Coffeehouse Thread

28 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

HTML5 sucks

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    Ok, don't get offended right away. I am saying this term in a general case. It sucks because it is simply not enough. All those buzz around HTML5, but, in reality, it is still a legacy standard. You can disagree with me, but, from what I have seen. Internet is pulling away from web-sites, which are HTML based. One obvious evidence of this is the apps. Instead of using web browser, people use apps instead.

     

    I have already thought of the following, native performance, screen resolution, so on and so forth. They can be resolved fairly ok in HTML. However, one thing is for certain, lack of standardized layer for new hardware features (multi-touch). I am not just talking about the multi-touch, I am talking about catching up with new hardware in general, multi-touch is just an example. Currently lack of multi-touch will be the weakest point of web standard. Thus, people will just move on to platform specific solutions, or silverlight which most likely will not run in browser for those devices anyway.

     

    I don't mean to be a party pooper, but, HTML5 is simply not enough. And for certain those WC3 arrogant people will not update HTML fast enough to support the new emerging market. I prefer standard, but, from the look of it, the standard is simply too crippled.

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    JoshRoss

    I suppose one man's trash is another man's treasure. If you think HTML5 sucks, try working with Windows Mobile 6.5.3. And if you think Windows Mobile 6.5.3 sucks, try Objective-C for a spin. Object-C doesn't have namespaces, so you have to come up with crapy schemes to keep your class names from colliding. Java sucks because most Java programmers are morons. Haskell sucks because most Haskell programs are too small. If you use anything long enough, it too will suck.

     

    Hell, the coffee house sucks because you can't delete duplicate posts.

     

    -Josh

  • User profile image
    brian.​shapiro

    I simply think HTML5 is overhyped.

     

    As an example, the Bing design thats in the works touted as being based on HTML5, but just about everything I see there could be done today using HTML4. The most difficult thing today would be the image transforms, but thats just a gimmick. HTML5 is being used to evoke "the next generation of the web", but the most significant thing about HTML5 is just a push for standardization. Standardization of audio and video, standardization of vector formats, standardization of microdata, etc.

     

    Besides that, you have two big things: the canvas tag, which I'm skeptical about, and offline storage for web apps, which I'm also skeptical abuot.

  • User profile image
    elmer

    brian.shapiro said:

    I simply think HTML5 is overhyped.

     

    As an example, the Bing design thats in the works touted as being based on HTML5, but just about everything I see there could be done today using HTML4. The most difficult thing today would be the image transforms, but thats just a gimmick. HTML5 is being used to evoke "the next generation of the web", but the most significant thing about HTML5 is just a push for standardization. Standardization of audio and video, standardization of vector formats, standardization of microdata, etc.

     

    Besides that, you have two big things: the canvas tag, which I'm skeptical about, and offline storage for web apps, which I'm also skeptical abuot.

    Perhaps a little bit more than that...

     

    http://www.w3.org/TR/html5-diff/

  • User profile image
    brian.​shapiro

    elmer said:
    brian.shapiro said:
    *snip*

    Perhaps a little bit more than that...

     

    http://www.w3.org/TR/html5-diff/

    I left out the things I don't find exciting. ie, header and footer? Nice additions, but its not going to revolutionize the web. There are a lot of other changes that are good but can already be replicated using libraries like jQuery.

     

    All good for developers, but the question is, why would an end user care about HTML5?

  • User profile image
    JoshRoss

    brian.shapiro said:
    elmer said:
    *snip*

    I left out the things I don't find exciting. ie, header and footer? Nice additions, but its not going to revolutionize the web. There are a lot of other changes that are good but can already be replicated using libraries like jQuery.

     

    All good for developers, but the question is, why would an end user care about HTML5?

    If the W3C wanted to do something revolutionary, it should start with removing tags rather than adding. HTML seems to be a big pile of steaming mess. If you can attach style with css, then there should be something for attaching structural annotations, like header and footer.

     

    -Josh

  • User profile image
    Maddus Mattus

    JoshRoss said:
    brian.shapiro said:
    *snip*

    If the W3C wanted to do something revolutionary, it should start with removing tags rather than adding. HTML seems to be a big pile of steaming mess. If you can attach style with css, then there should be something for attaching structural annotations, like header and footer.

     

    -Josh

    hear hear!

     

    I find myself drawn into HTML and I am letting WPF slide,..

     

    HTML 4 or 5, I really dont give a hoot. As long as I can write exiting software Smiley

  • User profile image
    elmer

    JoshRoss said:
    brian.shapiro said:
    *snip*

    If the W3C wanted to do something revolutionary, it should start with removing tags rather than adding. HTML seems to be a big pile of steaming mess. If you can attach style with css, then there should be something for attaching structural annotations, like header and footer.

     

    -Josh

    http://www.w3.org/TR/html5-diff/

     

    Removed items:

    3.5. Absent Elements

    3.6. Absent Attributes

     

    Redefined Items:

    3.3. Changed Elements

    3.4. Changed attributes

  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    JoshRoss said:

    I suppose one man's trash is another man's treasure. If you think HTML5 sucks, try working with Windows Mobile 6.5.3. And if you think Windows Mobile 6.5.3 sucks, try Objective-C for a spin. Object-C doesn't have namespaces, so you have to come up with crapy schemes to keep your class names from colliding. Java sucks because most Java programmers are morons. Haskell sucks because most Haskell programs are too small. If you use anything long enough, it too will suck.

