Apple's "HTML5 showcase" hardly uses any HTML5 at all. It's mostly CSS. So why they called it "HTML5 showcase" is the question of the day.
Marketing. Above all else Apple excels itself in marketing although this latest stunt seems to have backfired slightly, at least in the more technology-affine community.
Marketing. Above all else Apple excels itself in marketing although this latest stunt seems to have backfired slightly, at least in the more technology-affine community.
If they can get others to add 3D Transforms then I think it will be a win for Apple.
No it didn't backfire. The other browser makers are feeling sore because Apple showed what Safari is capable of and rubbed their noses in it.
This will push them to improve their browsers and be a win-win for everyone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erunno
Marketing. Above all else Apple excels itself in marketing although this latest stunt seems to have backfired slightly, at least in the more technology-affine community.
No it didn't backfire. The other browser makers are feeling sore because Apple showed what Safari is capable of and rubbed their noses in it.
This will push them to improve their browsers and be a win-win for everyone.
As you are aware and as already discussed, just to reitterate Apple's focus with these demos, in a couple instances Apple went so far as to use -webkit- in CSS when adding the appropriate prefix for the other browsers would have made them compatible, or even completely removing the working draft prefix altogether.
I actually expected this after seeing Apple post that HTML5 page. Apple is investing a lot in the web, but doing so rather quietly. Safari's webkit base is, no matter what is said in the court of public opinion, leading the charge in improving browser features, and bringing the web into a new age.
Sadly, the same cannot be said for Microsoft, who's idea of leading the way is stealing from others, or do the bare minimum to save face.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Microsoft hater, or an Apple Fanboy. It just seems Microsoft are really dragging their feet here, and they don't seem to care.
IMHO it seems more like Microsoft has Captain Peter "Wrongway" Peachfuzz trying to pretend he is Douglas "Wrongway" Corrigan at the helm and he doing one lousy job of it. Seriously it seemed that Microsoft put all its eggs in then Windows 7 basket and when that didn't take off as planned they didn't have anything in the wings to pick up the slack. How do you innovate when some 62% of your user base is still using an OS from 2001?
No it didn't backfire. The other browser makers are feeling sore because Apple showed what Safari is capable of and rubbed their noses in it.
You mean by adding over 100 --webkit prefixed CSS elements despite that many of them had already standardized versions? Interoperability my ass.
Or by claiming that this is a HTML5 showcase despite almost using no HTML5 elements (case in point: 360 rotation done in HTML4).
Or excluding browsers from tests which they could run without problems (e.g. Chrome does fine with almost all tests). If they used browser sniffing to exclude browsers from specific (!) tests which really did support certain feature this at least be understandable.
It was marketing stunt, no more or less, and a bad one at that.
You mean by adding over 100 --webkit prefixed CSS elements despite that many of them had already standardized versions? Interoperability my ass.
Or by claiming that this is a HTML5 showcase despite almost using no HTML5 elements (case in point: 360 rotation done in HTML4).
Or excluding browsers from tests which they could run without problems (e.g. Chrome does fine with almost all tests). If they used browser sniffing to exclude browsers from specific (!) tests which really did support certain feature this at least be understandable.
It was marketing stunt, no more or less, and a bad one at that.
Who said anything about interoperability? You're being conflicting with your own post when you mention code that specifically works with WebKit despite most of it being standardized in modern browsers and then stating inoperability was an implied goal that they failed to achieve when they are clearly pimping Safari ?*not Chrome, not Firefox, not IE, not Opera.
Then you make a weird comment about it using almost no HTML5, when they clearly do. I think you meant to point out that much of the tests revolve around CSS3 elements, which they clearly address on the site. In the title they state "HTML5 and web standards" which makes sense as most people have no idea what CSS is but are somewhat familiar with the concept of HTML.
As a marketing stunt it remains to be seen how effective it will be. If we see 3D Transforms hit the nightlies of other browsers within a couple months I'd call it a raging success. If we see Safari's marketshare increase more than it has in previous months I'd call it a raging success.
You seem to have a deep hatred for these demos but answer us this: If Apple's goal is prevent people jumping from Safari to Chrome or Firefox, how exactly do they do that by showcasing how Chrome and Firefox are just as good, if not better? Exactly!
