Apple's Gianduia framework to rival Flash and Silverlight?

Apple is reported to be developing their own native and standards based web framework to compete with Adobe Flash Player and Microsoft Silverlight. Named “Gianduia”, the client-side javascript framework would enable developers to create rich, desktop class web apps without the need for additional browser plugins.

AppleInsider states that Gianduia was initially introduced at last year’s World of WebObjects Developer Conference alongside WWDC and that Apple plans to reveal more information about it to developers later this summer.

Named after the Italian hazelnut chocolate, Gianduia promises to be plugin-free as it’s basically “browser-side Cocoa (including CoreData) + WebObjects, written in JavaScript”—as described by developer Jonathan Rentzsch. Renztsch similarly claimed that he was "Blown away by Gianduia” and that "Cappuccino, SproutCore and JavascriptMVC have serious competition.”

What effect the new framework would have on Flash or Silverlight remains to be seen as browsers have had the ability to run interactive web apps since 2005 and numerous client-side javascript frameworks have been available for some time. 

Apple has already started implementing such frameworks into their own internet applications: SproutCore is used by the MobileMe team, TuneKit is used by iTunes, Gianduia is used by Apple Retail, Coherent is used by Dashcode 3, PastryKit is used by the iPhone, and AdLib is used by the iPad.

In addition to rich online applications, various advancements in HTML5 have ignited the thought of it replacing Flash’s other main stronghold: games. Several demos using HTML5’s Canvas, 3D transformations, and animations have shown what modern browsers are capable of today. Check them out below with a WebKit-based browser such as Chrome or Safari:

Images courtesy of AppleInsider

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Most internet pirates say they would pay for content

Next Story

Borders' Kobo e-reader launches June 17th for $149

160 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

flash is used on 30-40 percent of websites online.. that is a lot of websites they are deciding not to support.. moonfruit.com for example hosts thousands of flash based websites.. wix.com is another.. there is lots and lots, even applications of facebook use it.. anyone want to buy an iphone? think im gona upgrade to the htc desire

yeh well no wonder why apple decided not to release flash on the iphone and ipad.. tell you what, i used to like apple.. now im really starting to dislike them - they are power crazy and greedy.. worse than MS!! bloody frustrating

All the fanboyism aside as well as your love/hate for Apple...

This is typical of any company really but it may bite Apple in the ass. Denying competition on your products so you can push your own. Microsoft is doing the same thing with Silverlight tho they dont deny Flash from being used in Window but may in Windows mobile 7.

Apple's Standard is not a proper standard but a proprietary specification.
And, Apple's specification based in a open standard is not standard, neither it is open.

I think, i will stay with jQuery for a while.

The only part to read is this really:

'Apple is reported to be developing their own native and standards based web framework to compete with Adobe Flash Player and Microsoft Silverlight.'

Yes we get it. It's based on open standards. here's the thing. We do not care. Congratulations, they have written something based on open standards.

The argument here is not whether apple's system will be open or not, the part we dislike is :

'to compete with Adobe Flash Player and Microsoft Silverlight'

Apple first bans flash from it's iPhone/iPad and then releases a letter from Steve 'Hand of God' Jobs himself about how bad flash it.. but wait. Look, we've found the solution! and it's ours.

Please people. Stop saying read the article. We have read the article a few times, and it still smells of ****.

Oh and all of you jumping on Richard, you shouldnt be. Let me break this down as simple as possible.

1. Apple tells you flash is evil and that they wont support it.
2. Apple tells you HTML5 is the future
3. Apple suddenly comes out with a solution to its flash problem.
4. Apple has your balls in a vice grip, and has put Jedi mind tricks in play.

Use your brain, step back from the situation, and look at what Apple just did. They told you to hate flash, to promote their own Web Kit... Captain Obvious to the rescue.

pjw said,
Oh and all of you jumping on Richard, you shouldnt be. Let me break this down as simple as possible.

1. Apple tells you flash is evil and that they wont support it.
2. Apple tells you HTML5 is the future
3. Apple suddenly comes out with a solution to its flash problem.
4. Apple has your balls in a vice grip, and has put Jedi mind tricks in play.

Use your brain, step back from the situation, and look at what Apple just did. They told you to hate flash, to promote their own Web Kit... Captain Obvious to the rescue.


Captain Obvious says, read the article.

Their soloution is a framework wth open standards (HTML and Javascript).

Edited by virtorio, May 9 2010, 9:24pm :

virtorio said,

Captain Obvious says, read the article.

Their soloution is a framework wth open standards (HTML and Javascript).

They have always told the truth about what they are doing as well huh. Apple never lies or hides the real deal... good ole honest apple.

shakey said,
They have always told the truth about what they are doing as well huh. Apple never lies or hides the real deal... good ole honest apple.
This, folks, is a classic remark from a person who doesn't know what he's talking about.

This really is nothing more than a JavaScript MVC framework to compete with the likes of SproutCore and Cappuccino. Hell, it'll probably never see the light of day outside of Apple.

So let me get this straight.

+Apple created a framework that 'competes' with flash using javascript and webkit.
|- Said framework only works in webkit.
|- Framework apparently as not sent in to w3c for consideration.

But people say its just a javascript framework based on 'open standards' [as long as its webkit],and can be implemented in any standars complient browser [that uses webkit].

At what point should i not become suspicious? As one slashdot poster said 'If we reduce all the web layout/rendering engines to only webkit, it ceases to be html/javascript coding and becomes webkit coding'

I dont like html and javascript for personal reasons but i know they have thier merit, but when one company is is so single mindedly attempting to drive thier viison as what the people want, I become wary.

