DjDarkman

> CSS3 is not HTML5 and that fact is not debatable at W3C.

HTML5 is like AJAX, it's just an umbrella term in reality. When you hear "AJAX library" you probably think of a library that does a lot more than just HTTP requests. Same goes for HTML, it's almost useless without some CSS.

> Geolocation has been removed from the main HTML5 spec.

InnerHTML wasn't in the spec originally, but everyone used/had it anyway because it was a good idea.

> WebSQL has been dropped in favour of IndexedDB (both are separate specs).

It was dropped only from Firefox, just like h.264, but that didn't stop anybody from using it. Some browsers have IndexedDB, some have WebSQL. IndexedDB was just a work in progress last time I checked, WebSQL already had existing implementations.

I don't think this so called test/benchmark has everything that is under the HTML5 umbrella. It lacks WebSQLDatabase, Geolocation, offline storage, CSS3(debatable) and many more.

So since this test is not complete, I call this article: false advertising.

The chart shows: "Internet Explorer Preview 6".

Interesting. I always thought that living beings age just because they were programmed to do so, because that's how the genetic algorithm works I guess.

Well this seems to be a lot more sensible than Android, though in my opinion they should have used full featured JavaScript.

Good if you want to program JavaScript like Java/C++, but bad if you want to understand JavaScript. At first glance I did not find no mention of "functional programing" in JavaScript, it's a real shame cause that's what's JavaScript is good at. And of course using setters and getters is pointless because it will blow up in IE and unless you want to mess with the DOM, there is no real reason to use them.

The MPEG LA said that it would assemble a patent pool against VP8, did they manage to do that, or they were just FUD-ing around?

I am interested in how can MeeGo support multiply architectures without requiring the developer to build against all of them... Last time I checked MeeGo apps were native code.

Also the in my opinion the fragmentation problem is due to the handset manufacturer's politics. I have a HTC Tattoo with Android 1.6 I could flash a 2.2 on it but then some hardware components wouldn't work, because it seems that it wasn't in HTC's interest to give back those drivers.

I am interested how will MeeGo tackle this.

I used to be addicted to energy drinks, and I used to be a heavy natural coffee consumer, but I stopped doing it. I learned trough my experience that high amounts caffeine are only good for one time use, because it sort of overloads the system, making you feel good at first, but it's only temporary.

This article is not worth anemones time, it's completely biased, and baseless.(see my previous comments for details)

It's like propaganda, the author lives in an alternate reality.

TL;DR: the web will end, and the Apple App Store will take over

> So a lot of iOS apps are likely to be developed (in the past and in the future) by web developers, if only because they make a nice mobile client for their existing web application.

> likely to be developed (in the past and in the future)

The past already happened unless the author invents time travel it's impossible for more applications to "likely to be developed" "in the past".

> Why would you deal with all the angst of writing a billing system

I could not agree more, use PayPal and a shopping cart that supports it.

> why would you maintain servers, deal with hairy scalability issues

What kind of scalability issues?

> deal with the craptastic reality of Internet Explorer,

I don't know, let me see why I develop for IE... ohh yes, because it means that my app is accessible to IE users!

btw: looks like the author remembered that IE actually exists, see previous comment.

> why would you do all this if you can just plug into the App Store and let it handle all the headaches?

Three reasons: 1) I need to learn Objective-C and iOS APIs 2) it means a lot less users than the IE users 3) I don't want to give away 30% of my earnings to Apple

> Sure, for some apps, it will still make sense to be on the web, or even to be only or mostly on the web. But for many, the web is a shortcut to avoid the problems of piracy and distribution.

I really like paragraphs where "some" and "many" many are used to give a sense of scale without presenting facts.

The web is not a shortcut to avoid piracy problems, it wouldn't work for games.

> It’s a lot simpler to build an iOS/MacOS app and distribute it through the App Store than to run web servers and keep them up to date and build billing systems and maintain mailing lists and so on2.

It's a lot smaller user base too.

> To put a final nail in the web-coffin, a lot of web developers have already gotten acquainted with the fundamental tools for building Mac OS apps while building their iOS satellite apps. It’ll be an easy transition for them to build their next app solely in the Mac ecosystem and avoid all the headaches of the web world.

Once you earn 1000$ it's easy transition to 200$.

> The Death of the Web?

...there is nothing like the smell of rotting corpses in the morning. But seriously the title suggest that this will be a one sided and pointless philosophic post.

> Here’s how it will happen.

This post is a prediction.

> Currently, the most sensible way to develop software and make money from it is as a web application.

Last time I checked Star Craft 2 was still a native application.

> It gets around the problems of piracy, distribution of updates, and it makes use of the awesome platform that is the web.

The author probably never heard of Internet Explorer and XSS.

> Sure, it is possible to make money (even large amounts of money) selling one-off software licences, but compared to selling recurring licences for a web app, it’s a dying model.

The author probably never heard of Photo Shop. Sure it's one off payments, but in the long run you will end up upgrading to the latest versions and it's not a web application.

> That’s very sensible, and I expect people to continue developing web applications in the future.

The author probably forgot the title at this point. I mean when I hear "death of the web" I think of all the web being gone for good.

> But, if you poke around web developer communities, you’ll see one obvious trend: almost everyone is either very interested in building some kind of iOS app, or is already doing so.

I really like the "obvious trend" part that tries to sell the phrase as exact science. How much is "almost everyone"?

> This seems to affect almost every web developer community, from Flash/Flex to RoR including Python along the way.

Very nice, but where are the data and the numbers?

> A lot of bleeding edge web developers use Macs, and a lot of them are lusting over iOS and want to build apps for it.

How much is a "lot"? What does "bleeding edge web developers" mean? Why are they "lusting over iOS"?

