51–60 of 76 posts
Youtube's HTML5 player is still very alpha and poorly designed (still no fullscreen?). It has hardly changed in over a year since it was released. I question Google/Youtube's commitment to moving to HTML5.
I've always questioned it. Reason: Webcam support. YouTube was founded on the idea that people could record via webcam and post videos immediately with no knowledge of video files, etc. How is HTML5 solving this problem for YouTube?
IE8 has dropped 12% share in a year. Firefox has dropped 2% in a year. Safari has climbed 12% in a year (iPad and iPhone usage). Chrome has climbed 6% in a year. IE7 has dropped 7%. IE9 obviously has climbed 10% share.
That's 55% of audience that has an HTML5-capable browser. Enough for us to put in CSS3 tweaks, selectors, etc., but not enough to abandon the metric ton of legacy Javascript and div soup that we have. At its current rate, IE8 is going to be around for a long, long, long time, much like IE6 was.
“I think the disappearance of Flash is closer than people think,” ABI senior analyst Mark Beccue said in a press release accompanying the data. This is from the mouth of someone who doesn't really understand what Flash is, apparently. HTML5 may dethrone Flash as the defacto video delivery system. But, to say HTML5 completely obliterates Flash is...kinda hyperbolic in a way.
So what reasons are there to use flash over HTML5, I ask myself and the HN crowd? -Video. (Mwoah, only non-WebM video, can't really count this one) -Webcam (thanks garethsprice) -Simultaneous sounds (thanks AndyJPartridge) -Cross-browser support (browsers interpreting HTML5 differently) -??? Non competitive advantages: -Games (see Angry Birds) -3D hardware acceleration (both have the same security issues exposing sha…
I can't get background music and sound effects working simultaneously under iOS using just those standards.
The iOS and Android browsers have laughable HTML5 support. On paper they may seem OK, but implementations are highly buggy at best. (Speaking from the perspective as an HTML5 game dev.) WP7 might be the first to have a good default browser for HTML5, and that kind of dumbfounds me. Get on the ball, Apple and Google. I know it's in your best interests to keep the more powerful stuff out of your mobile browsers, but th…
If you're going to compare the IE9 mobile browser, compare it with iOS 5.0 browser and Android 4.0 browser (also coming out this fall).
The only thing that will keep Flash alive even once HTML5 is pretty much universally supported will be the content control Flash has. With the or tag, all you have to do is view the page source and you can download anything. I think companies like Vevo will fight hard against that.
Or even digging through various directories to find where your video's been downloaded to.
For a while there, Flash was insisting on deleting its files (the directory entry is removed but the handle and content remain) in Linux. You can still find the filehandle through /proc and restore it.
Content control doesn't work so long as users own their systems and you've got to distribute it in some means or another.
Browser trends from a fairly-well-trafficked site, this month: 31% IE8, 18% Firefox, 16% Safari, 11% Chrome, 11% IE7, 10% IE9, 3% Other (IE6, mostly). IE8 has dropped 12% share in a year. Firefox has dropped 2% in a year. Safari has climbed 12% in a year (iPad and iPhone usage). Chrome has climbed 6% in a year. IE7 has dropped 7%. IE9 obviously has climbed 10% share. That's 55% of audience that has an HTML5-capable b…
It's completely misleading to suddenly add iOS browser market share to desktop Safari market share and go like "Wow. Safari market share grew 12% - in a year!" - when Mobile Safari has grown at a steady pace since 2007 and has never been considered part of desktop Safari's market share.
They may share code with their desktop counter-parts, but they are not the same, and if you are going to lump the desktop version with the mobile version together, then at least do it for all browsers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think video will remain one of the last applications of Flash on the web, because there is no way to implement DRM in HTML5. What's interesting is that even the latest video chat applications by Facebook and Google do not use Flash but their own proprietary plugins (though Google aims to replace this by standard web technologies). What other use cases are there for Flash (let's say in one year, when HTML5 capable b…
DRM will be obsolete, because there's no consumer demand for it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think video will remain one of the last applications of Flash on the web, because there is no way to implement DRM in HTML5. What's interesting is that even the latest video chat applications by Facebook and Google do not use Flash but their own proprietary plugins (though Google aims to replace this by standard web technologies). What other use cases are there for Flash (let's say in one year, when HTML5 capable b…
You're trying to dilute Flash into a few "kinda necessary" features. * The kind of 3D coming from Flash Player 11 makes WebGL look bad. * Audio API? * How about recording via webcam (kinda important to YouTube). * Not sure how HTML5 stacks up against Flash in terms of handling advertising (also important to YouTube), but I think Flash wins here. * Flex, Adobe AIR? Oh yeah, technology also evolves. As much as I love t…
The iOS and Android browsers have laughable HTML5 support. On paper they may seem OK, but implementations are highly buggy at best. (Speaking from the perspective as an HTML5 game dev.) WP7 might be the first to have a good default browser for HTML5, and that kind of dumbfounds me. Get on the ball, Apple and Google. I know it's in your best interests to keep the more powerful stuff out of your mobile browsers, but th…
The iOS and Android browsers have laughable HTML5 support. On paper they may seem OK, but implementations are highly buggy at best. (Speaking from the perspective as an HTML5 game dev.) WP7 might be the first to have a good default browser for HTML5, and that kind of dumbfounds me. Get on the ball, Apple and Google. I know it's in your best interests to keep the more powerful stuff out of your mobile browsers, but th…
Yeah, for all the HTML5 webapp ferver, if you've actually designed/developed one for mobile devices you know how bad it is. Mobile devices are simply too underpowered at the moment to run huge amounts of interpreted code without struggling.
I don't really think that's established yet -- Android's default browser doesn't have the same engine that chrome does. It's obviously going to be slower than desktop, but it might still be improved to the point of being fast enough.
Also, see this post about code generation on ARM: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2805825