Einlander said,
So let me get this straight.

|- Said framework only works in webkit.

It is still in development.


|- Framework apparently as not sent in to w3c for consideration.

Why would it be? It will be based on w3c standards so there will be no need for the w3c to re-approve THEIR standards. That would be like the w3c approving PHP as a standard. Why would they? An end user does not consume PHP.

Or WordPress. Why would w3c approve WordPress? It is a type of framework that creates pages using web standards.

I don't think you understand the ins-and-outs of how the web works exactly. Like many of the posters here who just read the sensationalist title, and immediately jumped to the wrong conclusion. It would be so easy to see what is going on if you RTFA FFS.

HeLGeN-X said,
I'd rather say "Flash" than "Gianduia." What the **** is a Giuansida???

It's in the third paragraph of the article. Learn to read.

Good Good. Looks like Apple have really Embraced HTML5 and Javascript. Oh and extended it in a propriety Way (This starting to sound familiar?).

If this were Microsoft people would be all over this like a rash. Truth is Apple are bad mouthing the competition then creating a similar platform. The correct way to go around this would have been to propose the CSS specification wait for ratification from the CSS members and then move from there.

Zerosignull said,
Good Good. Looks like Apple have really Embraced HTML5 and Javascript. Oh and extended it in a propriety Way (This starting to sound familiar?).

If this were Microsoft people would be all over this like a rash. Truth is Apple are bad mouthing the competition then creating a similar platform. The correct way to go around this would have been to propose the CSS specification wait for ratification from the CSS members and then move from there.

Why when they are using something that is already has standards that are supported on all browsers? If they do what this article is saying, browsers won't even have to be updated to support it as even IE6 already has full support for it.

Zerosignull said,
Good Good. Looks like Apple have really Embraced HTML5 and Javascript. Oh and extended it in a propriety Way (This starting to sound familiar?).

If this were Microsoft people would be all over this like a rash. Truth is Apple are bad mouthing the competition then creating a similar platform. The correct way to go around this would have been to propose the CSS specification wait for ratification from the CSS members and then move from there.


This hasn't extended it in a proprietary way at all. Hell, it doesn't even "only work in WebKit". Those examples in the article have nothing to do with Gianduia. If you go to apple.com/retail and try and schedule an appointment, it'll work in any browser. That's Gianduia. It's not even remotely proprietary.

Elliott said,

This hasn't extended it in a proprietary way at all. Hell, it doesn't even "only work in WebKit". Those examples in the article have nothing to do with Gianduia. If you go to apple.com/retail and try and schedule an appointment, it'll work in any browser. That's Gianduia. It's not even remotely proprietary.

Apparently these anti-apple zealots don't understand whats going on enough to comprehend its not proprietary or closed in any way possible. Not sure how a js/css file could be closed? Could someone explain that because I have never come across a way to close a js/css file in a way that not everyone can use it.

SputnikGamer said,

Apparently these anti-apple zealots don't understand whats going on enough to comprehend its not proprietary or closed in any way possible. Not sure how a js/css file could be closed? Could someone explain that because I have never come across a way to close a js/css file in a way that not everyone can use it.

What's this blx about JS/CSS files being closed? Never said they are. However point in fact My c++/c#/vb/java files are not closed. Can open them in any operating system. Doesn't mean I will be able to compile and run them though.

Zerosignull said,
Good Good. Looks like Apple have really Embraced HTML5 and Javascript. Oh and extended it in a propriety Way (This starting to sound familiar?).

The only way it can be proprietary in any way is if its closed off so no one else can use it, which isnt possible with CSS or JS.

So essentially Apple blocks Flash however then releases there own version? the funny part is apple just needs to write 'standards complient' on it, and suddenly people are screaming Apple's praise.

In the end a framework built for Apple products only is essentially a waste of time. Nice try though

crashguy said,
So essentially Apple blocks Flash however then releases there own version? the funny part is apple just needs to write 'standards complient' on it, and suddenly people are screaming Apple's praise.

In the end a framework built for Apple products only is essentially a waste of time. Nice try though


JavaScript IS an open standard. Did you try read the article?
And JavaScript works on any browser, not just Apple products.

Edited by Lamp Post, May 9 2010, 9:39am :

Lamp Post said,

JavaScript IS an open standard. Did you try read the article?
And JavaScript works on any browser, not just Apple products.

Actually was hoping to read some hate from Apple fanboys to be honest

The fact is Apple is attempting to use 'open' code, to push both flash and silverlight from the animation market on the web. The refusal to allow flash onto the platform (and i doubt silverlight works either) is being backed up now by an animation platform conviniently developed by Apple.

This is a direct attack by Apple to grab market share away from Flash (as silverlight has no marketshare really).

Apple is using open standards to push themselves as the open source leaders to bring people to their platform. You guys will suck it up like a sponge. You cry that Apple is the white light to remove you from the evils of microsoft, but i'm sorry, Apple is just as closed as Microsoft ever was, is or ever will be.

If you don't believe me? try to put a non apple phone or media player and sync with iTunes.. ohh ****. Doesn't work.

crashguy said,

Actually was hoping to read some hate from Apple fanboys to be honest

The fact is Apple is attempting to use 'open' code, to push both flash and silverlight from the animation market on the web. The refusal to allow flash onto the platform (and i doubt silverlight works either) is being backed up now by an animation platform conviniently developed by Apple.

This is a direct attack by Apple to grab market share away from Flash (as silverlight has no marketshare really).

