Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 6th Jan 2012 17:47 UTC
OSNews, Generic OSes Ah yes, why not? The last time we did this, it was March 2011, so it's been almost a year since we offered a little insight into what kind of operating systems and browsers you, dear readers, are using. Nothing particularly earth-shattering going on here.
Thread beginning with comment 502572
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[6]: Flash usage
by Lennie on Mon 9th Jan 2012 10:52 UTC in reply to "RE[5]: Flash usage"
Lennie
Member since:
2007-09-22

There is one difference with browser wars I, they are all open specifications. Most of the time there is real discussion, it is all out in de open.

You have to remember this is the W3 and IETF process:
- someone has an idea
- discuss/make a draft specification
- 1 or more vendors implement something
- in CSS/JavaScript they will get a "vendor-prefix" so it does not conflict with the real standard if it works differently.
- there will be a lot of in the field experience
- a more "final" specification is made
- all or atleast most of the vendors implement the "final" specification
- the specification is announced as final
- the remaining vendor will probably also implement it

So the time between: have an idea and get something in one or 2 vendors browser is actually not all that long. Maybe half a year, but it can take years before all vendors adopt it.

There is nothing proprietary about it.

Have to admit, the Google developers do create a lot of new ideas/code to try it out in real life.

Something like SPDY needs a lot of operational experience before any other vendors would even think of deploying it. Deploying it on the Google websites is thus a really good idea.

Other vendors are free to come up with their own ideas and implement them. If it turns out they have a better idea, other vendors will adapt that.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Flash usage
by lucas_maximus on Mon 9th Jan 2012 11:09 in reply to "RE[6]: Flash usage"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

In a recent discussion I had with Hakum Lie, CTO of browser maker Opera Software, the Nordic exec expressed concern about Google's approach.

"It's often that [Google] launch[es] services without testing in all browsers. We sometimes wake up in the morning and see a new Google service with things we could have fixed if they'd worked with us during the development phase," Lie said. "Now that they have their own browser, they think less of making sure it works across the board, which is a concern, because Google wouldn't have existed if it hadn't been for open standards. We'd probably all live in Microsoft land."

But Lie acknowledged Google's contributions to Web standards, "Some of those experiments are great," he said. "We need to have experimentation going on, and we can't demand that everything works in all browsers. But you should test in major browsers."


From here,

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2397158,00.asp

I have seen websites that only work properly with webkit these days, and suddenly everyone thinks that is alright ... but everyone seems to be up in arms if a site only work properly in IE.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: Flash usage
by Lennie on Mon 9th Jan 2012 12:16 in reply to "RE[7]: Flash usage"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

"suddenly everyone thinks that is alright"

Actually, the people who do that are just 'hacks'.

If Google forgets to test with Opera and/or others that would be bad.

But now that I think about it, I see a lot of sloppy code on Google websites. Code probably no-one still remembers why it is exists.

Their internal process for updating sites in general should was a mess.

A simple example is Google Analytics in combination with old versions of IE, like 6 It broke at times. They obviously didn't test properly.

Although I think that has actually improved.

I don't think it is Google that changed, when they made Google Gears no-one complained.

It was just an experiment to see what was possible before these things got adopted as part of HTML5.

Now that they have this marketshare, the impact on the other players is much bigger.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Flash usage
by lucas_maximus on Mon 9th Jan 2012 11:45 in reply to "RE[6]: Flash usage"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

As for the vendor prefix ... Nothing annoys me more.

It is abused quite a bit by developers, go to Smashing Magazine and find one of their "top 20 sites doing coolest <something or other>" and check how many of those sites work in IE8 or even IE9, some won't even work correctly in Firefox.

Here is a good example from Zurb

http://www.zurb.com/playground/osx-dock

It won't work even in the latest Firefox, to be fair to Zurb ... this is only a bit of an experiment.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: Flash usage
by Lennie on Mon 9th Jan 2012 12:49 in reply to "RE[7]: Flash usage"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

As Hakum Lie mentioned, experimentation is good.

What is important is that content is still viewable in all browsers.

This is a constant battle, especially now that IE6 is out and also all these new fancy features and modern browsers exists. There is a big gap between what is supported in those browsers.

That problem will obviously remain indefinitely, but what is supported by all browsers that are in use keeps getting more and more.

Even Opera supports things other browsers do not support which was thought up by Opera. Which is normal.

Like:
http://dev.w3.org/csswg/css3-gcpm/
http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-gcpm/
http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/opera-reader-a-new-way-to-read-t...

And which is a good thing.

The time between public specifications and deployment of the implementation in Chrome is short though. Too short ? I don't know.

Google has many websites people use on a daily basis, thus obviously is a big responsibility. If they don't make it work for everyone, everyone will suffer, including Google.

WebM-on-by-default on Youtube has been in development for 1 1/2 years now and it is not yet deployed.

SPDY has been deployed on Google websites and in Chrome for 1 year now. Some things in the specification still needed to be changed (draft 3).

Is it to soon ? Or is development to slow ? With these 2 examples I don't think so.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[8]: Flash usage
by Lennie on Mon 9th Jan 2012 14:17 in reply to "RE[7]: Flash usage"
Lennie Member since:
2007-09-22

As for the vendor prefix ... Nothing annoys me more.

It is abused quite a bit by developers,


You should really have a look at:

http://vimeo.com/16326857 at 21:00

The important part is:

"as long as they update the syntax when it changes"

Some people use things like Sass ( http://sass-lang.com/ ) to not have to type them themselves.

Here you can see how they do that:
http://vimeo.com/33647875

Not sure if that is the best example, but I'm sure you can research it yourself if you want to.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Flash usage
by zima on Fri 13th Jan 2012 23:57 in reply to "RE[6]: Flash usage"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

There is one difference with browser wars I, they are all open specifications. Most of the time there is real discussion, it is all out in de open.
You have to remember this is the W3 and IETF process:
- someone has an idea
- discuss/make a draft specification
[...]
Something like SPDY needs a lot of operational experience before any other vendors would even think of deploying it. Deploying it on the Google websites is thus a really good idea.

Yes, "one browser vendor widely deploys it early in few of the most popular web services around" should be on that list itself / it really doesn't seem to you similar to the fuss about MS & bundling of IE with Windows? (plus http://www.osnews.com/permalink?503344 )

Edited 2012-01-13 23:58 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2