Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 4th Jun 2010 15:36 UTC
Internet & Networking Earlier this week, Apple launched a HTML5 Showcase page, displaying several uses for HTML5 and related technologies. However, it turns out that Apple is using trickery to block out browsers other than Safari, with the end result that browsers with better support for web standards than Safari can't access the demos.
Thread beginning with comment 428185
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Still unclear
by Nelson on Fri 4th Jun 2010 18:21 UTC in reply to "RE: Still unclear"
Nelson
Member since:
2005-11-29

Yes it does. The needs of people are real, despite the fact that HTML5 and other open standards offerings have no caught up. The lack of progress on that front does not make the problems of everyday users disappear.

HTML5 or not, people are going to want RIAs, and even HTML5 if implemented perfectly in every browser, would not come close to offering the level of productivity Silverlight does.

We're holding back progress for the sake of ubiquity, and it's laughable how far ahead Silverlight is for RIAs and video.

The video tag will never gain critical mass without support for a protected path, there's just no way you're going to convince content providers to do so.

I think the browser vendors could be more productive in getting HTML5 interactive demos running above a few frames a second before trashing RIA platforms like Silverlight and AIR (Yes, even AIR, and AIR sucks.)

HTML5 is gaining ubiquity in name only. The place where HTML5 is most prevalent, an entire mobile thicket of websites coded for the iPhone using -webkit- extensions. Is that really the kind of same markup you want? You're creating the same situation IE created for itself years ago.

It does matter how much faster Silverlight is (dramatically faster, in case you didn't know), at least to pragmatic employers who want an RIA which isn't constrained by the ridiculous monolithic processes at the W3C.

The issue of accessibility was tackled in Silverlight.. since Silverlight 2..

The UI Automation framework has built in support for screen readers. Silverlight also supports robust keyboard navigation capabilities.

Silverlight supports browser zooming (which is vector based and works better than even Html content).

For high contrast you can either write your own style or apply a pixel shader to the screen (as of SL3).

A lot of the so called issues with Silverlight are fabricated. Plain and simple

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Still unclear
by PresentIt on Fri 4th Jun 2010 18:25 in reply to "RE[2]: Still unclear"
PresentIt Member since:
2010-02-10

The needs of people are real, despite the fact that HTML5 and other open standards offerings have no caught up. The lack of progress on that front does not make the problems of everyday users disappear.

Lack of progress? LOL.

We're holding back progress for the sake of ubiquity

No, what's holding back progress is stuff like Flash and Silverlight. These are extremely restrictive. Have you seen what it's finally possible to do with native video support in browsers? Flash and Silverlight could only dream of that.

The video tag will never gain critical mass without support for a protected path, there's just no way you're going to convince content providers to do so.

The most popular video site on the web is moving to HTML5.

I think the browser vendors could be more productive in getting HTML5 interactive demos running above a few frames a second before trashing RIA platforms like Silverlight and AIR (Yes, even AIR, and AIR sucks.)

So, you clearly haven't seen the latest browser demos.

Silverlight supports browser zooming (which is vector based and works better than even Html content).

Silverlight is a dead end.

A lot of the so called issues with Silverlight are fabricated. Plain and simple

Much like your issues with HTML5, then.

Edited 2010-06-04 18:26 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Still unclear
by Nelson on Fri 4th Jun 2010 18:37 in reply to "RE[3]: Still unclear"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Lack of progress? LOL.


Yes, a lack of progress. Html5 is simply an incoherent method of describing any kind of user interface. You try to shoehorn a bunch of incompatible standards and you spend more time getting them to play nice than actually getting the job done (databinding vs dom tree traversal and css selectors)


No, what's holding back progress is stuff like Flash and Silverlight. These are extremely restrictive. Have you seen what it's finally possible to do with native video support in browsers? Flash and Silverlight could only dream of that.


Let's play a game, you get specific on what native video support can do in the browser..and I'll do it in less lines of code, at a higher framerate with Silverlight.

I can treat a video as a bitmap surface, with manipulation speed as fast as the Gpu can render a quad, and apply pixel shaders to the said video on the fly.

Please. From someone who's been using Silverlight since it was called Wpf/E, I honestly want you to try me.


The most popular video site on the web is moving to HTML5.


How old is YouTube? Technology moves incredibly fast. What is the king today will not be the king tomorrow necessarily. Also, you can kiss goodbye any chances YouTube had of getting live streaming or video rentals if you go with Html5.


So, you clearly haven't seen the latest browser demos.


I've seen them, and I've been able to do that level of interaction since Silverlight 1/2 .. at a higher framerate.


Silverlight is a dead end.


Yeah, I guess you can say that. If you want to be completely closed minded. Sure.


Much like your issues with HTML5, then.


Nah.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Still unclear
by Neolander on Fri 4th Jun 2010 20:49 in reply to "RE[3]: Still unclear"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

"I think the browser vendors could be more productive in getting HTML5 interactive demos running above a few frames a second before trashing RIA platforms like Silverlight and AIR (Yes, even AIR, and AIR sucks.)

So, you clearly haven't seen the latest browser demos.
"
Myself, I have seen the "latest browser demos", in the form of HTML5 video on Kroc's website. Looking at it, it *does* run at 3-4 fps at best. Probably less. Don't know, when scrolling doesn't work smoothly in my browser anymore, I start to go berserk...

