragent spoofing is retarded. We said back in the days "code to standards and no one will need useragent spoofing"

 

[Arnia]

I know the history of Canvas, but thanks for pointing it out for others that might not have known. Firefox has supported it since version 1.5, another thing people might not be aware of. HTML5 isn't some kind of new 2010 thing.

The problem with what Apple did here is that they tout HTML5 as an open standard not locked to single a vendor and then go and pull a stunt like this. If some of the demos had required Safari specifically, they could've just locked those demos with a clear message of "Safari is currently the only browser to support viewing this demo, download it here and here..." and the demos that were more general could've been available to all webkit or all HTML5 supporting browsers.

That would've been putting your money where your mouth is. Promoting HTML5 as an open standard. This is my only issue with their demos.

Oh, I wasn't attacking you with that. I just felt that the way you were phrasing it could be misleading for some. I think it is important to realise that Apple has been pushing for improved rendering capabilities for some time, so this isn't exactly a bolt from the blue, and as I said I would definitely have preferred them to make these examples more broadly viewable. I just won't criticise from ignorance about their internal decision making which could very well make this the 'best' choice for them (which is why I'm keen for insights from others about the sorts of pressures on this decision so I can eventually go 'this was reasonable' or 'this was unreasonable'). I'll keep an open-mind until then, and try to keep all possibilities under consideration until they are ruled out.

 

[Gepper]

No, since Enlightenment never was a pure hell to compile. So you kinda failed the test.

And your comments on Konqueror show me more than anything that you didn't use seriously. It was my only browser from my days using KDE 1.x up to KDE 3.x. It was compatible, if you knew which useragents to spoof for which sites to get the right CSS sent to you.

Hence why I say going back to useragent spoofing is retarded. We said back in the days "code to standards and no one will need useragent spoofing"

Yes it was pure hell, and Rasterman and Mandrake admitted so much them self when i talked to them. It was very dependent on which system you used.

My banks and Postgirot (postal office) didn't work with konqueror, neither did a few news sites. It also had alot of rendering problems. If konqeror was so complete, how come the KDE devs complained to Apple regarding the changes they made? It wouldn't matter since they added nothing important, right?

 

[macsmurf]

Ah, I don't full-screen things usually on my laptop. I find everything is choppy, including Flash

I find that the HTML5 version of the video player in question works fine on Safari, and Flash works fine in both browsers. I am using the newest Flash beta.

Another trade-off; there are benefits and disadvantages to multiple implementations. I think a lot of these arguments basically come down to which particular properties you give greater weight to. Really, it varies between projects and I wouldn't commit to any single option at any point (I'm proficient in Java, Scala, Javascript, Python, Ruby, Objective-C, C, C#, C++, Nemerle, F-Script, Prolog and even Haskell and I often mix and match languages so I have a rather broad approach to development, which should also give context to my other opinions below).

Or basic disagreement is whether HTML5 is ready or not. I consider your approach bleeding edge and I wouldn't (and couldn't) discourage you. Of course, on the bleeding edge, you bleed. For example GWT 2.x is a much nicer product than GWT 1.x but I decided not to use 1.x for a variety of reasons. Other people did.

Once Google started to use it themselves, things began to happen. The deferred binding idea means that I have a much nicer way of handling browser quirks if I even have to.

In a practical project, what would you use Flash for? Most of the uses I've had for Flash involve either video or visualisation. The former is handled by third-party components that eliminate the burden of dual implementation, and the latter I can do cross-browser using Protovis and SVGWeb with a nicer syntax for describing the visualisations than Flare (say) provided.

I agree that if you use third party implementations you're good (if they are sufficient) but I was talking about doing the stuff directly. I've actually made a proof of concept for a specific application in Flex having nothing to do with video but I would probably use GWT today. The main reason I didn't use GWT at the time was the prehistoric way you'd have to build the GUI (in code). Today, GWT supports a declarative language instead.

That they do, although not always in a straightforward fashion. There are often large differences between runtime models between languages, and APIs tend to be designed for a single runtime. Even the Common Language Infrastructure, which is a phenomenal piece of work theoretically, simply acts as a really generic model flexible enough to support OO, procedural and functional language semantics efficiently. The mismatches do still show up, requiring CLR-using languages to shift idioms. The 'nicest' attempts at such things often consist of much thicker abstraction layers such as SWI-Prolog's XPCE (constraint-based UI, using X Windows for the low-level drawing but really a separate API), LogTalk (which implements something akin to Smalltalk's message-passing based OO on Prolog systems) and Haskell's myriad UI abstractions.

Yes, but then we are taking about a generic way of solving the problem. Flash is one thing but both Unity and MonoTouch have been more than acommodating when it comes to implementing new features. AFAIK, both support the iPhone 4.0 OS Beta and have been for a while.

There is something absolutist about painting it so black and white, and presuming that Apple have intentionally hurt other companies. It is one thing for a third-party company to be caught in the middle of a decision, but to paint the decision as being for that purpose is going too far in my opinion.

