Slashdot Mirror
Apple's HTML5 and Standards Gallery Not Standard
snitch writes "Apple has created an HTML5 Showcase that presents its vision for the next generation of the WWW. The fact that this page is only accessible using the Safari browser, while Apple advocates about web standards, has caused many to criticize the company's lack of broader platform support. The showcase demonstrates several HTML5 capabilities and features that have to do with video, typography, transitions, audio, etc. Further, on the front page the company states that 'Standards aren't add-ons to the web. They are the web. And you can start using them today.' The latter statement falls short by the fact that the featured examples only work with the Safari browser, and in the case of the CSS 3D transforms demonstration, require Mac OS X Snow Leopard (Safari PC or plain Leopard won't do)."
Apple is Microsoft 2.0
Worked for me in Chrome.
How about you actually try clicking one of the showcase items before you claim that it 'worked'?
Yeah, HTML5 is the future and as soon as we get rid of flash the better, but if you are going to try and show how its done, then do it right or don't do it at all, Apple.
Have a look at this: http://apirocks.com/html5/html5.html#slide1
This is a very nice demo that doesn't tell you to get XYZ browser. Sure, some parts might not work at all if you are not running on the latest chrome or webkit browser, but most demos work and I find it to be a nicer way of doing things (IMHO).
(This was part of a presentation done by some googlers about HTML5 a few months ago)
HTML5 is still a work in progress. They could have made a demo that only uses those features which are already widely supported, but it wouldn't have been as impressive. Or they could have made a demo that uses the latest bleeding-edge proposals for HTML5, and let it fail on most people's browsers - perhaps even worse.
Given that it's meant to be a showcase of things to come, it makes sense to require you to use the one browser that currently works with it. Even Mozilla sometimes releases demos that require the latest Firefox beta to test. Using browser sniffing to enforce it is certainly bad form, but they probably thought that otherwise people would just click through, see a broken demo, and not even realize they aren't seeing what they're meant to see. Hopefully they'll relax the restriction once (if) more browsers implement support for these proposed new features.
Apple tends to take standards that are in their infancy, and make them mainstream.
I don't see anything wrong with this, other than it making other browsers like FF3 look like they haven't been innovating.
Every new Apple mobile device and every new Mac -- along with the latest version of Apple's Safari web browser -- supports web standards including HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript. These web standards are open, reliable, highly secure, and efficient. They allow web designers and developers to create advanced graphics, typography, animations, and transitions. Standards aren't add-ons to the web. They are the web. And you can start using them today.
The way they say it, makes it seem that you know any HTML5 enabled browser should run HTML5 enabled content.
Yes, it did. Many of them also work in Opera. You're just - no offense - too stupid to change your browser's User Agent string so that it identifies itself as Safari, which is the only thing these demos check for.
You are - no offense - an arrogant prick who has missed the point. They claim to advocate standards across the intarwebs for all, putting up a page to view a new whiz-bang standard, but are forcing you to either download their browser, or take (what are to normal users) extraordinary means, to view the content.
Ability to change the User Agent has nothing at all to do with anything in this case.
Or how about I DON'T?
This is an interoperability demo, dumbass!
Which means that Firefox's "failing" is really Apple's own epic fail.
You seem to be missing the point: The fact that UA spoofing works is generally proof of either laziness or malice. Laziness is certainly common enough(remember the good old days when large numbers of sites would shriek for IE; but render just fine if FF was set to IE's UA string?); but malice also occurs from time to time(The old Opera/MSN story, for instance).
In this case, the fact that Apple is just UA sniffing is shabby at best. Just checking for feature support isn't rocket surgery. Neither would be sending the least interesting summer intern to test the demos on a couple of other browsers that are likely to work and accepting those UAs as well. The fact that their "HTML5 demo" is just "transparent Safari propaganda" isn't illegal or anything; but talking up "web standards" and then hardcoding your demo to only work with your browser doesn't exactly scream "intellectual honesty"...
Not the popular opinion, but think about it. M$ started out the same way.
- Get people hooked on the new-exciting-and-different (windows 3.1)
- you were a Luddite if you weren't adopting it
- People that new almost *nothing* about computers could "use" a computer
After the customer base was established, Microsoft Works came in and locked everyone into a proprietary format (they didn't know better). This was followed by Excel, Word and Access, and then Exchange.
Apple is taking the same road and once again people who don't know they don't know, don't know.
boycott slashdot February 10th - 17th check out: altSlashdot.org
Criticizing Apple for making a showcase of what they can do with standards not comply with standard browsers is trolling?! What does Apple have to do for fanboys to realize that they are just another GenericBigCompany(tm) who will rape you to death if they thought it'd add 1% to their quarterly bottom line?
Trolling... Indeed... *shakes head*
I hate printers.
Not that odd, really. Developers want to bang on things until they break. End users just want things to work. Ergo, the dev site lets you try the demos in any browser, while the end user site makes sure you have a browser that supports the demos 100%.
Why this is a story I have no idea. Mozilla, Google, and the WebKit team have been adding non-standard features and making tech demos that only work on specific versions of their own browser for years, but no one thinks they're trying to fragment the industry. Apple puts a browser detect on a page to ensure an end user demo works without a hiccup and geeks everywhere are up in arms. Go figure.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
I ran the entire demo in Chrome and I had issues with the video, which is to be expected at this point, because they still can't pick a standard, and the CSS3 3-D transforms which I don't understand because Chrome supports 3-D transforms.
open /Applications/Google\ Chrome.app --args -user-agent="Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10_6_3; en-us) AppleWebKit/531.22.7 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Safari/531.22.7"
In this case I think Apple is right to limit the demo to Safari, because at this point not even Chrome works for all the demos. I don't like everything that Apple does, but in this case what are they supposed to do? Due to no standard being set on video, no other browser will properly render the demos. I do question what the deal with the CSS is.