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Still unclear
by pooo on Fri 4th Jun 2010 19:04 in reply to "RE[2]: Still unclear"
pooo Member since:
2006-04-22

Freedom, platform independence, and open standards are big deal to a large segment of *developers*. Most end users don't know the difference but there is a powerful movement within the web development community that doesn't care about your precious frame rates. Chrome, IE9, Firefox are all fast *enough* and featureful *enough*.

You seem to think this debate is entirely about the abstract technical merits of each option but it is not! There are bigger issues and the technical merits of Silverlight vs HTML5. You may be right that Silverlight is better in many ways but HTML5 on the new breed of faster browsers is *good enough* and the additional benefits of Silverlight are not meaningful.

So you may argue based on technical merits that Silverlight won't die but know that *most* developers want it to die badly, and want HTML5 to succeed badly, and very large powerful corporations want the same. So, even though you could render overlays on video at 2x the frame rate (good for you), Silverlight might still lose this war.

I'm really sorry you invested so much of your time into something that everyone hates and is on questionably ethical grounds. Maybe you should just embrace HTML5 yourself and see that it isn't so bad, and you can actually feel good about it instead of having to go around ripping people and avoiding the real issues of the debate.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Still unclear
by Nelson on Fri 4th Jun 2010 19:20 in reply to "RE[3]: Still unclear"
Nelson Member since:
2005-11-29

Freedom, platform independence, and open standards are big deal to a large segment of *developers*. Most end users don't know the difference but there is a powerful movement within the web development community that doesn't care about your precious frame rates. Chrome, IE9, Firefox are all fast *enough* and featureful *enough*.


I don't know who modded you down, as I appreciate insightful posts like yours.

However I don't think framerates in the single digits are "fast enough". Maybe in the future they will get better, and IE9 shows that they can, but in the immediate and short term.. they're not, and customers still demand RIA and LOB apps regardless.


You seem to think this debate is entirely about the abstract technical merits of each option but it is not! There are bigger issues and the technical merits of Silverlight vs HTML5. You may be right that Silverlight is better in many ways but HTML5 on the new breed of faster browsers is *good enough* and the additional benefits of Silverlight are not meaningful.


I understand that, however I do try to viciously fight back the lumping of Silverlight into the same technical wastebasket that Flash is dumped into.

Your point is well taken though, there are various political forces at play which obviously prevent Silverlight from having as much fanfare as it deserves.

Really, broken down, Silverlight is a mash of very web-esque technologies. Declarative language with built in vector graphic support, databinding, hardware accelerated rendering, and a Jit engine.


So you may argue based on technical merits that Silverlight won't die but know that *most* developers want it to die badly, and want HTML5 to succeed badly, and very large powerful corporations want the same.


Well that's doubtable, the "most developers" part at least. Silverlight has an army of trained .NET developers in the workforce just itching to make a paycheck off of it (like myself).

Half of their problem is perception, the end user really doesn't care much about a 5mb, 90 second install plugin which they do once.

Symbian and WinPh7 have already proved it's possible to bring performant Silverlight to mobile devices. So as the technology tug of war shifts in the post-pc emerging chess board, we'll see Silverlight become more instrumental.


So, even though you could render overlays on video at 2x the frame rate (good for you), Silverlight might still lose this war.


Sure, I acknowledge that. I'm not complacent, I just wouldn't count SL out yet.


I'm really sorry you invested so much of your time into something that everyone hates and is on questionably ethical grounds. Maybe you should just embrace HTML5 yourself and see that it isn't so bad, and you can actually feel good about it instead of having to go around ripping people and avoiding the real issues of the debate.


I'm not sorry, I enjoy developing in Silverlight, and make decent money off of it. I also have embraced HTML5, and because I have, I am able to see its weakspots.

I can point out a lot of SL weakpoints too, probably moreso than HTML5 because I've been frustrated by SL more often =P.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Still unclear
by nt_jerkface on Fri 4th Jun 2010 22:37 in reply to "RE[3]: Still unclear"
nt_jerkface Member since:
2009-08-26

So you may argue based on technical merits that Silverlight won't die but know that *most* developers want it to die badly,


Oh did you take a poll?


and want HTML5 to succeed badly, and very large powerful corporations want the same.


A few powerful corps such as Google and Apple who don't like Silverlight because it doesn't fit in with their business plans.


I'm really sorry you invested so much of your time into something that everyone hates and is on questionably ethical grounds.


Silverlight doesn't have a problem with being hated, it has a problem with adoption due to the popularity of Flash. A lot of content producers would switch to Silverlight but Flash is "good enough tech" that has an incredibly high install rate that makes up for its technical deficiencies. Silverlight and HTML5 face the same problem which is that Flash is well entrenched and gets the job done, even if it isn't the most efficient solution.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: Still unclear
by Neolander on Fri 4th Jun 2010 20:42 in reply to "RE[2]: Still unclear"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

About silverlight performance, I installed moonlight v2 on my linux box some months ago out of curiosity.

Then I went to www.silverlight.net as a test. The embedded animation made my browser totally sluggish and ran at about 5 fps.
Now if I run some heavy flash app like GrooveShark or start heavy tabbed browsing on YouTube, I NEVER encounter such a bad performance. Only ~12 fps and some short browser lags here and there. And those flash apps do way more interesting (and probably way more power-savvy) things than showcasing Flash features.

Maybe moonlight has improved in v3. But as of v2, it was not a reasonable Flash replacement, at least on linux (and almost everybody here knows how terrible Flash performance already is on Linux)

Edited 2010-06-04 20:47 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3