If this is the best you can do with an HTML5 'app' then native apps have a long future. It's buggy, laggy, animations are wrong, graphics are low resolution in places, and user interface widgets are odd and non standard.
Financial Times Won't Give Apple A Cut, Drops iOS for Web App
21–30 of 90 posts
Re: Financial Times Won't Give Apple A Cut, Drops iOS for Web App
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
> By restricting HTML5 Audio controls, and rendering engine speed, it prevents games and music web apps from being viable inside the browser. It must be frustrating for the WebKit team when their engineering advancements are taken for granted and attributed to Chrome — the perceived bastion of web freedom — while they themselves are simultaneously criticized for assisting in a conspiracy against "the web" whenever th…
> It must be frustrating for the WebKit team when their engineering advancements are taken for granted and attributed to Chrome The chrome team makes more commits than the Apple webkit team. I know number of commits don't mean much but the chrome team is mostly reponsible for adding websocket, the file api, web workers and more. Also don't forget webkit itself is based on KDE's KHTML.
> but the chrome team is mostly reponsible for adding websocket, the file api, web workers...
Oh, so these features are comparable in effort and scale to an entire web browser and HTML5-compliant rendering engine then?
By your logic, Chrome is essentially KHTML + HTML5-fanboy-features. I guess that must mean Apple has been shipping a 2002-era build of Konquerer with each copy of Mac OS X then, huh? Because clearly WebKit itself is so minimal in comparison to the rest of Chrome as to be positively technologically inconsequential.
I hope you can see the irony of your remark in light of the original point I was making.
Re: Financial Times Won't Give Apple A Cut, Drops iOS for Web App
#23I think we are close to the tipping point where a majority of developers begin to favor webapps to iOS native apps. I've seen this coming a mile away. Apple almost lost a big portion of its development community 2 years ago with that whole 3rd party development platform issue. Apple relented, and they are now turning a different crank with the big subscription tax. They are playing a game of monopoly here. It's the s…
We're really nowhere near it at all. The basic economics is that the app market and the exposure from actually being in the app market is just far too massive for that to happen.
I'm also amazed at how often the myth that one day we'll all be using really crappy Html5 apps continues. Html5 compared to native apps done by an average developer just plain sucks, no amount of 'HTML5 web apps == AWESOME!' pretending and wishing will ever change that.
We'll have HTML6 in, what, 2025 maybe? So maybe all the wishes will come true then.
Re: Financial Times Won't Give Apple A Cut, Drops iOS for Web App
#24If this is the best you can do with an HTML5 'app' then native apps have a long future. It's buggy, laggy, animations are wrong, graphics are low resolution in places, and user interface widgets are odd and non standard.
That's why I'd rather just have the regular old "Web" for stuff like this. There seem to be a lot of experiments to 'appize' Web sites for tablets and the like, and while most of them look better than typical Web pages at first glance, they're usually laggy and less immediate than if you'd just seen a regular web page in the first place (a common issue is scrolling.. if I get the dreaded 8 frames per second effect, I'm outta there).
Re: Financial Times Won't Give Apple A Cut, Drops iOS for Web App
#25Apple is playing with fire, they have built an incredible platform for others to build on top of, but a platform requires a level of trust from developers and businesses in order for them to invest in it. Apple seems to be doing their best to destroy that trust. What Apple's greed seems to blind them to is that while, yes, companies gain a lot by building on Apple's platform, Apple also accrues a lot of benefits just by those apps existing, without having to take a 30% cut.
Re: Financial Times Won't Give Apple A Cut, Drops iOS for Web App
#26I think a lot of people are missing the bigger picture here, which is Apple is unwilling to just hand over user details, which the Financial Times and the likes want. The 30% cut "gripe" is just what they are telling the public to try to get you on "their" side. If I recall, Amazon actually had (has) a larger piece of the pie for subscriptions, but they are will to give out User Information.
Re: Financial Times Won't Give Apple A Cut, Drops iOS for Web App
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah if anyone can point out why Apple will be able to continue it's dominance over mobile apps with a 30% tax I'd really like to hear why.
Because their platform is superior to everything else out there. Because mobile apps is not even close to providing proper user experience. People expect snappy as hell execution on the iOS, the actual flow of the app is often more important than the looks. And in my experience the web apps just aren't there yet. Apple make no money on the app store it more or less goes to operations. You can call it a tax or you can…
If FT fans expect snappy iOS apps and all they can get is a substandard HTML app don't you think they'll considering ditching iOS when their contract is up?
Re: Financial Times Won't Give Apple A Cut, Drops iOS for Web App
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
> It must be frustrating for the WebKit team when their engineering advancements are taken for granted and attributed to Chrome The chrome team makes more commits than the Apple webkit team. I know number of commits don't mean much but the chrome team is mostly reponsible for adding websocket, the file api, web workers and more. Also don't forget webkit itself is based on KDE's KHTML.
> but the chrome team is mostly reponsible for adding websocket, the file api, web workers... Oh, so these features are comparable in effort and scale to an entire web browser and HTML5-compliant rendering engine then? By your logic, Chrome is essentially KHTML + HTML5-fanboy-features. I guess that must mean Apple has been shipping a 2002-era build of Konquerer with each copy of Mac OS X then, huh? Because clearly We…
>Oh, so these features are comparable in effort and scale to an entire web browser
Didn't Apple take the KHTML (Konqueror was a full fledged browser) code and then had to release their code because it was GPL. I remember reading about a complaint from the KHTML that Apple was releasing the code as a big blob and this was hindering KHTML integration.
Re: Financial Times Won't Give Apple A Cut, Drops iOS for Web App
#29I think we are close to the tipping point where a majority of developers begin to favor webapps to iOS native apps. I've seen this coming a mile away. Apple almost lost a big portion of its development community 2 years ago with that whole 3rd party development platform issue. Apple relented, and they are now turning a different crank with the big subscription tax. They are playing a game of monopoly here. It's the s…
>Apple currently holds one trump card with Safari on IOS devices though. By restricting HTML5 Audio controls, and rendering engine speed, it prevents games and music web apps from being viable inside the browser.
Relevant link: http://blog.millermedeiros.com/2011/01/ipad-is-the-new-ie6/
It's more than 14 months since Jobs wrote the blog blasting Flash and espousing HTML5 and Safari still has all these egregious issues. I think HTML5 is not a priority for Apple except to pay lip service to it when someone asks for Flash support. After all, it will threaten their lock-in with the App-store and the tithes on Apps and content and makes Apple the middleman. They have achieved what Comcast could only dream of, tax content sold over the internet.
Re: Financial Times Won't Give Apple A Cut, Drops iOS for Web App
#30If this is the best you can do with an HTML5 'app' then native apps have a long future. It's buggy, laggy, animations are wrong, graphics are low resolution in places, and user interface widgets are odd and non standard.
That's why I'd rather just have the regular old "Web" for stuff like this. There seem to be a lot of experiments to 'appize' Web sites for tablets and the like, and while most of them look better than typical Web pages at first glance, they're usually laggy and less immediate than if you'd just seen a regular web page in the first place (a common issue is scrolling.. if I get the dreaded 8 frames per second effect, I…
Yep. After using the NY Times Chrome "app" for a while I've gone back to using the web page. I can take in more information at a glance and spend less time paging. It's profoundly ironic that progress in user interfaces in the 21st century is construed as making things look more like their real-world counterparts.