It absolutely is. FTW even MSFT has a platform preview of IE9's capabilities including html5. although they have their own interpretation of HTML5 it seems.
I just took a look at the IE9 stuff (and ran their demos in safari). I'm curious about your comment that they have their own interpretation of HTML5?
From what I can tell, they are actually supporting the standards, including attempting to pass acid3 (still work to do there) and css3 (looks compliant).
I'll be great if they actually fully support html5. It'll make life easier developing our web site.
The trick is going to be getting people to actually upgrade to IE9. We still get users on IE6.
I just took a look at the IE9 stuff (and ran their demos in safari). I'm curious about your comment that they have their own interpretation of HTML5?
From what I can tell, they are actually supporting the standards, including attempting to pass acid3 (still work to do there) and css3 (looks compliant).
I'll be great if they actually fully support html5. It'll make life easier developing our web site.
The trick is going to be getting people to actually upgrade to IE9. We still get users on IE6.
LOL IE 6 is the bane of my dev's existence. We've basically stopped supporting it for most of our clients. They complained, but eventually stopped. A small problem with getting people to upgrade is that IE9 is not going to support windows XP. Those are old machines, but PC users seem to keep machines longer and not update frequently, leading us back to the IE 6 problem. Regarding MSFT's interpretation of HTML 5 MSFT feels they are waiting for the standard to solidify. Did you happen to see the ARS feature? It describes MSFT's choices in supporting specific standards vs. other browsers.
It's not my expertise by any stretch of the meaning, so here's a blurb that might describe it best...
""We love HTML5 so much that we want to do it right," Hachamovitch told Ars. Microsoft is putting a huge emphasis on HTML5 with IE9, but its approach is still very strict. Since HTML5 is not complete, and likely won't be anytime soon, the IE9 team is being very careful about which features it implements. Other browser makers aren't concerned about implementing a part of HTML5 one way in one version, then changing it in a subsequent version, and then changing it again... Redmond, on the other hand, is taking the same approach with IE9 as it did with IE8: support the current Web while pushing the new Web forward, according to Rob Mauceri, Principal Group Program Manager of IE. "Our approach to it is, let's really get the standard right," Mauceri told Ars. He admitted, however, that standards change and that it is quite likely there will be parts of HTML5 that change even after IE9 is released."
Did you happen to see the ARS feature? It describes MSFT's choices in supporting specific standards vs. other browsers.
It's not my expertise by any stretch of the meaning, but here's a blurb that sort of describes it best...
""We love HTML5 so much that we want to do it right," Hachamovitch told Ars. Microsoft is putting a huge emphasis on HTML5 with IE9, but its approach is still very strict. Since HTML5 is not complete, and likely won't be anytime soon, the IE9 team is being very careful about which features it implements. Other browser makers aren't concerned about implementing a part of HTML5 one way in one version, then changing it in a subsequent version, and then changing it again... Redmond, on the other hand, is taking the same approach with IE9 as it did with IE8: support the current Web while pushing the new Web forward, according to Rob Mauceri, Principal Group Program Manager of IE. "Our approach to it is, let's really get the standard right," Mauceri told Ars. He admitted, however, that standards change and that it is quite likely there will be parts of HTML5 that change even after IE9 is released."
But if it eventually passes the Acid3 test, it should have met a certain standard.
I think Acid tests in general are intentionally poorly coded to see how well browsers can cope with things. Although there is some SVG stuff in Acid 3 it is not a test of HTML5.
But if it eventually passes the Acid3 test, it should have met a certain standard.
I take what Hachamovitch is saying as they aren't going to implement every feature until it really becomes the standard; rather than implement it, revise it and possibly revise it again. That's why the 55% (?) acid 3 test rating. They just want to "do it" once so they aren't going to use code that might change. Kind of like the Iphone OS's unofficial API's . There there, but Apple doesn't want anyone to use them because they might change.
So if Flash is overly dependand on CPU resouces and the code is bloated, can't Adobe rewrite Flash to be leaner and use less of the CPU. That's what Adobe is doing as we speak, Right?
It's taken a commercial device and another browser war to make a lot of people realise that serving something over HTTP does not make it a web site. If someone is dumb enough to cripple their web site by putting flash in it, more fool them.
So if Flash is overly dependand on CPU resouces and the code is bloated, can't Adobe rewrite Flash to be leaner and use less of the CPU. That's what Adobe is doing as we speak, Right?
They are trying to make it better, but it's my understanding that the big problem with their solution is they moved dependance from the CPU to the GPU, still optimizing flash for desktop and laptop PC's with independent GPU's.
Even if they make it better it would be hard to argue that flash support is a good fit for mobile devices/ netbooks that don't have the battery life to really support a GPU that is not on chip.
"Mobile" is the new holy grail in computing (Google just stated that they expect mobile advertising to outgrow all PC's and laptop's in a few years; is that a good reason to rip off Apple? ) so the pressure is put on adobe and flash because it generally doesn't run well or is simply more difficult to support than it's worth on mobil devices.
