6 ms·

edit2: yeouch, I should have just stuck with my complaint that the page is still using Flash and canned the semantic whine. My bad. What's "full" HTML5? What'

edit2: yeouch, I should have just stuck with my complaint that the page is still using Flash and canned the semantic whine. My bad. What's "full" HTML5? What's all devices? Is it this? <div id="homeFooter" class="container_footer main_background"> That's not an HTML5 footer tag. Oh what's this video front and center in the middle of the page? Flash. I click on the link to the website that's gone full HTML5 on all devices and am staring Flash in the face. I feel like I've been had. Much more so for the Flash video than the nit on semantic tags. Edit: Ah ha! By rolled out they meant sequestered away at http://html5.grooveshark.com http://html5.grooveshark.com, not http://grooveshark.com http://grooveshark.com. They should really be linking to the HTML5 version of the site from the article. It's also the page I get when I use my phone to access the site. There we have an audio tag, though <div id="page-header" ...> exists instead of a header tag. Ah well, these are super minor nits at the end of the day. I'm glad for any site that is trying to get away from app stores and go native. I still feel like the term "full HTML5" is a tad vague (and not yet true).

gsabo 14y ago
You're not the only one who's been had: much of the music on Grooveshark is shared against artists' wishes.
- adgar 14y ago
  But entrepreneurism!
- rogerchucker 14y ago
  Gonna go look for my tiny violin
  - citricsquid 14y ago
    you don't think it's absolutely unacceptable that Grooveshark makes money off of content they don't have the rights to?
    - Volpe 14y ago
      No, because it provides a useful service... It's like saying Uber is unacceptable because it may violate (the outdated) laws in New York.
      - citricsquid 14y ago
        are you comparing laws and copyright infringement? Grooveshark takes content created by someone else and then profits from the distribution of that content without permission and without passing back any revenue to the rightful owner of the content. How does that compare to uber?
        Volpe 14y ago
        copyright infringement is also 'law'... so I'm comparing laws with laws. I'm not comparing the individual actions of the companies. Only that sometimes "the law" is not useful anymore. Which yes, I am saying that copyright needs to change, the notion of a 'rightful owner of content' needs to change. Having laws that are completely contrary to how society operates are generally doomed to fail.
        res0nat0r 14y ago
        I'm not sure where this type of opinion came from but it definitely has been becoming more prevalent in the last 5 years. I think it is just people are becoming more inclined to think they are entitled to someones else's creative content just because it has been easy to acquire free for years now. Just because it is easy to copy music online doesn't mean all music should be 'free' and every artist should just abandon what many of them rely on to make a living just because you want to save some money on your entertainment.
        deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]
        Volpe 14y ago
eurleif 14y ago
I take "full HTML 5" to mean that it doesn't use any technologies outside of the HTML 5 umbrella (which includes CSS, JavaScript, etc.), like Flash, not that it necessarily uses every HTML 5 feature to its full potential.
- simonsarris 14y ago
  Sorry, I'm really just upset that Flash is still being used on their main page (the page that the article links to). I had to go to html5.grooveshark.com to get a version without Flash. I guess its silly of me to not take "all devices" as "all mobile devices", which is reasonable in the context of site vs appstore
  - rich90usa 14y ago
    I'm going to guess that you were using your computer at the time. If you're using a desktop browser you're going to be directed to the site which relies on flash. If you're in a Webkit browser you can use html5.grooveshark.com and get the html5 experience on your desktop. On a handheld device, we automatically direct you to the html5 site when you visit grooveshark.com
    - adgar 14y ago
      You didn't answer the question. The question being asked is why - if y'all are capable of delivering an html5 grooveshark for mobile - the main grooveshark app (your flagship product) still exclusively uses flash.
      - wanderr 14y ago
        Time. We are a very small team. It will happen eventually, but at least now everyone has an option.
        adgar 14y ago
        That's a perfectly fair argument. For those who want to embrace HTML5, which flash-based features in the main site weren't ready to be ported to HTML5 due to technical limitations? As one of the few sites even trying, your use case could drive HTML5 audio.
joethompson 14y ago
Not using all the available new semantic markup is a little different than having a site that doesn't rely on Flash to serve audio.
DigitalSea 14y ago
Do you even know what HTML5 is? HTML5 doesn't enforce the use of header, section, article and all of the other tags. The tags you mention are merely for semantically marking up content and are block level elements like DIV's. The fact that Grooveshark is using things like HTML5 audio and whatnot without the reliance on 3rd party plugins like Flash to me is what HTML5 is all about.
- simonsarris 14y ago
  Sorry, I'm really just upset that Flash is still being used on their main page (the page that the article links to). I had to go to html5.grooveshark.com to get a version without Flash. I guess its silly of me to not take "all devices" as "all mobile devices", which is reasonable in the context of site vs appstore
mediocregopher 14y ago
>It's also the page I get when I use my phone to access the site. That's how it's supposed to be. When you go to grooveshark.com on your phone you get the html5 app, from anywhere else you get the main (flash using) site. Using html5.grooveshark.com takes you to the html5 site no matter what.

