4 ms·

Html5 on the ipad is still wishful thinking by people who don't want to bother being an ios developer. This demo is clearly worse than the BBC app and i have ye

Html5 on the ipad is still wishful thinking by people who don't want to bother being an ios developer. This demo is clearly worse than the BBC app and i have yet to see an ios web app that doesn't feel hacky and make me wish for a native version. In a couple generations when mobile CPUs are faster and ipads have more than 256mb of ram, we will see a repeat of the web app takeover that occurred on the desktop.

einarvollset 16y ago
Amen. I am more than a little sick of people opinionating about the greatness of all things HTML5 when they've clearly never tried to develop anything for either Android or iPhone, but simply wish that their existing experience directly translates. If you're downvoting, please shoot me an email with your html5 mobile app to prove me wrong: einar@lcrnd.com
deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
balac 16y ago
you a probably right, but you still can't directly compare the full time efforts of the BBC with this single developers part time project. It would be interesting to see what the BBC themselves could produce in HTML.
InclinedPlane 16y ago
It's not expected to be the same quality as the BBC app, it's a demo. More precisely a proof of concept. The message here is that if the BBC spent as much money making a high quality "mobile" html5 version of their site as they spent on the iPad app they would have just as good an end user experience with a lot fewer issues. For one you save all the money it takes to get an app into the app store (remembering that developer time and effort == money). For another you get the benefit of supporting more platforms instantly, iPad, iPhone, netbooks, android phones, etc.
- alexbosworth 16y ago
  A disclaimer: my company develops iOS apps on contract so I am a bit biased in preferring native code, but I have tried to do HTML5 as a substitute in the past. In my experience trying to develop HTML5 apps instead of a native app: 1) Development (and design) time is roughly equivalent between an iOS developer and an HTML developer, because of time trying to copy things that native code gets for free. 2) It's a bad idea to use a cheap HTML developer because there is a lot of stuff to work around, a good HTML5 iPad app is not something you can really do by dragging things around in dreamweaver. 3) What you wind up developing will have to be majorly modified for another platform due to iOS specific bugs, features and chrome. 4) You will never reach the same quality in HTML5 because the iPad has issues relating to CPU, RAM, and bugs or missing features in Safari that Apple doesn't seem too bothered to fix. As a proviso, in some circumstances, like for simple apps that don't need to be perfect, HTML5 is a good idea. What I'm saying is that in most cases native will be better in time/money spent and quality of resulting product.
  - masklinn 16y ago
    > You will never reach the same quality in HTML5 because the iPad has issues relating to CPU, RAM, and bugs or missing features in Safari that Apple doesn't seem too bothered to fix. But those are known (or knowable). It's not like you're dealing with 5 different browsers in 10 different versions here, you're dealing with a single browser in a single version (well two by the end of the year with iOS4.x on iPad) on a single, uniform hardware platform. So the CPU and RAM constraints are well known (and I don't think the BBC app is taxing there), and the bugs or missing features in Safari Mobile can be worked around. Furthermore you can easily rely on proprietary stuff such as custom JS or CSS rules for transforms & stuff, which is a much bigger issue on the open web.