Apple is using open standards to push themselves as the open source leaders to bring people to their platform. You guys will suck it up like a sponge. You cry that Apple is the white light to remove you from the evils of microsoft, but i'm sorry, Apple is just as closed as Microsoft ever was, is or ever will be.

If you don't believe me? try to put a non apple phone or media player and sync with iTunes.. ohh ****. Doesn't work.

true, apple is fighting for marketshare. Welcome to free market economics 101. But what they are developing is something that will (hopefully) work just fine on any web browser that implements open standards without the need of a plugin. How is that evil? How is that anti- competitive? And lastly, why the hell would you WANT to sync your pmp with iTunes if you had any other choice? You are grasping at straws, mate.

crashguy said,

If you don't believe me? try to put a non apple phone or media player and sync with iTunes.. ohh ****. Doesn't work.

Wow. You sir, have given the most retarded example I have ever read on Neowin. You basically are calling Nvidia a closed system because their video card drivers dont make your ATI card work. NO **** iTunes doesn't work with a Zune, that's why the Zune comes with its own software. You argument is calling Microsoft a closed and evil company also because WMP doesn't work properly with an iPod. You are dumb.

Edited by SputnikGamer, May 10 2010, 3:38pm :

I know this isn't really discussing the topic at hand, but I can't believe how many idiots there are on Neowin.

BoondockSaint said,
Of course one thing most people seem to be missing is that it only works on webkit based browsers - Safari and Chrome.

They're Javascript frameworks - thus they work on any browser. How about reading the damn article before firing off a reply.

Apple is heading down a loneyly road and seems to think that their iPhone and iPad dominace is enough to dictate the future of standards.


Microsoft made this mistake with IE in the 90s, they also made the mistake of bringing in non-secure web standards to the desktop.


This made IE outside the standards as Microsoft assumed their methods would be adopted and it also made the Win9X and XP OSes horribly insecure with the web scripting access model to the desktop.

thenetavenger said,
Apple is heading down a loneyly road and seems to think that their iPhone and iPad dominace is enough to dictate the future of standards.


Microsoft made this mistake with IE in the 90s, they also made the mistake of bringing in non-secure web standards to the desktop.


This made IE outside the standards as Microsoft assumed their methods would be adopted and it also made the Win9X and XP OSes horribly insecure with the web scripting access model to the desktop.

However, by doing so they brought us what is known as Ajax today. The XMLHttpRequest which the exchange team created for web access. Later when competing browsers jumped in the re-implemented this functionality too thus giving us todays Ajax.

Still annoys me that MS essentially created AJAX and then dropped the ball on it

Apples tactics about this whole thing reek of shady lies. I'd like to see where this all goes. But anyone who is for a company that forcibly blocks its customers from accesses things, well, they do lack some sort of sense.......

shakey said,
Apples tactics about this whole thing reek of shady lies. I'd like to see where this all goes. But anyone who is for a company that forcibly blocks its customers from accesses things, well, they do lack some sort of sense.......

ITS A JAVASCRIPT FRAMEWORK

evo_spook said,

ITS A JAVASCRIPT FRAMEWORK

ahh, my last reply got removed....

Well, in response again to the guy who likes to yell....

I never said it wasn't, put down your pitchfork and torch and stop trying to defend something so much, that you even yell things that had nothing to do with what I said...

admins seeming to be a little on the apple side, removing replies against those apply defenders, but keeping the apple defenders replies still in, even with they are trolling... as sam jackson said in the spirit, this is very damn strange. lol

Borix said,
Seems like the apple Internet team is busy on this thread...

Nope, more like people who actually read an article before going off in a totally wrong direction.

MountainSnake said,
What is this paranoia about Apple, Neowin? Looong time visitor, but I think I've had enough....

It really isn't the fault of the Neowin staff. Not to get defensive or anything. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I'm glad Neowin isn't an over-moderated forum. I do wish that the ignore feature from the forums works in the news comments section. Some people are just full of it, and I'm tired of reading the same hate filled non-productive comments over-and-over-and-over again.

I think I was not clear enough, I meant paranoia/obsession with a brand from a website that grew very big mainly because of Windows and Microsoft. This is not an Apple site, at least it was not in the past.

MountainSnake said,
I think I was not clear enough, I meant paranoia/obsession with a brand from a website that grew very big mainly because of Windows and Microsoft. This is not an Apple site, at least it was not in the past.

I agree.

MountainSnake said,
I think I was not clear enough, I meant paranoia/obsession with a brand from a website that grew very big mainly because of Windows and Microsoft. This is not an Apple site, at least it was not in the past.

Apple news has always been posted here. I've been a member and active viewer since 2001. Apple news just use to be in its own section. Its really a no-brainer that more people will be interested in MS related news, because it is vastly more popular. Maybe it was better when Apple news was posted in its own section.

Anyway, good news! You can customize the news you see on the main page to NOT see Apple news. Maybe you should try that instead of complaining.

Shadrack said,

It really isn't the fault of the Neowin staff. Not to get defensive or anything. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I'm glad Neowin isn't an over-moderated forum. I do wish that the ignore feature from the forums works in the news comments section. Some people are just full of it, and I'm tired of reading the same hate filled non-productive comments over-and-over-and-over again.

Hopefully we can do something like this in the immediate future. Example might be something similar to comment ranking on other sites, so we can hide the crappy (read: crappy but does not break rules) comments by default.