Remember, this page is a showcase of Apple's products based on the not completely baked HTML 5 standard - it is not a general HTML 5 showcase:
The demos below show how the latest version of Apple’s Safari web browser, new Macs, and new Apple mobile devices all support the capabilities of HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript.
I think the submitter is twisting the purpose of the html5 page on apple.com, and there is a whole lot of piling on Apple in this discussion without any real basis. Again, right there on the page it says this that it shows how Apple's latest products support HTML 5. It doesn't say that apple.com supports the latest version of Firefox or IE.
I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
Not quite.
This was supposed to be an HTML5 demo served up with a heaping helping of FUD.
"The demos below show how the latest version of Apple's Safari web browser, new Macs, and new Apple mobile devices all support the capabilities of HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript. Not all browsers offer this support."
Their nonsense with browser sniffing is clearly a crass attempt to perpetrate a fraud on the unsuspecting user. They want to give the false impression that no one else supports this stuff. They want to create the myth of your "100Ghz" supermachine when the reality is quite different.
Apple is indeed the new Microsoft: Microsoft 2.0.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
It actually means one very important thing: The demos Apple are using actually are standard, by and large, and that it is only Apple being dicks preventing other users of browsers from enjoying the content, not actual incompatibility at the browser level.
So DRM has gone the way of "bricked" and "literally" then.
Maybe the French were on to something with managing their language.
Many Brits do the "would of" error as well. It's common among all native users of the English language who border on illiteracy.
This was the executive summary for general public consumption.
If you wanted to look at the demos on other browsers, all you had to do was go to the http;//developer.apple.com/safaridemos/ link. Again, not everything will work on non-safari browers but most of them will work on the latest chrome.
This is all about presenting the technology to the average user in the best light when other browsers are still playing catchup.
Jesus was a compassionate social conservative who called individuals to sin no more.
An interwebs only accessible by apple proprietary software IS the future of standards they are looking for
If you had said "what they can do" as opposed to "what they can do with standards" then maybe I'd let you off the I'm-a-fucking-retard train.
As it is, however, you have a concession card entitling you to free travel whenever you want.
It's called the iTunes Store.
Also, what?
You would have bought an iPad if it had flash, yet you won't buy anything Apple because Jobs is a narcissist?
He was a narcissist before flash was excluded from the iPhone OS for performance reasons, so what has changed? Or are you just trolling?
The way they say it, makes it seem that you know any HTML5 enabled browser should run HTML5 enabled content.
And they do. What does that have to do with Apple blocking access to their showcase - at least for the lazy ones? See what they also say?
The demos below show how the latest version of Apple’s Safari web browser, new Macs, and new Apple mobile devices all support the capabilities of HTML5, CSS3, and JavaScript. Not all browsers offer this support.
The showcase does exactly what it says on the box. When you go around the block, it does even more - what they said before.
Lars T.
To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck
After the customer base was established, Microsoft Works came in and locked everyone into a proprietary format
And how is Apple doing this? The webkit tags they are using, work in pretty much any up-to-date webkit browsers - which included Android or just about any other popular mobile device.
Apple is explicitly not locking you in, instead of going down that road they are strongly promoting a standard (HTML-5) and a powerful rendering engine (Webkit) that anyone can use.
Where's the locki-n?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Actually I'm afraid it is you who are mistaken, although I won't call you names. If you would have clicked on the first link you would have seen a massive banner that reads "HTML 5 and web standards". Now if "web standards" only work on OSX, we might as well say that IE6 quirks mode is the standard the web should be based on.
The WHOLE POINT of having web standards in the first place is so we DON'T end up with another broken web with some things only working for client a, others only on client b. If this page where put out by MSFT, and only worked correctly on IE8 on Windows 7, wouldn't everyone have a fit? Of course they would.
Look, I really respect old Steve, I really do. He took a company on life support and brought them not only back from the dead, but back to the top of the heap. And I understand to a point why he wants to make everything only work the way he wants it to and that is because he wants to control the experience, so that everything "just works" the way he designed it. I get that. But what we have to be careful of is his "vision" polluting web standards so that the ONLY way to get the full web is HIS way. We have already been down that road with MSFT and IE6, just because old Steve is good at making iShiny doesn't mean we should head down that road again, okay?
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
If we are to accept what you say then the following can't be true:
Standards aren't standards if they're not standard.
Beyond that, of course, I've seen it mentioned that it's disingenuous to talk about standards while using webkit-specific tags. While I'm a happy user of many Apple products, I agree with this statement; if Apple are going to make webkit-specific tags, they should have full feature compatibility with their standarized equivalents.
The CB App. What's your 20?
A vendor prefix doesn’t mean “proprietary”—it means “experimental”. Once the standard reaches final recommendation status, which can only occur once two independent implementations have been created, then the vendor prefixes will be dropped.
Likewise, it is not a standard, then. If people code their pages to fit what Apple are currently touting as a standard, they will find in many cases that once the standards are solidified, they will have to recode to ensure cross-browser. support.
The CB App. What's your 20?
those 'developer' links still filter on browser. Why is there so much justification for this?
Standards aren't standards if they're not standard.
Not sure what your point is. Apple's point at face value is that you can start using their products to start browsing HTML5/CSS3 sites today. If one company implements the agreed to standard and other companies don't that doesn't make the standard a non-standard...
I opened the page in Chrome and it didn't work 100%. Now, if you want to analyze Apple's source and point out where their site breaks standards, that would be something more interesting
You might have missed this bit as well:
Not all browsers offer this support. But soon other modern browsers will take advantage of these same web standards
I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
Woosh. Vendor prefixes are all good and well, but they're *not standard*.
The revolution will be mocked