[untog]

>At all. I find that to be a disingenuous or at least off topic insult.

Is it even possible to insult a multinational company?

My point is that the article suggests that Apple is a big friend to HTML5, and that the growth of HTML5 will be in large part due to Apple's "massive support". I do not believe that Apple is a "massive" supporter of HTML5.

Apple's first priority is securing their own walled garden, not HTML5. HTML5 and its associated technologies are capable of creating fully-featured, offline-capable web apps that work on a variety of smartphone platforms with minimal changes. Apple will not allow such submissions into the App Store, and instead channels users towards an Objective-C, Apple-only path. They are pro-HTML5 when it suits them (fighting against Adobe) but when it threatens their walled garden, they discard it.

It isn't my intention to single them out in this- Google is just a bad with Android, as is MS with Windows Phone. The only reason I'm focusing on Apple is because the original article made them out to be a big flag-waver for HTML5, and I think that is disingenuous.

[drivebyacct2]

Again, how is having a native platform in any way shape or form hostile towards HTML5? The only possible way I could understand your paranoia was before Apple turned on Nitro for their embedded web views. Now that they've done that, there's simply no reason to believe that they would deprecate their browser or fork HTML5.

Besides the article doesn't say that they're a big supporter (though I think they are: WebKit, Safari, Mobile WebKit, millions of iOS devices, etc) of HTML5... it simply says they are putting capable browsers in the hands of users.

>Apple will not allow such submissions into the App Store

A false accusation, and more importantly... HTML5 applications using those technologies would not even [need to or benefit from] be submitted through the App Store. That's the entire point. What are you even talking about? The only way your argument makes any sense is if you're implying that Apple scrap Mobile Webkit, remove Mobile Safari, or intentionally REGRESS their own mobile browser to prevent native-app-like-features from HTML5... which, I'm sorry, but I find to be a ludicrous assertion.

Who isn't bad in your scenarios? Every platform in existence has a native layer in it that you could "cite". If it weren't for Google (Android, Chrome, WebKit), Apple (WebKit, Safari, Mobile Safari) and Microsoft (IE9, Mobile IE9), we wouldn't even be speaking hypothetically about web apps as the future, as they'd be impossible!

[untog]

At this point I really don't know what to reply- I really don't understand how on earth you'd read the comment I posted and interpret it as "Apple should scrap Mobile Webkit". You seem to have interpreted my comments to be the exact opposite of what I was actually saying. How does "I think Apple are holding back HTML5" (my original comment) end up meaning "I want Apple to remove HTML5 features from their phones"?

There is no reason why App Store apps could not be written with HTML5. It works offline. It has local storage. Apps written in such a way could work on iOS, Android, WM, WebOS... the whole lot. Yet they are not allowed in the App Store (or Android Market, etc. etc.)- this holds back HTML5. (and of course they would benefit from it- users go straight to the App Store to download apps. Offline web sites just don't have the same understanding)

I am not suggesting that the manufacturers throw out their existing native layers- there are times (3D games, etc) where they are entirely appropriate. But while they are the only option, developers are forced into walled gardens when writing apps. I can't work out how anyone would perceive that as a good thing.

[drivebyacct2]

I really don't mean to sound rude, but you're not reading what I'm writing and I'm honestly not sure that you understand HTML5 or the capabilities that current mobile devices have in the HTML5 front.

You can absolutely publish fully functional HTML5 apps right now and any user on any mobile platform can use them. Even more, you can make simple Web View wrapper and publish them to Market, App Store, etc. Surely, surely, you're not really sitting there saying they have to build some new manifest and packaging format to support web apps... in their NATIVE application store, right? The entire point of web apps is that you don't need the concept of an "app". The app is the webpage as it's displayed in the browser. If you want to avoid that perception issue, then use an embedded web view wrapper.

My point was that all of these functionalities and abilities are in existence RIGHT NOW in (at least) the WebKit browsers. You're acting like it's not possible now, or that it won't be in the future. My point was that your accusations imply that Apple/Google/etc will, at some point in the future, go back and remove the Location API or Local Storage APIs or future Device APIs from their browsers... (since that's the only way your accusations make any sense).

You continue to act like the native platform or native app store somehow impedes the ability to use the browser or web views, which is just either above my head or just plain wrong.

[untog]

"My point was that your accusations imply that Apple/Google/etc will, at some point in the future, go back and remove the Location API or Local Storage APIs or future Device APIs from their browsers..."

Throughout this entire discourse (and I'd challenge the claim that you've "tried to be nice", unless you just didn't try very hard) you've thrown out various accusations of what I think, then dismantled them- despite me having never suggesting anything of the sort in the first place.

Why on earth would I accuse Apple/Google of planning to remove HTML5 APIs? I genuinely have no idea why you are projecting these ideas. My point is that HTML5 could be a first-class citizen when it comes to app making. It is not. And the fault for that lies with the phone manufacturers. Therefore, in my mind, Apple does not have "massive support" for HTML5.

But hey, let's leave it here, while you're trying to be nice. I'm not sure I'm interested in finding out how condescending you'll be when you aren't.