Edited by Denis W., May 8 2010, 7:40pm :

rm20010 said,

Hopefully we can do something like this in the immediate future. Example might be something similar to comment ranking on other sites, so we can hide the crappy (read: crappy but does not break rules) comments by default.

That all sounds great, but honestly I just want the ignore to work in these comments. Some people I've already dismissed as being so different from my opinion that trying to engage in conversation with them just creates a lot of toxic waste that goes no where. Yet I still have a problem when they spew such blatant ignorance.

Some people who are on the other side of what I believe make good points and are able to construct their arguments in a reasonable way. I'm perfectly fine with them and I want to read what they write and not all the toxic "hate" spam.

If its just a wrapping for some open standards code then I see more "framewors" will be released by people that they found usefull in their work and would like to share (think of the "FREE .Net Controls" section in the Forums). Good stuff.

Comment raaaaaaggggge! Shiesh guys, it's just a framework that uses open standards. There are a lot of said frameworks out there. Are we going to troll all open frameworks now? The hate has nothing to do with the article other than it has Apple in the title. Typical day here on Neowin.

Stuff like CSS transitions, CSS 2D transforms, CSS animations, and CSS 3D transforms, are NOT standards. They are Apple's ideas that they are trying to get developers to use before they become standards to force the W3C into doing things Apple's way. These non-standards are simply working drafts put forth by Apple, are all only in the first or second revision, and could very likely be totally revamped, removed, or replaced at any time.

Apple is taking an approach very similar to Microsoft in the IE 4, 5, and 6 days - they're creating their own proprietary "standards" and encouraging the web developers to use them so that users will be forced to switch to a webkit browser.

Is it a bad approach? Maybe, maybe not. The W3C is excrutiatingly slow and needs to be pushed to move forward faster (parts of CSS2 aren't even finalized yet!), but let's not pretend that webkit is a standards based browser - by adding all the extensions they've made it no better than IE back in the day.

JonathanMarston said,
Stuff like CSS transitions, CSS 2D transforms, CSS animations, and CSS 3D transforms, are NOT standards. They are Apple's ideas that they are trying to get developers to use before they become standards to force the W3C into doing things Apple's way. These non-standards are simply working drafts put forth by Apple, are all only in the first or second revision, and could very likely be totally revamped, removed, or replaced at any time.
You're right. They are working drafts, but there's a pretty good chance that they'll get accepted as standards. Don't bitch and moan at Apple because they're trying to push the web forward the right way.

JonathanMarston said,

Apple is taking an approach very similar to Microsoft in the IE 4, 5, and 6 days - they're creating their own proprietary "standards" and encouraging the web developers to use them so that users will be forced to switch to a webkit browser.
No, Apple is trying to push open technology forward. WebKit is open source, so Mozilla can, if they need to, borrow the code to do something like 3D transforms.

JonathanMarston said,

Is it a bad approach? Maybe, maybe not. The W3C is excrutiatingly slow and needs to be pushed to move forward faster (parts of CSS2 aren't even finalized yet!), but let's not pretend that webkit is a standards based browser - by adding all the extensions they've made it no better than IE back in the day.
These are open working drafts, with the ability to be implemented by any browser. They're not DirectX filters.

Edited by Elliott, May 8 2010, 2:07pm :

Elliott said,
You're right. They are working drafts, but there's a pretty good chance that they'll get accepted as standards. Don't bitch and moan at Apple because they're trying to push the web forward the right way.

By implementing and pushing them before they're standards? Is it a good thing to encourage developers to make pages that depend on a draft version of something that is only available on a single browser engine, that if eventually turned into a standard, will likely work differently than it does today? Is it right that it's more than likely that if/when these drafts become standards that the sites built on the draft versions will be broken?

The right way would be to submit the drafts and wait for the W3C to accept them as recommendations BEFORE implementing them in the release versions of Webkit instead of trying to put things that are non-standard on to the web ahead of their time.


No, Apple is trying to push open technology forward. WebKit is open source, so Mozilla can, if they need to, borrow the code to do something like 3D transforms.

These are open working drafts, with the ability to be implemented by any browser. They're not DirectX filters.

And there was nothing stopping people from implementing DirectX filters from IE in other browsers. The DOM (known has DHTML when Microsoft created it), javascript event models, and XMLHttpRequest are just a few of the things that Microsoft invented in IE before they became standards. They were eventually adopted by the W3C as standards, but in a slightly different form. This caused all web developers to have to go back and change their markup to meet the final standard. It's why will still see web applications that require IE6 today. With what Apple is encouraging we're going to end up with web applications that require specific versions of Safari/Chrome in the future...

This has all happened before, and Apple is just causing it to happen again.

Absolute total and utter bull**** article.

NOTHING to do with Flash.

NOTHING to do with Silverlight.

This is just ****ing JavaScript, like tens of other JS frameworks out there. Horrendously misleading title and article, and you can see the results of that in the comments. Apple haters foaming at the mouth in glee at an opportunity to attack El Jobso.

tomjol said,
Absolute total and utter bull**** article.

NOTHING to do with Flash.

NOTHING to do with Silverlight.

This is just ****ing JavaScript, like tens of other JS frameworks out there. Horrendously misleading title and article, and you can see the results of that in the comments. Apple haters foaming at the mouth in glee at an opportunity to attack El Jobso.


what do u expect? thats le neowin way to generate traffic

SyntaxError said,
Reservations to shop at an Apple store? Wow, they really are full of themselves.
They're reservations to get a person to assist you in finding what you need so you don't have to go hunting around for an employee like every other store.

