4 ms·

The fact that CSS3 was released in 1999 and such an app in 2023 is a cool HN-worthy post shows how easy, accessible/programmable/inspectable keyframe based anim

The fact that CSS3 was released in 1999 and such an app in 2023 is a cool HN-worthy post shows how easy, accessible/programmable/inspectable keyframe based animation got stuck with not much relief in sight. Flash dropped dead like a decade ago leaving a void, what remains is its husk as Adobe Animate, and droves of so-so frameworks and communities around them. Robust CSS/SVG based animation remained mostly an empty promise. You can find nice examples, sure, but it remains a niche craft.

mandmandam 3y ago
I squarely blame Adobe for this stagnation, because I remember many people predicting that exactly this would happen when they bought Macromedia. Adobe just kills things, on purpose. Steve Jobs gets a side-order of blame. So happy I don't give those shits money any more. Thanks Serif!
cantSpellSober 3y ago
Browser support has come a long way in this time period as well. Now we have the tech, and the demand, why aren't there more competitors?
- rchaud 3y ago
  Anybody in the web animation sector likely already has After Effects, which can be made web-ready with the Lottie plugin.
christoph 3y ago
Worth mentioning that After Effects can export CSS/SVG/canvas animations with the free bodymovin/Lottie plugin. This is my personal go to for creating web key frame animations and elements. Not every after effects feature is exportable, but it’s the best and most reliable solution I’ve found for this type of workflow, maybe due in part though to my previous experience with AE. Currently supported features: http://airbnb.io/lottie/#/supported-features http://airbnb.io/lottie/#/supported-features
MyFirstSass 3y ago
I've ended up using GSAP in this vacuum for sequencing. It's a weird heir for all things animation on the web these days, it works great but something about the keyframing/sequencing process seems like it should be supported natively.
rchaud 3y ago
Transitions and Transforms weren't available in 1999. Proper CSS animation with keyframes was first available in 2009 and even then browser support wasn't great -- lots of polyfills like 'moz-' and 'webkit-' were required. jQueryUI was miles ahead in terms of delivering cross-browser compatible UI animation, so why bother with CSS3 animation which wouldn't work on IE8?
- no_wizard 3y ago
  A modern jQuery UI could go such a long way. I suppose Bootstrap fits this bill in a lot of ways but I feel like jQuery UI was even easier
  - rudasn 3y ago
    Problem with jQuery UI was that it was bloated and came right at a time where bootstrap was taking off, IIRC. jQuery mobile didn't help much either. The theming support was kind of nice though.
pcurve 3y ago
I feel like Flash was a technology that served to bridge the gap until faster cheaper internet and video streaming / hosting became mainstream. These days, the demand is still there, but too niche, with people primarily using mobile device for content consumptions, and plenty of rich media content available in form of videos.
jokethrowaway 3y ago
CSS as an animation spec is simply inferior so we failed to create an open community of people who cared enough about it - and people kept using other solutions
unsupp0rted 3y ago
I have no problem with this. Animation on the web improves a page 5% of the time and makes it worse 95% of the time. I don’t need to see any more Flash “Loading…” screens in my lifetime, especially just to see nav menus. Even with instant broadband loading, the nav menu is better when it’s not animated. The post-masthead features section is better when it’s not animated.

mandmandam 3y ago

I squarely blame Adobe for this stagnation, because I remember many people predicting that exactly this would happen when they bought Macromedia. Adobe just kills things, on purpose. Steve Jobs gets a side-order of blame. So happy I don't give those shits money any more. Thanks Serif!

cantSpellSober 3y ago

Browser support has come a long way in this time period as well. Now we have the tech, and the demand, why aren't there more competitors?

rchaud 3y ago
Anybody in the web animation sector likely already has After Effects, which can be made web-ready with the Lottie plugin.

christoph 3y ago

Worth mentioning that After Effects can export CSS/SVG/canvas animations with the free bodymovin/Lottie plugin. This is my personal go to for creating web key frame animations and elements. Not every after effects feature is exportable, but it’s the best and most reliable solution I’ve found for this type of workflow, maybe due in part though to my previous experience with AE. Currently supported features: http://airbnb.io/lottie/#/supported-features http://airbnb.io/lottie/#/supported-features

MyFirstSass 3y ago

I've ended up using GSAP in this vacuum for sequencing. It's a weird heir for all things animation on the web these days, it works great but something about the keyframing/sequencing process seems like it should be supported natively.

rchaud 3y ago

Transitions and Transforms weren't available in 1999. Proper CSS animation with keyframes was first available in 2009 and even then browser support wasn't great -- lots of polyfills like 'moz-' and 'webkit-' were required. jQueryUI was miles ahead in terms of delivering cross-browser compatible UI animation, so why bother with CSS3 animation which wouldn't work on IE8?

no_wizard 3y ago
A modern jQuery UI could go such a long way. I suppose Bootstrap fits this bill in a lot of ways but I feel like jQuery UI was even easier
- rudasn 3y ago
  Problem with jQuery UI was that it was bloated and came right at a time where bootstrap was taking off, IIRC. jQuery mobile didn't help much either. The theming support was kind of nice though.

pcurve 3y ago

I feel like Flash was a technology that served to bridge the gap until faster cheaper internet and video streaming / hosting became mainstream. These days, the demand is still there, but too niche, with people primarily using mobile device for content consumptions, and plenty of rich media content available in form of videos.

jokethrowaway 3y ago

CSS as an animation spec is simply inferior so we failed to create an open community of people who cared enough about it - and people kept using other solutions

unsupp0rted 3y ago

I have no problem with this. Animation on the web improves a page 5% of the time and makes it worse 95% of the time. I don’t need to see any more Flash “Loading…” screens in my lifetime, especially just to see nav menus. Even with instant broadband loading, the nav menu is better when it’s not animated. The post-masthead features section is better when it’s not animated.