Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 4th Feb 2011 12:24 UTC
Internet & Networking "Since the last year with all the hype around HTML5 and the buzz about 'how HTML5 is going to save the web' and that 'Flash is dead', etc., a lot of people started to believe that HTML5 is ready for production and that it is more stable and has a better performance than Flash... Since the beginning I've been saying to everyone that it isn't true and it won't be for a long time."
Thread beginning with comment 460937
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Not delighted
by maethorechannen on Fri 4th Feb 2011 17:29 UTC in reply to "Not delighted"
Member since:

What really got me was this line -

I’m saying that the iPad is the new IE6 because we are expecting it to be something that it isn’t, the same way that we were expecting that IE6 would have the same features/performance/reliability than the latest versions of Firefox/Safari.

Firefox and Safari didn't exist when IE6 released. How could you expect IE 6 to have the same features/performance/reliability of browsers that followed several years after it's release? It's been so long I can't remember how it stacked up to Netscape Navigator and Konqueror.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Not delighted
by Delgarde on Sun 6th Feb 2011 20:38 in reply to "RE: Not delighted"
Delgarde Member since:

It's been so long I can't remember how it stacked up to Netscape Navigator and Konqueror.

Fairly well, actually, which partially explains it's longevity - it was good enough for people to build their first-generation web apps on (the one's we're still having to support today).

Konqueror back then was pretty crude - it worked, but a lot of sites would choke on it, particularly if they did anything fancy. Netscape 6 wasn't bad (although offering little over the Mozilla browser it was based on), but certainly didn't offer any compelling reason for people to use it instead of IE.

Reply Parent Score: 2