Edited by Elliott, May 8 2010, 2:40pm :

SyntaxError said,
Reservations to shop at an Apple store? Wow, they really are full of themselves.


"Other stores" where there are more customers than employees so reservations are simply not practical?

Good move. If it's something that follows Web standards than it's great news. Another step in the right direction to get rid of evil proprietary plugins like crappy Silverlight and Flash.

Lechio said,
Good move. If it's something that follows Web standards than it's great news. Another step in the right direction to get rid of evil proprietary plugins like crappy Silverlight and Flash.

Hi RMS.

Still pushing that evil commie source software eh?

(Oh look I can make silly statements too!)

Edited by Athernar, May 9 2010, 2:38am :

Athernar said,

Hi RMS.

Still pushing that evil commie source software eh?

(Oh look I can make silly statements too!)


What are you on? Yes it's silly and makes no sense.

Lechio said,

What are you on? Yes it's silly and makes no sense.

Not the same stuff you're on if you can't see I was referencing your usage of "evil proprietary plugins".

Athernar said,

Not the same stuff you're on if you can't see I was referencing your usage of "evil proprietary plugins".


"Evil" to represent what they do, limit your freedom. In case you failed to understand it.

Lechio said,

"Evil" to represent what they do, limit your freedom. In case you failed to understand it.

I guess that means Neowin is evil too then, therefore what are you doing here?

Oh, and cut off your ISP too, since that's not 100% free. Or the design and technology behind your CPU, GPU and motherboard, better get rid of those too. x86 and x86-64 are proprietary too, therefore evil. Guess you'll need to build everything from scratch.

Unless you don't want to be free (therefore "good") that is.

But I guess you'll try and make some retort that essentially results in you saying proprietary is only evil when it serves your agenda.

Edited by Athernar, May 9 2010, 6:34pm :

Athernar said,

I guess that means Neowin is evil too then, therefore what are you doing here?


Neowin is a community open to all that wish to register. What I'm doing here is the same you do, I guess. It's not up to you to choose who has the privilege to access a public Website.


Oh, and cut off your ISP too, since that's not 100% free. Or the design and technology behind your CPU, GPU and motherboard, better get rid of those too. x86 and x86-64 are proprietary too, therefore evil. Guess you'll need to build everything from scratch.

Unless you don't want to be free (therefore "good") that is.

But I guess you'll try and make some retort that essentially results in you saying proprietary is only evil when it serves your agenda.


One thing is not even remotely related to other. We are talking about Web openness and the efforts being done to keep it/turn it free. I represent no-one but myself and am free to express and debate my opinions with others , that's how a democratic society works. Funny you mentioned "agenda" and don't refer the agenda of those who push proprietary plugins in determent of open standards.

Edited by Lechio, May 10 2010, 7:09pm :

Lechio said,

Neowin is a community open to all that wish to register. What I'm doing here is the same you do, I guess. It's not up to you to choose who has the privilege to access a public Website.

I haven't said anything to the effect of it being or should be up to me to decide, that's something entirely in your head, I posed a question, I did not make a statement.


I shall rephrase slightly for you. Neowin is a community that runs on proprietary software(IPB & other In-House Webapps), so by your logic Neowin is "evil". So what are you doing on a "evil" website?

Lechio said,
One thing is not even remotely related to other. We are talking about Web openness and the efforts being done to keep it/turn it free. I represent no-one but myself and am free to express and debate my opinions with others , that's how a democratic society works. Funny you mentioned "agenda" and don't refer the agenda of those who push proprietary plugins in determent of open standards.

Whether it's about "web-openness" or not is irrelevant, the principle stands. You cannot preach about proprietary technologies being "evil" when you use them yourself, lest you become a hypocrite.

Edited by Athernar, May 10 2010, 11:06pm :

Neowin is a community. It runs on a Linux server powered by open source software. So what you doing on a "commie" site hey?

It's not irrelevant, it's what my post was entirely about.

Lechio said,
Neowin is a community. It runs on a Linux server powered by open source software. So what you doing on a "commie" site hey?

It's not irrelevant, it's what my post was entirely about.

Unlike you, I don't have a problem using either open or closed source software, try again.

Saying "Neowin is a community" is meaningless, they use and create propriatery software, so by your own work they must be evil, no?

It very much is irrelevant, or are you saying that propriatery technology is only "evil" when on the web? Because that's starting to sound a bit like the whole "agenda" thing I mentioned.

P.S. That Linux server is running on the "patent-encumbered" (I know you guys love that phrase) x86/-64 Instruction Set, I'm sure there are a few dozen other patents in there too. Doesn't sound so "free and open" now eh?

Edited by Athernar, May 11 2010, 2:09am :

This story is bogus. This is a JS framework and nothing like a Flash replacement... Apple Insider are clueless and a number of this articles claims are completely untrue. "HTML5 performance" rivalling or beating Flash? Total and utter ********.

Silverlight wipes the floor with flash and silverlight has taken 3yrs ish to get to the great software it is now, i can't see apple catching up to the same standard anytime soon.

torrentthief said,
Silverlight wipes the floor with flash and silverlight has taken 3yrs ish to get to the great software it is now, i can't see apple catching up to the same standard anytime soon.

SilverWho ? Out of +200 million sites only 1000 use Silverlight.

Edited by ilev, May 8 2010, 8:56am :

ilev said,

SilverWho ? Out of +200 million sites only 1000 use Silverlight.

Rome wasn't built in a day. More over, Silver Light is not so resource intensive unlike Flash which is a memory hog and screws up systems.

