6 ms·

Why you’d be stupid to bet against HTML5

31 points by marcieoum 14y ago

paupino_masano 14y ago
I don't think "betting against it" is accurate terminology - the general consensus is more that the mobile device infrastructure isn't ready for HTML5 yet (in terms of performance etc). I think it will catch up... probably within the next couple of years, but until then we need to think about our current users and the experience they receive. On a side note I see the article mentioned using a hybrid app - I think that is an acceptable "in-between" at the moment. Personally though I have found maintaining hybrid applications cost a lot in extra development time - I really hope it pays off in the long term.
- lukifer 14y ago
  I don't think it has to be binary: [ ] ready [x] not ready. It's ready for a certain set of use cases and platforms, but not everything, much as Hypercard was ready for calculator clones, but not 3D flight simulators. The internet itself is a prime example of the value of a common platform accessible by nearly any device. That doesn't mean such a platform needs to be all things to all people.
jameshsi 14y ago
I think the HTML5 vs Native debate is less about the software as it is about hardware support on a corporate or communal level. As a software developer, i've been hoping HTML5 would take off since I first learned about it. However, in mobile, there seems to be a trend for hardware and software synergy.. a preference to really own the vertical stack and have full control over the experience and in order to build a great phone. On the native side, the titans of Google, Microsoft, and Apple all have their weight behind their own respective platforms. While the community in software for HTML5 is strong, the reason i'm starting to bet against is because of the lack of love from the hardware side of things. I'm not sure I can imagine a large existing company in hardware pushing HTML5 as far as its own native platform. Without a phone or mobile device built and designed with HTML5 in mind, is it really possible for the fortress to crumble inside out?
- mikecane 14y ago
  >>>Without a phone or mobile device built and designed with HTML5 in mind, is it really possible for the fortress to crumble inside out? What do you think of these two Intel demos that show River Trail speeding up HTML5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hhksxH1Wco&feature=share&list=PL27DC1B760EA680E9 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hhksxH1Wco&feature=share... ... and giving JavaScript multiples cores: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRGfMllFyuM&feature=share&list=PL27DC1B760EA680E9 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRGfMllFyuM&feature=share... If that happens on the desktop, won't people also demand it on mobile devices too?
nuttendorfer 14y ago
My problem with HTML5 is that you have to use JavaScript on the client. Until browser vendors implement other languages I'll stick with native.
- hobonumber1 14y ago
  If you dislike JS so much, why don't you use some cross-compiler?
  - stream_fusion 14y ago
    It's often difficult to gain mindshare with other developers and management.
  - crististm 14y ago
    JS is (unfortunately) the only choice when you target browsers. I don't see any intrinsic advantage that can make it the go-to language. It's the lack of choice that I find problematic.
- randomdata 14y ago
  Is the problem Javascript or is it that the native environments provide nice and cozy frameworks that almost force you into strong development practices so there is a level of comfort that is generally not found in the browser? HTML5 is still the wild west, where anything goes. "jQuery spaghetti" is considered acceptable by many, and to convince developers who write in that style to provide structure to their application is asking them to do what often pushes them away from native development in the first place. Once you build up a solid MVC (or similar) framework in which to develop your Javascript/HTML5-based applications, the differences between native and HTML5-based development seem pretty trivial to me, and a few syntactical differences between the languages used on the varying platforms are no more than a talking point.
kaolinite 14y ago
HTML5 apps are good for the company making them, not for the user using the app. Almost all the best apps (i.e. the apps you want to use not the apps you have to use) are native. That doesn't mean they're worthless, they're great for getting an app out quickly (e.g. Wunderlist, who released non-native then made a native app). LinkedIn put a lot of time and effort into their app, it is pretty good, though a little laggy even on a Galaxy S2 which should be powerful enough. The Financial Times doesn't really care too much about user experience I'd imagine, as long as the users get the content. But er, I resent being called stupid for betting against HTML5 for mobile app development. No need for such a confrontational title :-)
- bornhuetter 14y ago
  I think thats very much personal preference. As a user, I almost always prefer the browser version. The main reason for this is that the browser controls are always there. For example, forward and back are always there, save for offline reading, and bookmarking is always there. Always in the same place. I've tried a few native apps for news and social sites, but I've removed almost all of them because I found them harder to use than the browser. Some other people seem to love native apps though.
  - kaolinite 14y ago
    Browser is different to a HTML5 mobile app. A HTML5 mobile app is one you download from the app store. I'm a big fan of the browser and I'm a big fan of native apps - I just don't like it when I download an app (especially if I have to pay) expecting a native app, and then I get a HTML5 app.
    - bornhuetter 14y ago
      Gotcha, I thought you were arguing against HTML5 in general. I agree that HTML5 mobile apps are not currently as good as native, and I'd prefer native as a user. I think in the future HTML5 mobile apps will be good, especially if Winmo8 and/or Firefox OS gain traction, but if I were a developer in that space I would stick with native for the moment.
marknutter 14y ago
I hope people continue to bet against it so those of us seeing productivity gains from utilizing it can continue to outmaneuver the competition.
mbesto 14y ago
A couple of things: 1. Facebook's app isn't pure native today. They simply shifted more of the development to native than was before. LinkedIn does the same thing. "For areas within the app where we anticipate making changes more often, we will continue to utilize HTML5 code, as we can push updates server side without requiring people to download a new version of the app."[1] 2. "Now nobody says Java is slow" - Seriously? 3. "This is like what we saw 30 years ago with the PC, with hundreds of standards and everyone wanting to produce their own PC." - No, it's not. This is a different set of fragmentations. Mainly having to do with OS fragmentation (which didn't exist with Win dominance) and displaying information on a limited canvas. 4. Curious...what motivation does Apple, Samsung, HTC, Nokia, etc have to advance their browser engines? When we talk about "HTML5 maturing" isn't this what we are waiting for? [1] - https://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook-engineering/under-the-hood-rebuilding-facebook-for-ios/10151036091753920 https://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook-engineering/under-th...

