Article: A nail in the HTML5 coffin?

[cfg83]

Hello -

I am an advocate of the concept of HTML5, but I don't know if it will succeed or fail in the long run. Therefore, I am interested in ALL pro/con opinions. When I see an article like this I want to hear what others have to say :

A nail in the HTML5 coffin?
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/tablets/a-nail-in-the-html5-coffin/2316

Takeaway: What can an enterprise IT leader do when a social media titan publicly shuns the very tool that was supposed to make cross-platform mobile development possible? Patrick Gray explains.

One of the biggest hindrances to widespread tablet adoption is the proliferation of tablet platforms. Unlike desktop computers, where Microsoft Windows largely dominates the marketplace, there’s essentially no heir apparent in the tablet space. Apple currently controls the most market share, but Google’s Android and Microsoft’s impending Windows 8 continue to vie for attention.

For everyone, from enterprise IT leaders to startup mobile software companies, tablet applications can look like a highly risky bet. Hardware costs for a particular platform are relatively obvious, but the cost to hire skilled developers or groom talent in-house is an expensive proposition, not to mention long-term support of any custom applications. This makes a cross-platform tool that allows one to hedge their bets while the dust settles on the tablet market look all the more compelling. Until the CEO of Facebook spoke recently, that tool looked like HTML5.

...

Carlos

[snip3r8]

The problem with using html5 for mobile apps is that the browsers on mobile devices just plain suck. With things like phonegap ,all the code is run in a WebKit view,sure , you can get the job done ,but add any fancy animations that mobile users are used to and they will struggle even on a galaxy s3 with quad core. For html5 to be an option for mobile , mobile browsers/browser views need to come up to par with desktop ones.

[vexorian]

Just about everyone with some know in the business would tell that facebook is just trying to escapegoat on HTML5 for their own failings.

This article lost all credibility by saying this:

One of the biggest hindrances to widespread tablet adoption is the proliferation of tablet platforms. Unlike desktop computers, where Microsoft Windows largely dominates the marketplace, there’s essentially no heir apparent in the tablet space.

Too many platforms, tablet not controlled by single entity = bad?

LoL.

[jrog]

Hello -

I am an advocate of the concept of HTML5, but I don't know if it will succeed or fail in the long run. Therefore, I am interested in ALL pro/con opinions. When I see an article like this I want to hear what others have to say :

A nail in the HTML5 coffin?
http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/tablets/a-nail-in-the-html5-coffin/2316


Carlos
HTML5 is much bigger than this article seems to make it out to be. Yes, it does theoretically represent a tool for creating cross-platform mobile applications, but it is also more than that (for example, it is also a tool for creating websites or other documents that are better-equipped to be read by screen-readers). That being so, it will likely have many diverse benefits. What's more, because HTML4 is a subset of HTML5, HTML5 seems very unlikely to "die" any time soon -- unless HTML itself (in general) is likely to die some time soon, which seems doubtful. In that respect, HTML5 simply presents added benefits beyond HTML4 that seem useful and about which many web designers/developers seem pretty enthusiastic.

It's also a very young technology, so that's worth mentioning, and, as snip3r8 mentioned, the HTML5 support on mobile devices just does not seem that great. So, Facebook's difficulties may be a fault of the mobile devices themselves, not of HTML5.

Short version: it's a long leap from Facebook's regretting its use of a relatively young technology on a specific subset of devices with generally poor track records in this regard (mobile devices) to HTML5's death.

[doorknob60]

Maybe it's not ideal for iOS and Android apps, but for desktop designed web apps, it's perfect. I'm sure Facebook could use HTML5 for their desktop version (do they already?), and all the popular Google Apps use it. Also, Windows 8 apps can be developed in HTML5 (it's not the only option, but it's one of them). It's not going anywhere as long as the internet is around. I mean, what could replace it, Flash?

Also, I'm looking forward to the new Facebook Android app, because the old one sucked, no wonder they didn't like it :P

[Merk42]

Yes Facebook switched from HTML5 to native code, but is that a failing of HTML5 or Facebook?

Google Apps (gmail, drive, contacts, NOT YouTube) will stop supporting IE8 as of November 15 (http://googleappsupdates.blogspot.com/2012/09/supporting-modern-browsers-internet.html). What this means is they could update all those to take advantage of HTML5 features so it'll be interesting to see if they do and what they come up with.

[forrestcupp]

The problem with using html5 for mobile apps is that the browsers on mobile devices just plain suck. With things like phonegap ,all the code is run in a WebKit view,sure , you can get the job done ,but add any fancy animations that mobile users are used to and they will struggle even on a galaxy s3 with quad core. For html5 to be an option for mobile , mobile browsers/browser views need to come up to par with desktop ones.

That's only if you're limiting html5 to a browser. Windows 8 is designed for its "Metro" apps to be developed with html5+javascript. That doesn't depend on any browser, and it works on mobile devices and PCs. So because of that, I'd say html5 isn't going anywhere.

[mr john]

I like Flash. It still has its uses. I'd rather have specific tools that are focused for specific purposes, not html5 trying to do everything.

[vexorian]

And who says HTML5 is trying to do everything?

Or that flash has a specific purpose? It is used in games, video players, banners, etc...

[mr john]

Nobody needs to say it, it's obvious. They are trying to get HTML5 to do everything. When flash came out it was mostly used for interactive animations. It's still by far the best product for that.

[jrog]

Nobody needs to say it, it's obvious. They are trying to get HTML5 to do everything.
I'm actually also not sure that I understand the complaint (it isn't obvious to me!), so can you say more about this? The reason that I'm not sure that I understand is that HTML5 itself doesn't really do much of anything, strictly speaking. It's simply a markup language. Support for playing videos, for example, isn't built into HTML5 itself in some way; it is up to the browsers to implement it, using basically whatever methods and formats they please. HTML5 is just a specification that says that the tag "<video>" (to continue with that example) shall be used to indicate that a document contains video content at that spot. HTML4 already had tags that did something like this, too (e.g., "<object>").

Maybe your complaint is that web browsers shouldn't be made to implement video playback support?

[vexorian]

Nobody needs to say it, it's obvious. They are trying to get HTML5 to do everything. When flash came out it was mostly used for interactive animations. It's still by far the best product for that.
HTML5 does much less than your usual language. It focuses on markup. Then we have javascript for programming and CSS for style. Flash on the other hand does everything in an application.

[contributor]

HTML5 is not a fail! HTML5 is not only good for web apps & web designs, but are also much more flexible, allowing the use of interpreted javascript and html instead of compiled java and C.