> But for many, the web is a shortcut to avoid the problems of piracy and distribution. And the web is a shortcut with a lot of headaches. It’s a lot simpler to build an iOS/MacOS app and distribute it through the App Store than to run web servers and keep them up to date and build billing systems and maintain mailing lists and so on2.

This phrase seems to a suggest that the App Store fixes piracy issues.

> It’s a lot simpler to build an iOS/MacOS app and distribute it through the App Store than to run web servers and keep them up to date and build billing systems and maintain mailing lists and so on2.

A lot more expensive too: 30% of your selling price.

I would be interested in the following:

- does it have to be a laptop? what if there is a WiFi router in my room?

- does the device needs to be on my lap? is it safe to have it on the table?

- does it only make the sperms less mobile or does it corrupt the DNA?

I wonder what counts as an "emergency" and "cyber attack" and what is the extent of a "portion"?

These terms seem too vague for me, take this example: Someone tweets that Obama has killed a baby kitten, Obama could shut down Twitter because it's an emergency, he was falsely accused. He could shut down Facebook too, and all services that could be connected to Twitter to stop this cyber attack from spreading.

No disrespect, but I seriously doubt that the majority of the people(not just Americans) actually know how the Internet works, it's like asking a first graders to solve a differential equations.

The Internet just works fine by itself it does not need supervision from the US government, in fact it is one of the reasons it works so well.

I code a custom CMS when I can't find a CMS that does 99% of my required features out of the box. Otherwise it's simply not worth my time.

A CMS is lost if tries to dictate the HTML output, sadly most of them do.

My best bet is to use frameworks/libraries to achieve the needed features. I look at his as a Lego building project.

Ok, you have a point, the thing that has annoyed me is that I got downvoted for comments that are not "ego talking".

If I write something like "<something> is a load of crap in my opinion" I don't mind getting downvoted, but a lof of times I get downvoted even when I am strict and technical, and again this won't bother me if people would supply a response.

Having a "well formed" comment simply downvoted is equal to simply replying that "Your comment is so crap that it's not even worth my time to explain why.".

> You've generated discussion.

Yes it seems that there is a way to do this properly, as I wrote I still get downvoted, even when I'm polite, but it looks like the bright people greatly outnumber the others here in HN.

I receive a lot of downvotes for "well formed" comments too. The only thing that bothers me is that people downvote them and do not specify the reason, it's like they don't care, they just there to downvote. If I do not include any of my bluntness in a comment it annoys me that people just mark them as bad and don't reply to them.

I actually get downvoted for saying blasphemy like this:

"Actually there were no HTML5 stuff shown in the demo, I can code those effects to work with IE6. In fact that demo may even work in IE6 if you would include some hacks."

I mean does this sound mean?

My issue was this: when I have set the ocacity/trasnparency of an element, in IE6 it did not effect the child elements, which was a real pain to fix. I also had very hard time with aligning elements on top of each other and avoiding CSS rules that behave differently in IE and non-IE browsers.

TL;DR: Doing animations in web applications is hard for all the wrong reasons.

Quote from http://www.optimum7.com/internet-marketing/web-development/p...

"Believe it or not, the biggest road block I encountered when creating this css3 cartoon was switching the scenes at the correct moment to coincide with the css3 animation. I used jquery’s built in delay function to flip through the scenes and activate the next scene."

Being able to correctly time your animation is at least as important as the effects themselves. You don't get it with CSS not even CSS3. To be more specific: http://api.jquery.com/animate/

TL;DR: the animation logic can only be done in JavaScript, CSS does not have such a feature, and it doesn't even need to because it's fine to do that in JavaScript.

Until we get rid of most IE versions, we can't really reliably produce animation in web applications. I have built a very simple image cross-fade effect. I most of my time making it IE compatible.

Actually there were no HTML5 stuff shown in the demo, I can code those effects to work with IE6. In fact that demo may even work in IE6 if you would include some hacks.

It uses jQuery, and it generates jQuery/JavaScript code, which is good because you could check it out and learn it. I learned SQL with PHPMyAdmin, so I think you may be able to actually learn how this works behind the scenes.

I call myself web developer, but if I were a little bit more specific I could call myself: HTML/CSS/JavaScript/<whatever crazy sever technology you can think of> programmer. If I wanted to be a little vague I would call myself ninja or rock star.

The reason I like web developer is that it gives a clue to everyone about what I am doing or trying to accomplish, it also may give the impression that I am trying to be open minded about the technologies I use, with some bias towards the things I already know.

Frameworks are good but you should not get stuck with them. You should not use them if there is something else that may be better for the job.

I think Google or anyone else should man up and "invent" something that can compete on a quality level with Facebook.

Facebook is like Hercules, very strong, but not immune to death, still a mortal. In other words Facebook did not max out the capacity in social networking.

Something like Diaspora may be a step forward, I think it's kind of creepy for Facebook to know all my social stuff.(The main reason I don't do much on Facebook).

TL;DR: There is still a chance to do better than Facebook.

Well I did not expect so many responses. Thanks everyone for both the positive and negative comments, I have read all of them and I will keep them in mind.

BTW: It's not the Karma points that bothered me, it's the grayish color that some of my comments got and that some downvoters just downvote and don't respond.

I may be alone in this, but I like expressing my thoughts/feelings, as a matter of fact, most of the time I want to make it really clear that what I say is just my the way I see it.

Do I go a little bit too far with it? Maybe.

It depends on what he would use it for.

Looks like some trolls decided to go on a downvote spree.

They screwed themselves with this. There are already a lot of web apps that target iOS and Android and other forward thinking browsers. The majority of the current phones are NOT WinPhone 7, which means that Microsoft is insane if they'd expect the market to adhere to them. If they want to dictate they need to have market share and traction first, but they don't.

No no Microsoft, not this time!