31 points by marcieoum 14y ago

I don't think "betting against it" is accurate terminology - the general consensus is more that the mobile device infrastructure isn't ready for HTML5 yet (in terms of performance etc). I think it will catch up... probably within the next couple of years, but until then we need to think about our current users and the experience they receive. On a side note I see the article mentioned using a hybrid app - I think that is an acceptable "in-between" at the moment. Personally though I have found maintaining hybrid applications cost a lot in extra development time - I really hope it pays off in the long term.

lukifer 14y ago
I don't think it has to be binary: [ ] ready [x] not ready. It's ready for a certain set of use cases and platforms, but not everything, much as Hypercard was ready for calculator clones, but not 3D flight simulators. The internet itself is a prime example of the value of a common platform accessible by nearly any device. That doesn't mean such a platform needs to be all things to all people.

jameshsi 14y ago

I think the HTML5 vs Native debate is less about the software as it is about hardware support on a corporate or communal level. As a software developer, i've been hoping HTML5 would take off since I first learned about it. However, in mobile, there seems to be a trend for hardware and software synergy.. a preference to really own the vertical stack and have full control over the experience and in order to build a great phone. On the native side, the titans of Google, Microsoft, and Apple all have their weight behind their own respective platforms. While the community in software for HTML5 is strong, the reason i'm starting to bet against is because of the lack of love from the hardware side of things. I'm not sure I can imagine a large existing company in hardware pushing HTML5 as far as its own native platform. Without a phone or mobile device built and designed with HTML5 in mind, is it really possible for the fortress to crumble inside out?

mikecane 14y ago
>>>Without a phone or mobile device built and designed with HTML5 in mind, is it really possible for the fortress to crumble inside out? What do you think of these two Intel demos that show River Trail speeding up HTML5: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hhksxH1Wco&feature=share&list=PL27DC1B760EA680E9 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7hhksxH1Wco&feature=share... ... and giving JavaScript multiples cores: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRGfMllFyuM&feature=share&list=PL27DC1B760EA680E9 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XRGfMllFyuM&feature=share... If that happens on the desktop, won't people also demand it on mobile devices too?