There's much more to it and I'm not sure I got it all correct, but that's all I got ATM.
There are more in the tutorials section but I don't care to list them all out for you.
Sorry, but I'm not seeing any Flash on that site either. I've got Click to Flash installed, so if it were there I'd see big gear icons or whatever. I haven't spotted any. Not even that video on the about page you linked earlier.
I think it is pretty ironical that a lot of people who are all down on Flash and praising HTML5 have never output a line of code in their life. Yet when you go to jQuery.org where you would think there would be nothing but JS and HTML5 they are using Flash all over the place.
I program about 85% to 90% flash. I like it a lot ... as a matter of fact I have at least 5 sites that are 100% flash. One html page with flash movies loading and unloading as needed.
I welcome flash's depart for one reason and one reason only.
MOBILE Sites
Not just talking iphone here. No mobile device parses it properly. Obviously this is a big issue for adobe ... if they don't hurry up, not sure it can survive in future.
All code for controlling the flash is in javascript via jQuery. Since John is at Mozilla and driving performance of Javascript with HTML5 on Mozilla I would expect two kinds of sites for jQuery, sooner rather than later.
One that queries the headers for HTML5 and one for XHTML1.0 Strict that the current site uses.
Of course a choice of video formats will be available and I'd bet flowplayer for HTML5 will evolve as well.
Comments
It absolutely is. FTW even MSFT has a platform preview of IE9's capabilities including html5. although they have their own interpretation of HTML5 it seems.
I just took a look at the IE9 stuff (and ran their demos in safari). I'm curious about your comment that they have their own interpretation of HTML5?
From what I can tell, they are actually supporting the standards, including attempting to pass acid3 (still work to do there) and css3 (looks compliant).
I'll be great if they actually fully support html5. It'll make life easier developing our web site.
The trick is going to be getting people to actually upgrade to IE9. We still get users on IE6.
http://jquery.org/about
hmm ... so that's what you called all over the site....
I just took a look at the IE9 stuff (and ran their demos in safari). I'm curious about your comment that they have their own interpretation of HTML5?
From what I can tell, they are actually supporting the standards, including attempting to pass acid3 (still work to do there) and css3 (looks compliant).
I'll be great if they actually fully support html5. It'll make life easier developing our web site.
The trick is going to be getting people to actually upgrade to IE9. We still get users on IE6.
LOL IE 6 is the bane of my dev's existence. We've basically stopped supporting it for most of our clients. They complained, but eventually stopped. A small problem with getting people to upgrade is that IE9 is not going to support windows XP. Those are old machines, but PC users seem to keep machines longer and not update frequently, leading us back to the IE 6 problem. Regarding MSFT's interpretation of HTML 5 MSFT feels they are waiting for the standard to solidify. Did you happen to see the ARS feature? It describes MSFT's choices in supporting specific standards vs. other browsers.
It's not my expertise by any stretch of the meaning, so here's a blurb that might describe it best...
""We love HTML5 so much that we want to do it right," Hachamovitch told Ars. Microsoft is putting a huge emphasis on HTML5 with IE9, but its approach is still very strict. Since HTML5 is not complete, and likely won't be anytime soon, the IE9 team is being very careful about which features it implements. Other browser makers aren't concerned about implementing a part of HTML5 one way in one version, then changing it in a subsequent version, and then changing it again... Redmond, on the other hand, is taking the same approach with IE9 as it did with IE8: support the current Web while pushing the new Web forward, according to Rob Mauceri, Principal Group Program Manager of IE. "Our approach to it is, let's really get the standard right," Mauceri told Ars. He admitted, however, that standards change and that it is quite likely there will be parts of HTML5 that change even after IE9 is released."
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/new...ste-of-ie9.ars
Did you happen to see the ARS feature? It describes MSFT's choices in supporting specific standards vs. other browsers.
It's not my expertise by any stretch of the meaning, but here's a blurb that sort of describes it best...
""We love HTML5 so much that we want to do it right," Hachamovitch told Ars. Microsoft is putting a huge emphasis on HTML5 with IE9, but its approach is still very strict. Since HTML5 is not complete, and likely won't be anytime soon, the IE9 team is being very careful about which features it implements. Other browser makers aren't concerned about implementing a part of HTML5 one way in one version, then changing it in a subsequent version, and then changing it again... Redmond, on the other hand, is taking the same approach with IE9 as it did with IE8: support the current Web while pushing the new Web forward, according to Rob Mauceri, Principal Group Program Manager of IE. "Our approach to it is, let's really get the standard right," Mauceri told Ars. He admitted, however, that standards change and that it is quite likely there will be parts of HTML5 that change even after IE9 is released."
http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/new...ste-of-ie9.ars
I am not quite sure what he meant either.
But if it eventually passes the Acid3 test, it should have met a certain standard.
I am not quite sure what he meant either.
But if it eventually passes the Acid3 test, it should have met a certain standard.