You must have missed His Steveness recent crusade against Flash in which he usually uses the benefits of standardization (from which interoperability stems from) as one of his main arguments against Adobe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism
You're being conflicting with your own post when you mention code that specifically works with WebKit
No:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erunno
Or excluding browsers from tests which they could run without problems (e.g. Chrome does fine with almost all tests). If they used browser sniffing to exclude browsers from specific (!) tests which really did support certain feature this at least be understandable.
Emphasis mine. And thanks for telling me that this page is meant for pimping Safari. I would have never guessed without your help. The point is that Apple is doing so in a very underhanded way. I think someone used the term "intellectually dishonest" and I tend to fully agree.
You mean by adding over 100 --webkit prefixed CSS elements despite that many of them had already standardized versions? Interoperability my ass.
Its clear Apple wants these CSS extensions added to the official spec. How can Apple show interoperability right now, when no one else supports all of these functions.
Quote:
Or excluding browsers from tests which they could run without problems (e.g. Chrome does fine with almost all tests).
They didn't want almost all the demonstration to work, they wanted all of it to work. Safari was the only browser that Apple has any control over.
Quote:
It was marketing stunt, no more or less, and a bad one at that.
You are very right it was a marketing stunt. One that will push everyone else to improve their browsers.
I can understand other browser makers feeling snubbed by the way Apple presented these elements. At the same time they are not proprietary to Apple.
Other web developers that have no affiliation to Apple are creating HTML5 demos using many of the exact same tools Apple used in its demo. CSS is open source and intended to be added to the official HTML5 spec.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erunno
Emphasis mine. And thanks for telling me that this page is meant for pimping Safari. I would have never guessed without your help. The point is that Apple is doing so in a very underhanded way. I think someone used the term "intellectually dishonest" and I tend to fully agree.
Chrome is like a Ferrari and Safari looks like a VW Beetle. Your'e right. What used to be the best looking browser is now just boring.
Not being a fan of Word95 style black Times New Roman on white background, I was pleased to find that someone had located the HTML/CSS for the new Safari Reader functionality and worked out how to install this. I played around a design more suiting to my tastes, which is available for you to download and install yourself.
Custom style mod for Safari 5′s Reader feature Plain white background, cool grey Helvetica or sans-serif fonts with basic styling to support headlines tables and a clean scrollbar amongst others.
Comments
Apple's "HTML5 showcase" hardly uses any HTML5 at all. It's mostly CSS. So why they called it "HTML5 showcase" is the question of the day.
Marketing. Above all else Apple excels itself in marketing although this latest stunt seems to have backfired slightly, at least in the more technology-affine community.
Marketing. Above all else Apple excels itself in marketing although this latest stunt seems to have backfired slightly, at least in the more technology-affine community.
If they can get others to add 3D Transforms then I think it will be a win for Apple.
This will push them to improve their browsers and be a win-win for everyone.
Marketing. Above all else Apple excels itself in marketing although this latest stunt seems to have backfired slightly, at least in the more technology-affine community.
No it didn't backfire. The other browser makers are feeling sore because Apple showed what Safari is capable of and rubbed their noses in it.
This will push them to improve their browsers and be a win-win for everyone.
As you are aware and as already discussed, just to reitterate Apple's focus with these demos, in a couple instances Apple went so far as to use -webkit- in CSS when adding the appropriate prefix for the other browsers would have made them compatible, or even completely removing the working draft prefix altogether.
I actually expected this after seeing Apple post that HTML5 page. Apple is investing a lot in the web, but doing so rather quietly. Safari's webkit base is, no matter what is said in the court of public opinion, leading the charge in improving browser features, and bringing the web into a new age.
Sadly, the same cannot be said for Microsoft, who's idea of leading the way is stealing from others, or do the bare minimum to save face.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a Microsoft hater, or an Apple Fanboy. It just seems Microsoft are really dragging their feet here, and they don't seem to care.
IMHO it seems more like Microsoft has Captain Peter "Wrongway" Peachfuzz trying to pretend he is Douglas "Wrongway" Corrigan at the helm and he doing one lousy job of it.
No it didn't backfire. The other browser makers are feeling sore because Apple showed what Safari is capable of and rubbed their noses in it.
You mean by adding over 100 --webkit prefixed CSS elements despite that many of them had already standardized versions? Interoperability my ass.
Or by claiming that this is a HTML5 showcase despite almost using no HTML5 elements (case in point: 360 rotation done in HTML4).
