40 replies to this topic 2 votes

[Boz]

Quote

Today, Mark Zuckerberg revealed that Facebook’s mobile strategy relied too much on HTML5, rather than native applications.
Not only was this a big mistake with mobile, but Zuckerberg says that its biggest mistake period was the focus on HTML5. This is the first time that the Facebook CEO has openly admitted this, but things are looking good for the new iOS native app. According to Zuckerberg, people are consuming twice as many feed stories since the update to the new iOS app, which is great.

http://techcrunch.co...-much-on-html5/

Just another proof that HTML5 is TERRIBLE.

[sanctified]

No, this is just proof that HTLM5 is a terrible sustitute for native apps. It's the only thing that this proves.

[LogicalApex]

HTML 5 is being charged with delivering far too much. There is a strong attempt to reach the Software as a Service future and HTML 5 is being pushed hard as the road to get us there. There will always be a need for native apps and web apps... By allowing the two to co-exist and do what its best for them both we end up better off. No need to squish it all into one pot.

[+Vice]

Well since HTML5 web-apps added to the home screen of iPhones and Android devices cannot send notifications to peoples devices or have badges placed on their icons on the home screen errr duh?

You can't have a social platform without proper notifications. It would be like having skype that never told you when you had an incoming phone call.

[.Neo]

Boz, on 11 September 2012 - 22:59, said:

Just another proof that HTML5 is TERRIBLE.

Boz, you should start working for the Ministry of Public "Enlightenment" and Propaganda of a dictatorial regime somewhere. You'll definitely be a great asset.

[Growled]

Everyone knows that HTML5 is not a finished standard yet. Yeah, I'd say they made a huge mistake relying on it.

[.Neo]

Growled, on 11 September 2012 - 23:56, said:

Everyone knows that HTML5 is not a finished standard yet. Yeah, I'd say they made a huge mistake relying on it.

It's fine to rely on HTML5, just not to the degree where you completely replace native apps by the technology. Facebook thought they had found an easy way to build cross-platform apps. They were simply being cheap and lazy, something their mobile products clearly demonstrated.

[Boz]

.Neo, on 12 September 2012 - 00:00, said:

It's fine to rely on HTML5, just not to the degree where you completely replace native apps by the technology.

It's not fine to rely on HTML5 because:

A) It barely works on maybe 50% of the browsers
B) It doesn't even work properly on mobile through a browser (fragmentation is even worse with feature sets) and on mobile it's even worse.
C) It's slow and any interactivity is a DOG on CPU and on mobile again tons of features don't even work right. Differences between iOS and Android implementation to start.
D) It doesn't have access to native APIs but only those who are supported by the browser and even then the supported APIs differ from one browser/platform to another.
E) It's not even finalized and now W3C and WHATWG have split the spec in two versions making even more problems with compatibility
F) It's just SLOW as hell. It can't even compare to anything native and even Flash. It's just slightly modernized HTML platform (not finished with specs I might add because they can't agree on many things) that is still relying on 15 year old scripting language that hasn't evolved at all and the foundation of the issues with HTML haven't been solved. They just tried to build upon an already broken model that is dependent on browser support for features.
G) Google, Mozilla and Microsoft are all trying to create their own HTML5+ specs that they think benefits their platforms. It's basically a clusterf***

The only thing HTML5, and actually HTML by default has, which is nothing new, is usability over the content shown as it is easily searchable due to it's semantic nature but even that is not really HTML5 thing.. This was a fact even before HTML5.

[tiagosilva29]

.Neo said:

Facebook thought they had found an easy way to build cross-platform apps.

They should have use Java.

[.Neo]

Boz, on 12 September 2012 - 00:06, said:

It's not fine to rely on HTML5 because:

It's fine for simple things. Per example I never experienced any problems with HTML5 videos in Safari. As I said before just not for advanced applications like basing entire apps around it. That's just plain stupid and obviously you're going to run into the problems Facebook was facing.

[thomastmc]

Boz, on 11 September 2012 - 22:59, said:

Just another proof that HTML5 is TERRIBLE.

.Neo, on 12 September 2012 - 00:51, said:

It's fine for simple things. Per example I never experienced any problems with HTML5 videos in Safari. As I said before just not for advanced applications like basing entire apps around it. That's just plain stupid and obviously you're going to run into the problems Facebook was facing.

Adobe is focusing heavily on HTML5 for mobile platforms, even ditching their own Flash product for it.
http://blogs.adobe.c...lash-focus.html

Windows Modern UI, Windows RT, and Windows Phone 8 native apps are developed with HTML5. Microsoft even went as far as to bake JavaScript into their new runtime, WinRT, so that HTML5 applications would perform as well as C++ and C# applications.