    - bruceboughton 16y ago
      >> It's not like you're dealing with 5 different browsers in 10 different versions here, you're dealing with a single browser in a single version If you're only targetting iPhone/iPad/iPod, then what's the point of doing it as a HTML5 app? The implied advantage of HTML5 is portability. The main downside of HTML5 for iPhone apps is that they don't appear in the App Store. How many installs has the BBC News app got because it's been featured in the App Store? Thousands, I bet. The 'app' culture is pretty ingrained in iOS users now... if it's not in the app store, it doesn't exist. Notice how major services like Facebook have both native apps and iPhone optimised web apps.
tomdale 16y ago
Have you guys seen the HTML5 version of the NPR app? The scrolling is actually smoother in the web version. http://touch.sproutcore.com/npr/ http://touch.sproutcore.com/npr/
- extension 16y ago
  After trying to use that on my ipad for five minutes, I lost count of the obvious bugs. And no, the scrolling is not faster.
  - DenisM 16y ago
    Same here. What i wonder is whether mobile web app thingie is going to get better over time or if it's going to stay half-broken forever.
  - DenisM 16y ago
    Same here. What i wonder is whether mobile web app thingie is going to get better over time or if it's going to stay half-broken forever.
  - lecha 16y ago
    NPR app was put together quite quickly and was intended by it's authors as a demo of though capabilities of www.Sproutcore.com Let's not miss the larger point here. HTML5 have become a real option of application development. A business that relies on mobile/tablet form factor should seriously consider HTML5 as the application platform. The cost of porting iPhone/iPad apps to Android phones/tablets is much less with HTML5 than with native code. Lack of distribution and monetization of HTML5 apps doesn't need to be an issue. A web app can be embedded into a native app to be sold on the AppStore.
- jws 16y ago
  To be fair, the App version's scrolling is "just plain broken"[1] so that isn't hard. [1] It is better than it used to be. There used to be a weird lag at the start. Now it is nearly subliminally jerky. It also crashed when I opened it to check for this comment.
raquo 16y ago
> we will see a repeat of the web app takeover that occurred on the desktop Desktop apps are not like iOS apps. They don't have very easy purchasing/billing built-in, they have to be downloaded and installed in a weird way (very few of my non-geek friends can install anything except apps on their iPhones), and they cost a fortune. Apple will be doing a good job of maintaining AppStore the easiest option for both users and developers, and, well, people tend to use the easiest option.
jamesgpearce 16y ago
It's an ongoing series... yes, it rough right now, but I'm pretty sure I can make it equivalent - to the pixel - to the app. In fact the only real challenges are scrolling (since Safari has a strange opinion on overflow:scroll) and embedded video (because the BBC is using some native iPlayer approach, as far as I can see). Otherwise, my expectation is that a few 100k of HTML5 will be hard to distinguish from 6Mb or so of app. If you have a capped data plan, that might be, er, good news...
jcollins 16y ago
I just happened across http://abcnews.go.com http://abcnews.go.com the other day on my iPad and thought it was fairly well done and the page turn animations were decent. Check it out.