I don't think I have any other option. It's reasonable to think of it as collateral damage but that doesn't excuse Apple from not informing the companies of their decision. If they want to exclude these approaches, that's fine by me, although I believe it to be a mistake in the long run, but at least come clean about it. When they don't, after numerous inquiries, I can only conclude it to be intentional.

I'm unwilling to criticise anyone for things which are speculated about. I am willing to say that I wish they did X instead of Y, but I wouldn't presume that I knew enough about their business to not give the impression that I was an idiot to them (which, if you're trying to convince them even indirectly through a forum they probably keep track of, seems like shooting yourself in the foot). I appreciate there is a fine line between criticism and desire, but I think it is an important line to keep in mind in convincing them of your points. It is too easy to resort to emotive arguments (like blithe comments that such-and-such is 'evil') which simply harden divisions, rather than try and bridge them by finding common understanding and convince them that your position has merit.

I have no illusions of convincing Apple of anything at all in any way.

So in conclusion, I think it is great that some people are starting to use HTML5 but I'm gonna wait a while.

 

[KnightWRX]

Yes it was pure hell, and Rasterman and Mandrake admitted so much them self when i talked to them. It was very dependent on which system you used.

Sure, on SunOS 5.6 or SunOS 5.7 maybe. On Linux ? Few dependencies and mostly just a make fest. Now if you said Gnome even at version 1.x with it's millions upon millions of dependencies...

And even then, unless you had to modify code to compile it (I had to add a Linux system macro recently to a Solaris header shipped by Sun so that I could compile Freeradius on Solaris 9), I would never define compilation as pure hell. Even packages that required subtle adjustments to Makefile.in and rerunning automake weren't so bad.

I never encountered a site that didn't work in Konqueror, even my bank and ecommerce sites I used back in the days. Sure, a few rendering glitches, but then again, I would get those in Mozilla too or even Netscape 4.x.

 

[Max(IT)]

oh please. HTML5 is as big a mess as HTML4 and the same as HTML10. A web browser without Flash is seriously flawed!

do you really believe in what you wrote ? Or are you just paid by Adobe ?!?

Seriously I can't understand people defending Flash in this forum ...

Snarky comments...really intelligent on your part. I've seen the demos way before it was posted here, btw.

Flash doesn't "suck." That's childish.

I've developed on flash before. ActionScript is not the greatest, but it is what it is.

The future is in the mobile devices, but flash should not be discounted because Apple says so. Get off the bandwagon.

I like HTML5, but there is no way it can compete with Flash right now. Flash has too much history and is capable of more than any web platforms.

It's funny how the people who hate Flash because it's "not open" or "too slow." Are those the only reasons?

Ask any real web developer. They will never agree. If you're going to do simple websites, HTML5 is fine. Anything advanced, you need to use Flash.

Flash is a resource hog. This is A FACT.
I don't care if it is close or open.
It is dangerous and this is enough for me to hate it.

 

[Max(IT)]

I tried these on my iPod Touch and performance is very laggy! It's cool on my Mac but it still makes my fans run very fast, the same way Flash does. It seems there's no CPU effective way of doing animations like this...

Oh and could anyone point me to an HTML5 authoring tool?? Please?? We can't be coding games and websites in freaking TextEdit!! This is not the command-line era where you type everything and hope it visually turns out in the way you wanted it when you compile it.

What kind of Mac do you have ??
On my MBP the Tron video takes about 6-9% cpu load, with temperature below 49°C.
THE SAME video on YouTube, with HW ACCELERATED GAIA 2 PREVIEW, takes about 35-41% cpu load with temperature above 66° C !!!!

We are speaking about a HUGE difference.

This is just another confirmation: Flash is CRAPWARE.
HTML5 could be not ready yet, but everyone should wait for it and get rid of Flash.

 

[Max(IT)]

Just ran the movie trailer example on my MBP and it set off the fans in the same way Hulu does. This is the future?

try to be honest, dude ...

On my MBP, and it's not the last model, the video is taking not more than 10% cpu load, while on YouTube the same video is taking 40% cpu load. And with hardware acceleration ....

Do you REALLY have a MBP ???

 

[twoodcc]

glad to see apple showing more instead of just talking

 

[Max(IT)]

It is a slick video and great example of HTML5, but that video runs jittery on a high end dual processor PowerMac G5.

So how the hell will it run slick on an iPhone or iPad or even the original round of low end INTEL Macs (which of course were slower than the high end G5 at the time)? LOL

I don't know about a G5, but that video is smooth on my MBP, with cpu usage in the 10-13% range ....

 

[marksman]

Eh? Care to provide a source?

Don't need a source, that is how google works. Apple gets a percentage of all ad revenue for Google search used on their products. Same way Firefox raises million and millions of dollars a year.

 

[madmax_2069]

Crystal Galaxy is probably the most fun. It's been out for a while. It's quite addicting.

http://www.effectgames.com/effect/games/crystalgalaxy/

holy crap dude now i cant stop playing it. see what you gone and done

It does tend to get a bit slow with allot of objects on the screen, but its still a fun and addicting game

 

[dicklacara]

Way off topic... maybe so, maybe no...

.

Here is an article worth reading and watching!