nuttendorfer 14y ago

My problem with HTML5 is that you have to use JavaScript on the client. Until browser vendors implement other languages I'll stick with native.

hobonumber1 14y ago
If you dislike JS so much, why don't you use some cross-compiler?
- stream_fusion 14y ago
  It's often difficult to gain mindshare with other developers and management.
- crististm 14y ago
  JS is (unfortunately) the only choice when you target browsers. I don't see any intrinsic advantage that can make it the go-to language. It's the lack of choice that I find problematic.
randomdata 14y ago
Is the problem Javascript or is it that the native environments provide nice and cozy frameworks that almost force you into strong development practices so there is a level of comfort that is generally not found in the browser? HTML5 is still the wild west, where anything goes. "jQuery spaghetti" is considered acceptable by many, and to convince developers who write in that style to provide structure to their application is asking them to do what often pushes them away from native development in the first place. Once you build up a solid MVC (or similar) framework in which to develop your Javascript/HTML5-based applications, the differences between native and HTML5-based development seem pretty trivial to me, and a few syntactical differences between the languages used on the varying platforms are no more than a talking point.

kaolinite 14y ago

HTML5 apps are good for the company making them, not for the user using the app. Almost all the best apps (i.e. the apps you want to use not the apps you have to use) are native. That doesn't mean they're worthless, they're great for getting an app out quickly (e.g. Wunderlist, who released non-native then made a native app). LinkedIn put a lot of time and effort into their app, it is pretty good, though a little laggy even on a Galaxy S2 which should be powerful enough. The Financial Times doesn't really care too much about user experience I'd imagine, as long as the users get the content. But er, I resent being called stupid for betting against HTML5 for mobile app development. No need for such a confrontational title :-)

bornhuetter 14y ago
I think thats very much personal preference. As a user, I almost always prefer the browser version. The main reason for this is that the browser controls are always there. For example, forward and back are always there, save for offline reading, and bookmarking is always there. Always in the same place. I've tried a few native apps for news and social sites, but I've removed almost all of them because I found them harder to use than the browser. Some other people seem to love native apps though.
- kaolinite 14y ago
  Browser is different to a HTML5 mobile app. A HTML5 mobile app is one you download from the app store. I'm a big fan of the browser and I'm a big fan of native apps - I just don't like it when I download an app (especially if I have to pay) expecting a native app, and then I get a HTML5 app.
  - bornhuetter 14y ago
    Gotcha, I thought you were arguing against HTML5 in general. I agree that HTML5 mobile apps are not currently as good as native, and I'd prefer native as a user. I think in the future HTML5 mobile apps will be good, especially if Winmo8 and/or Firefox OS gain traction, but if I were a developer in that space I would stick with native for the moment.

marknutter 14y ago

I hope people continue to bet against it so those of us seeing productivity gains from utilizing it can continue to outmaneuver the competition.

mbesto 14y ago

A couple of things: 1. Facebook's app isn't pure native today. They simply shifted more of the development to native than was before. LinkedIn does the same thing. "For areas within the app where we anticipate making changes more often, we will continue to utilize HTML5 code, as we can push updates server side without requiring people to download a new version of the app."[1] 2. "Now nobody says Java is slow" - Seriously? 3. "This is like what we saw 30 years ago with the PC, with hundreds of standards and everyone wanting to produce their own PC." - No, it's not. This is a different set of fragmentations. Mainly having to do with OS fragmentation (which didn't exist with Win dominance) and displaying information on a limited canvas. 4. Curious...what motivation does Apple, Samsung, HTC, Nokia, etc have to advance their browser engines? When we talk about "HTML5 maturing" isn't this what we are waiting for? [1] - https://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook-engineering/under-the-hood-rebuilding-facebook-for-ios/10151036091753920 https://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook-engineering/under-th...