Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 5th Jan 2013 16:41 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 547449
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-11-29
I don't think the main argument wasn't that it was impossible, it certainly is possible to engineer usable enough web apps. The problem people have boils down to a few things:
1) Given a set amount of resources, using HTML5 mean less productivity in certain scenarios.
HTML5 is a rather disjointed mash up of a bunch of technology, and the tooling around it is poor. The language (JS) isn't easily scalable to medium sized solutions and the performance takes a lot of extra work.
2) Integration with the host platform
It is harder to integrate with the underlying OS in a meaningful way. It's more difficult to appear native when you need to support a lowest common denominator of UI constructs. It leads to apps that look and feel foreign on every platform
3) The web is still in flux
There are various implementations of various states of emerging standards in every browser. Some browsers implement the Working Draft, some implement the Candidate Recommendation, etc. which lead to pretty subtle and some not so subtle differences in syntax and behavior.
This means there are complex feature matrixes to consider when deciding on which technologies to use. This makes it harder to utilize more modern layout models, for example.