It adds a new perspective to the Flash vs HTML5 skirmish.

Here's a little tease, emphasis mine (with the full link below);

Very early into Mr. Underkoffler's presentation he uses the Mac OS as the core of his initial point, as follows: The early Macintosh team in '82, '83 …'84 had to write an entire new operating system from the ground up. Now this is an interesting little message and it's a lesson that I think has since been forgotten or lost or something – and that is namely … that the OS is the interface. The interface is the OS. It's like the land and king in Arthur, they're inseparable, they're one. And to write a new operating system wasn't a capricious matter. It wasn't a matter of tuning up some graphics routine - there were no graphic routines. There were no mouse drivers."

http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2010/06/the-next-os-revolution-countdown-begins.html#more

.

 

[MorphingDragon]

Eh? Care to provide a source?

They do the same with Firefox too.

 

[MorphingDragon]

Uh ? how does Realplayer do animations and Games with vector graphics and sound ? Realplayer is simply a movie player.

At the Time of Flash's inception, RealPlayer and Quicktime had an identical feature set.

 

[jaykk]

Eh? Care to provide a source?

Google Paying Apple More Than $100 Million Annually For iPhone Search Deal

Google pays Firefox $66m

 

[macintoshtoffy]

Google Paying Apple More Than $100 Million Annually For iPhone Search Deal

Google pays Firefox $66m

So pretty much the money they get from searches pretty much pays for almost all the development of Safari and a good part of iPhone OS and Mac OS X

If there is a move to Bing, I wonder whether it is a matter of more money or has Microsoft promised something in return by way of middleware/software support for Mac OS X.

 

[puffnstuff]

I'm assuming because it is Safari only it's running CSS3 animation meaning webkit based browsers only. In that case I wonder if CSS3 animation will ever be available for firefox and chrome?


I applaud the effort that Apple, Mozilla and Google is putting into HTML5 but from my stand point the real set back is Javascript. Especially for games in order for this to be on par with what you can do with flash Javascript needs improvement.

 

[HyperZboy]

I don't know about a G5, but that video is smooth on my MBP, with cpu usage in the 10-13% range ....

I'm trying to figure out your point.

From your signature it looks like everything you own has been purchased within the LAST YEAR and a HALF! LOL

Do you really think everyone is like that?

Most Apple users keep products for 3-5 years! LOL

And ESPECIALLY in THIS ECONOMY they are!

 

[HyperZboy]

I'm assuming because it is Safari only it's running CSS3 animation meaning webkit based browsers only. In that case I wonder if CSS3 animation will ever be available for firefox and chrome?


I applaud the effort that Apple, Mozilla and Google is putting into HTML5 but from my stand point the real set back is Javascript. Especially for games in order for this to be on par with what you can do with flash Javascript needs improvement.

Oh God thank you. I was waiting for someone to confirm this since I always knew it was true.

IT'S NOT ALWAYS FLASH THAT CRASHES SAFARI!​

 

[Gepper]

Google Paying Apple More Than $100 Million Annually For iPhone Search Deal

Google pays Firefox $66m

First of all thats just a rumor, from the same guys who said bing was becoming default on iphone (which according to Steve it's not)
Second, even if it is true it's possible that google is simply paying them a flat fee no matter how many is using the browser.
And third, thats not a lot of money to justify all the trouble of marketing Safari.

It's a weak argument no matter how you put it.

 

[KnightWRX]

You also had the GCC fragmentation but i guess i'm making this up as well?
Libc also had some major doings around the time which varied a lot between distros.

I'm not trolling and I remember the glibc/libc5 gcc/egcs mess.

Your definition of pure hell is my definition of a fun night.

BTW, you call me a troll for knowing how to figure stuff out instead of crying to the devs about it, and yet you go claiming "Apple didn't piss off anyone at KDE and didn't cause problems for them". Yeah, really, stick a fork in yourself, you're done rewriting history.

At the Time of Flash's inception, RealPlayer and Quicktime had an identical feature set.

You're saying when Flash was created, I could code up games and animations with vector graphics into RealPlayer and Quicktime ?

What are you smoking ? When Flash was created, Shockwave (by the same vendor) had an almost identical feature set. RealPlayer was a movie player. End of story. Flash didn't even play movies back then.

BTW, Adobe didn't create Flash in 2005 if that is what you're thinking. Look back a few years before.

Do you even know what it is you're talking about ? Then I'm going to get trolled because I remember stuff and not make it up on the spot.

 

[Gepper]

I'm not trolling and I remember the glibc/libc5 gcc/egcs mess.

Your definition of pure hell is my definition of a fun night.

BTW, you call me a troll for knowing how to figure stuff out instead of crying to the devs about it, and yet you go claiming "Apple didn't piss off anyone at KDE and didn't cause problems for them". Yeah, really, stick a fork in yourself, you're done rewriting history.

What are you gonna tell me next? That starvation in the world is not a problem because you think it's fun starving?

If the goal is to create buggy software why keep improving them at all? I mean you're telling me that things are fine as is? And speaking of which, this whole deal about the demos not working in other browsers should be *perfect* for you since you like to mess with stuff, right?