Kirkburn said,
Did he say anything about that?

He hinted that Silverlight is popular when wording it as "catching up".

Silverlight is moving forward like **** today, actually. No wonder, when HTML5 has caught all the attention and is the future. I mostly just see Silverlight in in-house Microsoft Bingy Live Wave stuff.

Edited by Eric, May 8 2010, 3:41pm :

Northgrove said,

He hinted that Silverlight is popular when wording it as "catching up".

Silverlight is moving forward like **** today, actually. No wonder, when HTML5 has caught all the attention and is the future. I mostly just see Silverlight in in-house Microsoft Bingy Live Wave stuff.

"Up" is not the direction your comment indicates, but "up" it's going:
http://statowl.com/plugin_overview.php
http://riastats.com/

A jump from 37% to 49% from November to April does not indicate a failing technology.

Edited by Eric, May 8 2010, 3:56pm :

Northgrove said,

He hinted that Silverlight is popular when wording it as "catching up".

Silverlight is moving forward like **** today, actually. No wonder, when HTML5 has caught all the attention and is the future. I mostly just see Silverlight in in-house Microsoft Bingy Live Wave stuff.

No, he didn't. You seem to lack critical reading skills, or reading skills in general. He's talking about Gianduia catching up to Silverlight/Flash.

Northgrove said,

He hinted that Silverlight is popular when wording it as "catching up".

Silverlight is moving forward like **** today, actually. No wonder, when HTML5 has caught all the attention and is the future. I mostly just see Silverlight in in-house Microsoft Bingy Live Wave stuff.

He was talking about the power/features/richness or w/e else you wanna call it between simple html+js and flash vs silverlight, which, less face it, isn't just about streaming video anymore (it was at v1.0, but not now). Silverlight is turning into a very powerful software platform and MS is moving very fast on it. 4 versions in under 3 years. HTML5 and Silverlight don't clash like some like to think either.

GP007 said,
He was talking about the power/features/richness or w/e else you wanna call it between simple html+js and flash vs silverlight, which, less face it, isn't just about streaming video anymore (it was at v1.0, but not now). Silverlight is turning into a very powerful software platform and MS is moving very fast on it. 4 versions in under 3 years. HTML5 and Silverlight don't clash like some like to think either.

The only thing I think is lacking in the case of silverlight is a Mac OS X development environment. If there was a Mac OS X development environment I wouldn't be surprised if big media companies moved from Flash to Silverlight although one would argue that keeping development for iPhone strictly to Mac OS X hasn't hurt iPhone sales or iPhone development.

what are you smoking? OS X is based off neXT Step ... and microsofts history of software isn't that great ... and apple does not make html, javascript and css ... like countless others have mentioned, apple is just packaging already existing standards together. Apple do not own html, javascript or css they are all OPEN standards.

xfodder said,
what are you smoking? OS X is based off neXT Step ... and microsofts history of software isn't that great ... and apple does not make html, javascript and css ... like countless others have mentioned, apple is just packaging already existing standards together. Apple do not own html, javascript or css they are all OPEN standards.

+1 On the pipe vision.
But Apple haters don't really care for facts do they?

Lechio said,

+1 On the pipe vision.
But Apple haters don't really care for facts do they?

Right, so then what's the point? Are devs that lazy that they need Apple to package up open standards? I question the reason other than to say, hey we have this so even though we stopped you from using all these other dev tools out there in OS4, don't worry so much just use these.

I don't really care per se, but since it's nothing new just a packaging of something that anyone can use right now, it's getting way too much interest because of the Apple effect it seems.

xfodder said,
... and microsofts history of software isn't that great ...

uhm, really? i wonder what world you live in. i think it'd be silly of anyone to say that in this day and age (take that to mean exactly what it says).

Tola1005 said,

uhm, really? i wonder what world you live in. i think it'd be silly of anyone to say that in this day and age (take that to mean exactly what it says).

He said HISTORY are you saying MS never produced any duds?

GP007 said,

Right, so then what's the point? Are devs that lazy that they need Apple to package up open standards? I question the reason other than to say, hey we have this so even though we stopped you from using all these other dev tools out there in OS4, don't worry so much just use these.

I don't really care per se, but since it's nothing new just a packaging of something that anyone can use right now, it's getting way too much interest because of the Apple effect it seems.


The interest about it (at least in my way of seeing it) is that this is a Web development tool that follows Web standards. Not some proprietary development suite, like the one from Adobe, that forces you to buy their software to deploy Web content with no real alternatives and ultimately use third party plugins to access content from the Web.

It's another step forward in keeping the Web free, just like the iPhone/iPad is doing (look at youtube now offering an HTML5 alternative to crappy flash video).

Edited by Lechio, May 9 2010, 12:37pm :

if apple wants to be open and the net to be open then they will need to do it and stop locking everyone out as that is dumb and only shows that it's either the apple way or the highway.still i like the fact that they are creating a new framework but the only way that it will work is if they keep it open reguardless if they make money offa it or not and don't lock devs out but encourage them to come to you and you help them.if apple can pull that off i will be shocked but as it looks they won't any time soon.

I have had it with the adobe vs apple war. This is just apple trying to create drama to be popular.

onTh said,
I have had it with the adobe vs apple war. This is just apple trying to create drama to be popular.

Huh? Some of you guys will never be happy. Even when Apple develops and presents an open web application framework for everyone, there's still something wrong. "OHHH DRAMA QUEENS *whine whine cry*" Wow!

Northgrove said,

Even when Apple develops and presents an open web application framework for everyone, !