     

    Hell, the coffee house sucks because you can't delete duplicate posts.

     

    -Josh

    That really has nothing to do with hardware adaptation. HTML simply cannot catch up with current hardware until someone come along and show them how a standard should push technology instead of lagging behind "horribly".

     

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    elmer

    magicalclick said:
    JoshRoss said:
    *snip*

    That really has nothing to do with hardware adaptation. HTML simply cannot catch up with current hardware until someone come along and show them how a standard should push technology instead of lagging behind "horribly".

     

    It's the network and response time that is critical.

     

    HTML is a good match for the typical speeds and reliability of dial-up and dsl connections.

     

    Were 100mbps+ fibre connections ubiquitous, then we would be using a different “web” technology.

     

    People use Silverlight on intranets for just that reason... the network speed offers the opportunity.

  • User profile image
    Maddus Mattus

    elmer said:
    magicalclick said:
    *snip*

    It's the network and response time that is critical.

     

    HTML is a good match for the typical speeds and reliability of dial-up and dsl connections.

     

    Were 100mbps+ fibre connections ubiquitous, then we would be using a different “web” technology.

     

    People use Silverlight on intranets for just that reason... the network speed offers the opportunity.

    I really don't like it that I have to wait for an application to load inside a browser.

     

    Regardless of the speed of the network. It really feels hacky.

     

    And Silverlight is way to slow for complicated applications. Currently I am forced to used a SL application to manage security. I don't know if it's this particular implementation, but drag 'n drop sux! It's also very sluggish when you scroll, animations are sluggish,...

     

    We did the same thing in HTML using jQuery and it's much more responsive.

  • User profile image
    elmer

    Maddus Mattus said:
    elmer said:
    *snip*

    I really don't like it that I have to wait for an application to load inside a browser.

     

    Regardless of the speed of the network. It really feels hacky.

     

    And Silverlight is way to slow for complicated applications. Currently I am forced to used a SL application to manage security. I don't know if it's this particular implementation, but drag 'n drop sux! It's also very sluggish when you scroll, animations are sluggish,...

     

    We did the same thing in HTML using jQuery and it's much more responsive.

    Yes, you're right, I should have said:

     

    People CAN use Silverlight on intranets for just that reason...

     

    I didn't mean to imply that it was necessarily the technology of choice, just because the network is fast enough... obviously that will still be dictated by the application requirements.

  • User profile image
    Maddus Mattus

    elmer said:
    Maddus Mattus said:
    *snip*

    Yes, you're right, I should have said:

     

    People CAN use Silverlight on intranets for just that reason...

     

    I didn't mean to imply that it was necessarily the technology of choice, just because the network is fast enough... obviously that will still be dictated by the application requirements.

    I cannot imagine any functional requirements that would put silverlight above html (from an application point of view). What the web has tought me, is that applications need to be broken down, one screen one task. So as for intranet/internet applications the added value for Silverlight (complex UI) is null and void.

     

    For streaming, I love the Silverlight player, beats the flash one hands down.

  • User profile image
    spivonious

    I agree. RIAs are the future, but there will always be a place for the browser, and HTML5 is the next logical step in that world.

  • User profile image
    intelman

    I think a move to native video formats and demos like what we saw with Bing at Apple's conference are compelling reasons that HTML 5 seems appealing. I for one am on board.

  • User profile image
    wkempf

    brian.shapiro said:
    elmer said:
    *snip*

    I left out the things I don't find exciting. ie, header and footer? Nice additions, but its not going to revolutionize the web. There are a lot of other changes that are good but can already be replicated using libraries like jQuery.

     

    All good for developers, but the question is, why would an end user care about HTML5?

    You can't replicate the feature using jQuery if JavaScript is turned off, and it's turned off for a surprisingly large number of users.

  • User profile image
    wkempf

    Maddus Mattus said:
    elmer said:
    *snip*

    I cannot imagine any functional requirements that would put silverlight above html (from an application point of view). What the web has tought me, is that applications need to be broken down, one screen one task. So as for intranet/internet applications the added value for Silverlight (complex UI) is null and void.

     

    For streaming, I love the Silverlight player, beats the flash one hands down.

    Just one example where SL would be the obvious choice based on functional requirements is any application that requires webcam support. There's numerous other examples. Yes, the vast majority of applications can be done in HTML5 rather than SL, but HTML5 isn't capable of everything that SL is.

  • User profile image
    wkempf

    The whole "standards don't innovate", "standards progress too slowly", "standards don't push technology" and other such laments are just plain stupid. They entirely miss the point of standards. HTML5 is an important progression, and what it provides will enable a whole lot of applications (general terms, not meant to be confused with an "app") that currently cannot be done without resorting to proprietary plugins with a limited reach. Those proprietary plugins will continue to be where the technology is pushed, and that's entirely the way things should be.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.