gsabo 14y ago

You're not the only one who's been had: much of the music on Grooveshark is shared against artists' wishes.

adgar 14y ago
But entrepreneurism!
rogerchucker 14y ago
Gonna go look for my tiny violin
- citricsquid 14y ago
  you don't think it's absolutely unacceptable that Grooveshark makes money off of content they don't have the rights to?
  - Volpe 14y ago
    No, because it provides a useful service... It's like saying Uber is unacceptable because it may violate (the outdated) laws in New York.
    - citricsquid 14y ago
      are you comparing laws and copyright infringement? Grooveshark takes content created by someone else and then profits from the distribution of that content without permission and without passing back any revenue to the rightful owner of the content. How does that compare to uber?
      - Volpe 14y ago
        copyright infringement is also 'law'... so I'm comparing laws with laws. I'm not comparing the individual actions of the companies. Only that sometimes "the law" is not useful anymore. Which yes, I am saying that copyright needs to change, the notion of a 'rightful owner of content' needs to change. Having laws that are completely contrary to how society operates are generally doomed to fail.
        res0nat0r 14y ago
        I'm not sure where this type of opinion came from but it definitely has been becoming more prevalent in the last 5 years. I think it is just people are becoming more inclined to think they are entitled to someones else's creative content just because it has been easy to acquire free for years now. Just because it is easy to copy music online doesn't mean all music should be 'free' and every artist should just abandon what many of them rely on to make a living just because you want to save some money on your entertainment.
        deleted 14y ago
        [deleted]
        Volpe 14y ago

eurleif 14y ago

I take "full HTML 5" to mean that it doesn't use any technologies outside of the HTML 5 umbrella (which includes CSS, JavaScript, etc.), like Flash, not that it necessarily uses every HTML 5 feature to its full potential.

simonsarris 14y ago
Sorry, I'm really just upset that Flash is still being used on their main page (the page that the article links to). I had to go to html5.grooveshark.com to get a version without Flash. I guess its silly of me to not take "all devices" as "all mobile devices", which is reasonable in the context of site vs appstore
- rich90usa 14y ago
  I'm going to guess that you were using your computer at the time. If you're using a desktop browser you're going to be directed to the site which relies on flash. If you're in a Webkit browser you can use html5.grooveshark.com and get the html5 experience on your desktop. On a handheld device, we automatically direct you to the html5 site when you visit grooveshark.com
  - adgar 14y ago
    You didn't answer the question. The question being asked is why - if y'all are capable of delivering an html5 grooveshark for mobile - the main grooveshark app (your flagship product) still exclusively uses flash.
    - wanderr 14y ago
      Time. We are a very small team. It will happen eventually, but at least now everyone has an option.
      - adgar 14y ago
        That's a perfectly fair argument. For those who want to embrace HTML5, which flash-based features in the main site weren't ready to be ported to HTML5 due to technical limitations? As one of the few sites even trying, your use case could drive HTML5 audio.

joethompson 14y ago

Not using all the available new semantic markup is a little different than having a site that doesn't rely on Flash to serve audio.

DigitalSea 14y ago

Do you even know what HTML5 is? HTML5 doesn't enforce the use of header, section, article and all of the other tags. The tags you mention are merely for semantically marking up content and are block level elements like DIV's. The fact that Grooveshark is using things like HTML5 audio and whatnot without the reliance on 3rd party plugins like Flash to me is what HTML5 is all about.

simonsarris 14y ago
Sorry, I'm really just upset that Flash is still being used on their main page (the page that the article links to). I had to go to html5.grooveshark.com to get a version without Flash. I guess its silly of me to not take "all devices" as "all mobile devices", which is reasonable in the context of site vs appstore

mediocregopher 14y ago

>It's also the page I get when I use my phone to access the site. That's how it's supposed to be. When you go to grooveshark.com on your phone you get the html5 app, from anywhere else you get the main (flash using) site. Using html5.grooveshark.com takes you to the html5 site no matter what.