einarvollset 16y ago

Amen. I am more than a little sick of people opinionating about the greatness of all things HTML5 when they've clearly never tried to develop anything for either Android or iPhone, but simply wish that their existing experience directly translates. If you're downvoting, please shoot me an email with your html5 mobile app to prove me wrong: einar@lcrnd.com

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

balac 16y ago

you a probably right, but you still can't directly compare the full time efforts of the BBC with this single developers part time project. It would be interesting to see what the BBC themselves could produce in HTML.

InclinedPlane 16y ago

It's not expected to be the same quality as the BBC app, it's a demo. More precisely a proof of concept. The message here is that if the BBC spent as much money making a high quality "mobile" html5 version of their site as they spent on the iPad app they would have just as good an end user experience with a lot fewer issues. For one you save all the money it takes to get an app into the app store (remembering that developer time and effort == money). For another you get the benefit of supporting more platforms instantly, iPad, iPhone, netbooks, android phones, etc.

alexbosworth 16y ago
A disclaimer: my company develops iOS apps on contract so I am a bit biased in preferring native code, but I have tried to do HTML5 as a substitute in the past. In my experience trying to develop HTML5 apps instead of a native app: 1) Development (and design) time is roughly equivalent between an iOS developer and an HTML developer, because of time trying to copy things that native code gets for free. 2) It's a bad idea to use a cheap HTML developer because there is a lot of stuff to work around, a good HTML5 iPad app is not something you can really do by dragging things around in dreamweaver. 3) What you wind up developing will have to be majorly modified for another platform due to iOS specific bugs, features and chrome. 4) You will never reach the same quality in HTML5 because the iPad has issues relating to CPU, RAM, and bugs or missing features in Safari that Apple doesn't seem too bothered to fix. As a proviso, in some circumstances, like for simple apps that don't need to be perfect, HTML5 is a good idea. What I'm saying is that in most cases native will be better in time/money spent and quality of resulting product.
- masklinn 16y ago
  > You will never reach the same quality in HTML5 because the iPad has issues relating to CPU, RAM, and bugs or missing features in Safari that Apple doesn't seem too bothered to fix. But those are known (or knowable). It's not like you're dealing with 5 different browsers in 10 different versions here, you're dealing with a single browser in a single version (well two by the end of the year with iOS4.x on iPad) on a single, uniform hardware platform. So the CPU and RAM constraints are well known (and I don't think the BBC app is taxing there), and the bugs or missing features in Safari Mobile can be worked around. Furthermore you can easily rely on proprietary stuff such as custom JS or CSS rules for transforms & stuff, which is a much bigger issue on the open web.
  - bruceboughton 16y ago
    >> It's not like you're dealing with 5 different browsers in 10 different versions here, you're dealing with a single browser in a single version If you're only targetting iPhone/iPad/iPod, then what's the point of doing it as a HTML5 app? The implied advantage of HTML5 is portability. The main downside of HTML5 for iPhone apps is that they don't appear in the App Store. How many installs has the BBC News app got because it's been featured in the App Store? Thousands, I bet. The 'app' culture is pretty ingrained in iOS users now... if it's not in the app store, it doesn't exist. Notice how major services like Facebook have both native apps and iPhone optimised web apps.

tomdale 16y ago

Have you guys seen the HTML5 version of the NPR app? The scrolling is actually smoother in the web version. http://touch.sproutcore.com/npr/ http://touch.sproutcore.com/npr/

extension 16y ago
After trying to use that on my ipad for five minutes, I lost count of the obvious bugs. And no, the scrolling is not faster.
- DenisM 16y ago
  Same here. What i wonder is whether mobile web app thingie is going to get better over time or if it's going to stay half-broken forever.
- DenisM 16y ago
  Same here. What i wonder is whether mobile web app thingie is going to get better over time or if it's going to stay half-broken forever.
- lecha 16y ago
  NPR app was put together quite quickly and was intended by it's authors as a demo of though capabilities of www.Sproutcore.com Let's not miss the larger point here. HTML5 have become a real option of application development. A business that relies on mobile/tablet form factor should seriously consider HTML5 as the application platform. The cost of porting iPhone/iPad apps to Android phones/tablets is much less with HTML5 than with native code. Lack of distribution and monetization of HTML5 apps doesn't need to be an issue. A web app can be embedded into a native app to be sold on the AppStore.
jws 16y ago
To be fair, the App version's scrolling is "just plain broken"[1] so that isn't hard. [1] It is better than it used to be. There used to be a weird lag at the start. Now it is nearly subliminally jerky. It also crashed when I opened it to check for this comment.

raquo 16y ago

> we will see a repeat of the web app takeover that occurred on the desktop Desktop apps are not like iOS apps. They don't have very easy purchasing/billing built-in, they have to be downloaded and installed in a weird way (very few of my non-geek friends can install anything except apps on their iPhones), and they cost a fortune. Apple will be doing a good job of maintaining AppStore the easiest option for both users and developers, and, well, people tend to use the easiest option.

jamesgpearce 16y ago

It's an ongoing series... yes, it rough right now, but I'm pretty sure I can make it equivalent - to the pixel - to the app. In fact the only real challenges are scrolling (since Safari has a strange opinion on overflow:scroll) and embedded video (because the BBC is using some native iPlayer approach, as far as I can see). Otherwise, my expectation is that a few 100k of HTML5 will be hard to distinguish from 6Mb or so of app. If you have a capped data plan, that might be, er, good news...

jcollins 16y ago

I just happened across http://abcnews.go.com http://abcnews.go.com the other day on my iPad and thought it was fairly well done and the page turn animations were decent. Check it out.