LOL
Since when as Apple EVER done anything that is "open". They couldn't be more proprietary.

ahhell said,

LOL
Since when as Apple EVER done anything that is "open". They couldn't be more proprietary.

http://www.apple.com/opensource/

Read that then come back here and admit that you don't know what the **** you are talking about. Your refusal to admit you were wrong about that statement will be taken as an admission of being an anti-Apple troll.

edit: nevermind, you have already admitted it in your forum signature.

Edited by roadwarrior, May 8 2010, 7:22pm :

So all Steve Jobs pontificating about Flash and Adobe and 'open standards' was all just a pile of horse sh*t then. Now he expects everyone in the world to rewrite every page on the entire Internet to comply with his standards then?

The truth is that it's probably rubbish anyway. Apple can't write software. Period. Have a look at ALL Apple's software and figure out whether Apple wrote it themselves or licensed it. This is why there's NO HANDWRITING on iPad (What?). Because Apple can't do software this complex. No multitasking? Apple have NEVER done multitasking (they licensed the OS-X kernel from an old Microsoft cast-off).

Apple - they should change their (stolen) name to iPAID.

Yawn.

greatscot said,
This is why there's NO HANDWRITING on iPad (What?). Because Apple can't do software this complex. No multitasking? Apple have NEVER done multitasking (they licensed the OS-X kernel from an old Microsoft cast-off).

What? The iPad doesn't have a stylus. Try dipping your finger in ink and using it to write without using a pen. How good does it look? Yeah, *that's* why there's no handwriting recognition on iPad for Roman languages - there is for certain Chinese languages though. Oh, but there's Roman handwriting recognition on Mac OS X because you can plug in a graphics tablet and use that.

Also, the Mac OS X and iPhone OS are based on BSD - nothing to do with Microsoft.

iKenndac said,

What? The iPad doesn't have a stylus. Try dipping your finger in ink and using it to write without using a pen. How good does it look? Yeah, *that's* why there's no handwriting recognition on iPad for Roman languages - there is for certain Chinese languages though. Oh, but there's Roman handwriting recognition on Mac OS X because you can plug in a graphics tablet and use that.

Also, the Mac OS X and iPhone OS are based on BSD - nothing to do with Microsoft.


Actually no.

iPad/iPhone's display is capacitive. Thats why a pen cant be used on them.

greatscot said,
Apple can't write software. Period. Have a look at ALL Apple's software and figure out whether Apple wrote it themselves or licensed it. This is why there's NO HANDWRITING on iPad (What?). Because Apple can't do software this complex. No multitasking? Apple have NEVER done multitasking (they licensed the OS-X kernel from an old Microsoft cast-off).

iPhone OS 4 will have better multitasking support than most, if not all phones out there.

The iPad doesn't have a stylus. I guess it'd be hard to produce electricity at the end of a stylus without a battery, though I'm not a physicist. And they don't want a stylus in people's hands anyway and they gave a clear reason for that : what happens with a stylus? well, we always lose it somewhere!

As for Apple not being able to write complex software, Mac OS X seems quite complex to me. After Windows, it's probably the most complicated software out there. Final Cut is also huge ;-) Get your facts updated, buddy.

Edited by PyX, May 8 2010, 2:25pm :

alfaaqua said,

Actually no.

iPad/iPhone's display is capacitive. Thats why a pen cant be used on them.

Um, no this is just ignorance. Go look up TabletPCs, many are capacitive that support both touch and stylus. (All it takes is a smart capacitive screen to support a pen. Heck even a smart capacitive screen can do pressure from touch and of course full pressure and tilt and angle if the pen/stylus is smart enough.)

iKenndac said,

What? The iPad doesn't have a stylus. Try dipping your finger in ink and using it to write without using a pen. How good does it look? Yeah, *that's* why there's no handwriting recognition on iPad for Roman languages - there is for certain Chinese languages though. Oh, but there's Roman handwriting recognition on Mac OS X because you can plug in a graphics tablet and use that.

Also, the Mac OS X and iPhone OS are based on BSD - nothing to do with Microsoft.

If Apple had a strong handwriting technology, the iPad would also have it and Apple would be telling people how important handwriting was. They don't have the technology, at least nothing even close to the ink/handwriting technology in Windows. (Go search Youtube for a comparison of OS X vs Vista/Win7 on handwriting)


Apple tells people what they have is good only when Apple can offer it. This is why Apple argued for B&W ONLY displays in the 80s, and one button mice until just a few years ago. These concepts were not better, but Apple made people believe they were.


OS X is not BSD. (Windows NT's UNIX subsystem also supports the BSD kernel API). Go look up XNU to see where the frankenstein kernel of OS X came from.


As for the Microsoft connections, go look up Mach, which is part of XNU. Microsoft considered a Mach approach for NT back in 1990, but abandoned the concepts because of their limitations. The creator of Mach now works for Microsoft and even he is shocked that anyone selling a 'modern' OS is still using concepts as old as Mach. (Google/Bing it)

PsykX said,

iPhone OS 4 will have better multitasking support than most, if not all phones out there.

The iPad doesn't have a stylus. I guess it'd be hard to produce electricity at the end of a stylus without a battery, though I'm not a physicist. And they don't want a stylus in people's hands anyway and they gave a clear reason for that : what happens with a stylus? well, we always lose it somewhere!

As for Apple not being able to write complex software, Mac OS X seems quite complex to me. After Windows, it's probably the most complicated software out there. Final Cut is also huge ;-) Get your facts updated, buddy.