The problem was that they didn't have a native app, period. It was a grand miscalculation to assume that people didn't want notifications from their social network, or direct access to the camera or sensors.

[Deranged]

tiagosilva29, on 12 September 2012 - 00:08, said:

They should have use Java.

At which point I would never use Facebook again. I doubt I'm the only one.

[CentralDogma]

Does the Facebook mobile client even need HTML5? Seems like all they would need is plain old HTML and some Javascript.

[Boz]

thomastmc, on 12 September 2012 - 01:19, said:

Adobe is focusing heavily on HTML5 for mobile platforms, even ditching their own Flash product for it.
http://blogs.adobe.c...lash-focus.html

Considering I'm also an Adobe partner I can tell you with absolute confidence that Adobe is not ditching Flash at all.. quite the contrary.. the new versions of Flash are going to be pretty amazing. Especially when we get to Flash Next. Even now, Flash 11.4 has multithreading//concurrency in code and full support for StageVideo and Stage3D fully GPU accelerated APIs.

Adobe AIR is taking a very good spot in creating fully GPU accelerated native app experiences with, you guessed it, Flash/AS (actually AIR but it's pretty much the same thing). Even Adobe's own apps like Photoshop and other stuff for mobile are made with Flash/AS3/AIR basically..

Only in the eyes of those who are narrowminded it's a HTML5 vs Flash thing. It was never like that and it won't be.. Flash is built on top of HTML. It's an addition to HTML/JS/CSS, it's not a versus thing.

Adobe is trying to find their own place and push HTML5 to the level of Flash and that's normal. They have always done that. It's not like Adobe overnight decided to just support HTML5. Dreamweaver, Fireworks and many other things produced before supported were helping people build HTML/JS/CSS experiences. They have just invested more trying to make some tools that par Flash ones for those who want to create animations and similar stuff with HTML. It's natural for a creative company like them.

Flash is actually getting used more and more again because people have built stuff in HTML5 and when they need to maintain it, build to support various browsers it costs clients 3 times more money to do it in HTML5. So they are going back to Flash for many things. I know this because I have spent a lot of time building stuff in Flash a while back and I have a lot of people in my profession getting more and more Flash work again. So I can see the reactions. Not only that, but Adobe has been forced by companies to re-publish Flash for Android in UK because companies are starting to complain now.

Both HTML and Flash have their place and that won't change. Actually if you add games to the equation you will see that a lot of people are making some pretty amazing games now in Flash too because HTML5 is just not up to par in providing a fluid and smooth experience like Flash does not to mention getting into the whole audio/video support fiasco.

[thomastmc]

Boz, on 12 September 2012 - 01:42, said:

Considering I'm also an Adobe partner I can tell you with absolute confidence that Adobe is not ditching Flash at all.. quite the contrary.. the new versions of Flash are going to be pretty amazing. Especially when we get to Flash Next.

Both HTML and Flash have their place and that won't change. Actually if you add games to the equation you will see that a lot of people are making some pretty amazing games now in Flash too because HTML5 is just not up to par in providing a fluid and smooth experience like Flash does.

Adobe seems to disagree with you on it's public statements to businesses and developers relating to the future of Flash.

Adobe said:

... This makes HTML5 the best solution for creating and deploying content in the browser across mobile platforms. We are excited about this, and will continue our work with key players in the HTML community, including Google, Apple, Microsoft and RIM, to drive HTML5 innovation they can use to advance their mobile browsers.

Adobe said:

We will no longer continue to develop Flash Player in the browser to work with new mobile device configurations (chipset, browser, OS version, etc.) following the upcoming release of Flash Player 11.1 for Android and BlackBerry PlayBook.

http://blogs.adobe.c...lash-focus.html

Adobe said:

Increasingly, rich motion graphics will be deployed directly via the browser using HTML5, CSS3, JavaScript and other modern web technologies. While the primary role of Flash Player as an engine for innovation on the web remains the same, what it is used for will change.
Adobe believes that the Flash runtimes are particularly and uniquely suited for two primary use cases: creating and deploying rich, expressive games with console-quality graphics and deploying premium video.

This shift in focus for Flash does not mean that existing content will no longer run, or that Flash cannot be used for content other than gaming and premium video. However, it does mean that when prioritizing future development and bug fixes, gaming and premium video use cases will take priority.

http://www.adobe.com...rs/roadmap.html

If HTML5 is so terrible, why have Google, Apple, Microsoft, and Adobe embraced it so fervently?