Or excluding browsers from tests which they could run without problems (e.g. Chrome does fine with almost all tests). If they used browser sniffing to exclude browsers from specific (!) tests which really did support certain feature this at least be understandable.
It was marketing stunt, no more or less, and a bad one at that.
You mean by adding over 100 --webkit prefixed CSS elements despite that many of them had already standardized versions? Interoperability my ass.
Or by claiming that this is a HTML5 showcase despite almost using no HTML5 elements (case in point: 360 rotation done in HTML4).
Or excluding browsers from tests which they could run without problems (e.g. Chrome does fine with almost all tests). If they used browser sniffing to exclude browsers from specific (!) tests which really did support certain feature this at least be understandable.
It was marketing stunt, no more or less, and a bad one at that.
Who said anything about interoperability? You're being conflicting with your own post when you mention code that specifically works with WebKit despite most of it being standardized in modern browsers and then stating inoperability was an implied goal that they failed to achieve when they are clearly pimping Safari ?*not Chrome, not Firefox, not IE, not Opera.
Then you make a weird comment about it using almost no HTML5, when they clearly do. I think you meant to point out that much of the tests revolve around CSS3 elements, which they clearly address on the site. In the title they state "HTML5 and web standards" which makes sense as most people have no idea what CSS is but are somewhat familiar with the concept of HTML.
As a marketing stunt it remains to be seen how effective it will be. If we see 3D Transforms hit the nightlies of other browsers within a couple months I'd call it a raging success. If we see Safari's marketshare increase more than it has in previous months I'd call it a raging success.
You seem to have a deep hatred for these demos but answer us this: If Apple's goal is prevent people jumping from Safari to Chrome or Firefox, how exactly do they do that by showcasing how Chrome and Firefox are just as good, if not better? Exactly!
Who said anything about interoperability?
You must have missed His Steveness recent crusade against Flash in which he usually uses the benefits of standardization (from which interoperability stems from) as one of his main arguments against Adobe.
You're being conflicting with your own post when you mention code that specifically works with WebKit
No:
Or excluding browsers from tests which they could run without problems (e.g. Chrome does fine with almost all tests). If they used browser sniffing to exclude browsers from specific (!) tests which really did support certain feature this at least be understandable.
Emphasis mine. And thanks for telling me that this page is meant for pimping Safari. I would have never guessed without your help. The point is that Apple is doing so in a very underhanded way. I think someone used the term "intellectually dishonest" and I tend to fully agree.
Good point, wrong browser. Chrome handles this the best of any browser.
If Chrome extensions could do a fraction of what Firefox extensions are capable of your objection might even have been valid.
And thanks for telling me that this page is meant for pimping Safari. I would have never guessed without your help.
Based on your posts you still haven't figured it out.
PS: Who writes "His Steveness" and expects to be taken seriously... L1|<3 4 realzees, y0!
You mean by adding over 100 --webkit prefixed CSS elements despite that many of them had already standardized versions? Interoperability my ass.
Its clear Apple wants these CSS extensions added to the official spec. How can Apple show interoperability right now, when no one else supports all of these functions.
Or excluding browsers from tests which they could run without problems (e.g. Chrome does fine with almost all tests).
They didn't want almost all the demonstration to work, they wanted all of it to work. Safari was the only browser that Apple has any control over.
It was marketing stunt, no more or less, and a bad one at that.
You are very right it was a marketing stunt. One that will push everyone else to improve their browsers.
Other web developers that have no affiliation to Apple are creating HTML5 demos using many of the exact same tools Apple used in its demo. CSS is open source and intended to be added to the official HTML5 spec.
Emphasis mine. And thanks for telling me that this page is meant for pimping Safari. I would have never guessed without your help. The point is that Apple is doing so in a very underhanded way. I think someone used the term "intellectually dishonest" and I tend to fully agree.
Chrome is like a Ferrari and Safari looks like a VW Beetle. Your'e right. What used to be the best looking browser is now just boring.
Not being a fan of Word95 style black Times New Roman on white background, I was pleased to find that someone had located the HTML/CSS for the new Safari Reader functionality and worked out how to install this. I played around a design more suiting to my tastes, which is available for you to download and install yourself.
Custom style mod for Safari 5′s Reader feature Plain white background, cool grey Helvetica or sans-serif fonts with basic styling to support headlines tables and a clean scrollbar amongst others.
Download at http://www.munjeet.com/comment/apple-safari-reader/
Feedback welcome.