Slashdot Mirror


Rivals Mock Microsoft's 'Native HTML5' Claims

CWmike writes "Mozilla and Opera are mocking browser rival Microsoft's use of the term 'native HTML5' to describe Internet Explorer 9 and the in-development IE10 as an oxymoron, an attempt to hijack an open standard and a marketing ploy. On Tuesday, Microsoft's Dean Hachamovitch, the executive who runs the IE group, used the term several times during a keynote at MIX, the company's annual Web developers conference, and in an accompanying post on the IE blog. Hachamovitch claimed in his keynote that, 'The only native experience of the Web of HTML5 today is on Windows 7 with IE9.' Asa Dotzler, Mozilla's director of community development, replied mockingly in Bugzilla: 'I'm pretty sure Firefox 5 has "complete native HTML5" support. We should resolve this as fixed and be sure to let the world know we beat Microsoft to shipping *complete* native HTML5.'"

7 of 211 comments (clear)

  1. MIcrosoft has gone native... by aapold · · Score: 5, Funny

    I think what they mean is they are employing natives in third world countries to write their HTML.

    --
    "Waste not one watt!" - CZ
  2. Native? Complete? by ifrag · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course there's no such thing as complete HTML5 either since it's still a draft.

    --
    Fear is the mind killer.
  3. Not supporting other OS is cool! by diegocg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Web sites and HTML5 run best when they run natively, on a browser optimized for the operating system on your device," said Hachamovitch. "We built IE9 from the ground up for HTML5 and for Windows to deliver the most native HTML5 experience and the best Web experience on Windows".

    Translation: IE only runs in Windows, so it's better. In fact, IE is so native that it doesn't support Webgl. Take that, Firefox and Chrome!

  4. Re:yeah by crazycheetah · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://www.basschouten.com/blog1.php/2009/11/22/direct2d-hardware-rendering-a-browser

    I would say Firefox has hardware rendering, and has it for a while (that blog post I linked to is from 2009 and they were far enough to get performance stats). "Firefox doesn't have such at all" is totally incorrect...

  5. Factual by ssbssb · · Score: 5, Funny

    Clearly this was not intended to be a factual statement.

  6. Sales weasle speak 101 by TiggertheMad · · Score: 4, Funny

    You don't get it. IE is far superior from a technological point of view, because it leverages the native source console features of the HTML 5 api to produce superior page state management and rasterization of dynamic content streams. The convergent meta-buffering features alone, make IE far more optimized for modern greb-drizle frazzle dazzle alacazam gibblety gobbilty goo. Don't try to fight the marketing droids with reason. You cannot win.

    --

    HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
  7. Re:ACID-moment for HTML5! by KingMotley · · Score: 3, Informative

    The problem with that is that it's just testing specific features, and it tends to spend a lot of time (and points) on things that aren't typically relevant, but may (or may not) even make it into the final HTML 5 spec. The more important features are simply glanced over, giving them 1-2 points, while stupid things are given 20+ points that the vast majority of sites will never use. That site is nice as a checklist, but terrible at determining how well a browser is fit for today's and tomorrow's web pages.