I think Acid tests in general are intentionally poorly coded to see how well browsers can cope with things. Although there is some SVG stuff in Acid 3 it is not a test of HTML5.
I am not quite sure what he meant either.
But if it eventually passes the Acid3 test, it should have met a certain standard.
I take what Hachamovitch is saying as they aren't going to implement every feature until it really becomes the standard; rather than implement it, revise it and possibly revise it again. That's why the 55% (?) acid 3 test rating. They just want to "do it" once so they aren't going to use code that might change. Kind of like the Iphone OS's unofficial API's . There there, but Apple doesn't want anyone to use them because they might change.
I wish AI would stop perpetuating nonsensical rumors and speculation. Obviously this is not true because Flash is indispensable.
What's not true? You're being sarcastic, right?
OK it's sarcasm. LOL
No?
Why not?
Would cost too much?
If your content doesn't play nicely with Apple devices, you're doing it wrong.
The writing's on the wall.
If your content doesn't play nicely with Apple devices, you're doing it wrong.
Excellent! I have waited several decades to see that come to pass
I wish AI would stop perpetuating nonsensical rumors and speculation. Obviously this is not true because Flash is indispensable.
Haha good one, great sense of humor.
So if Flash is overly dependand on CPU resouces and the code is bloated, can't Adobe rewrite Flash to be leaner and use less of the CPU. That's what Adobe is doing as we speak, Right?
They are trying to make it better, but it's my understanding that the big problem with their solution is they moved dependance from the CPU to the GPU, still optimizing flash for desktop and laptop PC's with independent GPU's.
Even if they make it better it would be hard to argue that flash support is a good fit for mobile devices/ netbooks that don't have the battery life to really support a GPU that is not on chip.
"Mobile" is the new holy grail in computing (Google just stated that they expect mobile advertising to outgrow all PC's and laptop's in a few years; is that a good reason to rip off Apple?
There's much more to it and I'm not sure I got it all correct, but that's all I got ATM.
Anyone see a trend forming?
Nah.
Or at least that's what Adobe is likely telling itself.
Visions of Enron-like employee meetings where the CEO, etc. pump up the crowd to "buy more stock [so I can sell mine]".
Anyone see a trend forming?
Nah.
Or at least that's what Adobe is likely telling itself.
And what a whole bunch of people on most other people's ignore list are telling themselves.
There are more in the tutorials section but I don't care to list them all out for you.
Sorry, but I'm not seeing any Flash on that site either. I've got Click to Flash installed, so if it were there I'd see big gear icons or whatever. I haven't spotted any. Not even that video on the about page you linked earlier.
I think it is pretty ironical that a lot of people who are all down on Flash and praising HTML5 have never output a line of code in their life. Yet when you go to jQuery.org where you would think there would be nothing but JS and HTML5 they are using Flash all over the place.
I program about 85% to 90% flash. I like it a lot ... as a matter of fact I have at least 5 sites that are 100% flash. One html page with flash movies loading and unloading as needed.
I welcome flash's depart for one reason and one reason only.
MOBILE Sites
Not just talking iphone here. No mobile device parses it properly. Obviously this is a big issue for adobe ... if they don't hurry up, not sure it can survive in future.
http://jquery.org/about
And?
<div style="text-align: center;font-size:16px;"><a id="player0" style="margin: 0pt auto; display: block; width: 520px; height: 330px;" href="http://content.jquery.com/jquery14/07-jqueryproject-hi.flv"><img src="http://static.jquery.com/org/images/project-video.png"; style="text-decoration:none;border:0px;"/><br/>Watch video of John Resig talking about the jQuery Project.</a></div>
<p><script src="http://static.jquery.com/jquery14/wp-content/themes/jquery14/flowplayer/flowplayer-3.1.4.min.js" type="text/javascript"></script> <script type="text/javascript">// <![CDATA[
flowplayer("player0", "http://static.jquery.com/jquery14/wp-content/themes/jquery14/flowplayer/flowplayer-3.1.5.swf", { canvas: { background: "#000000", backgroundGradient: "none" },clip: { autoPlay: true, scaling: "fit" },plugins:{ gatracker: { url: "http://static.jquery.com/jquery14/wp-content/themes/jquery14/flowplayer/flowplayer.analytics-3.1.5.swf", labels: { start: "Start", play: "Play", pause: "Pause", resume: "Resume", seek: "Seek", stop: "Stop", finish: "Finish", mute: "Mute", unmute: "Unmute", fullscreen: "Full Screen",fullscreenexit: "Full Screen Exit" }, debug: false, trackingMode: "AS3", googleId: "UA-1076265-2"}}});
// ]]></script></p>
http://flowplayer.org/
All code for controlling the flash is in javascript via jQuery. Since John is at Mozilla and driving performance of Javascript with HTML5 on Mozilla I would expect two kinds of sites for jQuery, sooner rather than later.
One that queries the headers for HTML5 and one for XHTML1.0 Strict that the current site uses.
Of course a choice of video formats will be available and I'd bet flowplayer for HTML5 will evolve as well.