Technically the iPhone OS 4 has less ability to multi-task than the WinCE, which was released in 1996. (To understand this you would need to look at how the kernel technologies handle devices and application scheduling. WinCE is nothing like NT, but works from the concept that NT was built on so that the kernel can't get locked to a single process for applications or devices like the XNU based kernel can and does.)


OS X also has troubles with multi-tasking, which they tried to address in Snow Leopard, but the OS can still hit CPU locks where any multi-core/multi-CPU based device will fall back to running all threads on ONE core. (Even the ZuneHD with its multi-CPU/GPU design can multi-task better than the iPhone OS or a full conceptual version of OS X because of this 'lock' based design of OS X and it XNU roots.)


OS X is complex if you take XNU from other people's work, strap on Adobe's display framework and sell it as something 'magical'. Apple engineers are not the leaders in the world of technology, they are the kings of slapping together other people's technologies.


As for Final Cut, it is a great and complex piece of software that Dreamworks designed and wrote for Apple. Again, not an Apple creation, nor something they even could have funded at the time as it took Movie industry and Dreamworks level of money to get the product produced.

greatscot said,
Apple have NEVER done multitasking (they licensed the OS-X kernel from an old Microsoft cast-off).

Where the **** did you get that nonsense? The OS X kernel is based on Mach, and was originally part of NeXT (which was Steve Jobs' other company after leaving Apple).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xnu

roadwarrior said,

Where the **** did you get that nonsense? The OS X kernel is based on Mach, and was originally part of NeXT (which was Steve Jobs' other company after leaving Apple).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xnu

From your own link:

kernel of the XNU operating system, Mach, is a simple microkernel.

Going through to the Mach article:

Mach is the logical successor to Carnegie Mellon's Accent kernel. The lead developer on the Mach project, Richard Rashid, has been working at Microsoft since 1991 in various top-level positions revolving around the Microsoft Research division.

roadwarrior said,

Where the **** did you get that nonsense? The OS X kernel is based on Mach, and was originally part of NeXT (which was Steve Jobs' other company after leaving Apple).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xnu


NeXT used Mach, it was NOT designed for or by NeXT.

Also although OS X is XNU in concept based, the BSD API kernel code comes from FreeBSD, NOT XNU and NOT OpenBSD.


XNU was a frankenstein OS that tried to fix the shortcomings of the hybrid kernel designs. OS X again tried to fix the shortcomings with a new approach to the merging of the kernel technologies, but as OS X has aged since 2000, these modifications have become more of a problem than a help in overall extensibility and performance.


(For example they worked on multi-threading aspects with regard to a single CPU but these same 'fixes' left problems with smp/multi-core performance and threading. Sadly even a nice 8 CPU Mac can have the OS, drivers, or an Application lock the process scheduler so that all threads are basically running through one CPU.)


Too many people think OS X is strictly BSD, XNU, Mach or some other concept, but sadly it is the best and worst of each of these designs. People see OS X as a 'new' OS model, yet is quite a bit behind Linux and Windows NT in 'theory' and technology.


(NT for example is a full object-oriented kernel with a client/server API set messaging, something that is a conceptual generation or two ahead of OS X and even Linux.)

Edited by thenetavenger, May 8 2010, 6:14pm :

thenetavenger said,

NeXT used Mach, it was NOT designed for or by NeXT.

Your reading comprehenion sucks. I never said that Mach was designed for or by NeXT. I said that the XNU kernel (which is based on Mach) was originally designed for and used by NeXT. Oh, and to expand on what Athernar said above (since he decided to clip the quote from the article), one of the other lead developers of Mach was from NeXT, and later worked for Apple. The developer from Microsoft that he mentioned started working for Microsoft in 1991, but was working on Mach well before then.


The project at Carnegie Mellon ran from 1985 to 1994, ending with Mach 3.0. A number of other efforts have continued Mach research, including the University of Utah's Mach 4[1]. Mach was developed as a replacement for the kernel in the BSD version of UNIX, so no new operating system would have to be designed around it. Today further experimental research on Mach appears to have ended, although Mach and its derivatives are in use in a number of commercial operating systems, such as NeXTSTEP and OPENSTEP, and most notably Mac OS X using the XNU operating system kernel which incorporates Mach as a major component.

........

Another of the original Mach developers, Avie Tevanian, was formerly head of software at NeXT, then Chief Software Technology Officer at Apple Computer until March 2006

PsykX said,
I guess it'd be hard to produce electricity at the end of a stylus without a battery, though I'm not a physicist.

We already know you're not a physicist. If you were a physicist, you would know that it is a simple matter of electromagnetic induction to transfer electricity wirelessly. RFID tags work in the same way... no battery, and yet they still need electricity.

PsykX said,

And they don't want a stylus in people's hands anyway and they gave a clear reason for that : what happens with a stylus? well, we always lose it somewhere!

And when I'm using my Tablet PC to take notes in class, I'm very glad I didn't buy an Apple product. You can type your notes just fine with a keyboard, but if it's math or physics, or something with diagrams or pictures, a stylus is an amazing feature.

thenetavenger said,
As for the Microsoft connections, go look up Mach, which is part of XNU. Microsoft considered a Mach approach for NT back in 1990, but abandoned the concepts because of their limitations. The creator of Mach now works for Microsoft and even he is shocked that anyone selling a 'modern' OS is still using concepts as old as Mach. (Google/Bing it)

I can't seem to find it, do you have a link directly to the website? I put in Mach kernel Microsoft Developer into Google and nothing useful came back.