Firefox 4
- Started
- Last post
- 45 Responses
- detritus0
Hey look, another misguided Boz rant.
- you are truly an idiot. Get a life retard.Boz
- +1spraycanII
- spraycanII0
Chrome is the best.period.
- i_monk0
People use Safari?
I'm sure Chrome is just dandy but I have enough Google in my life as it is. Google is the new Microsoft™.
- Boz0
@spraycanII
Yes.. I like Chrome..it's been my default browser for a while now.. but still has a few quirks but overall I do think it's the best browser so far.
I do like Firefox 4 as well.. 3.xx was a huge hog.. it was just slow but this one feels a lot lighter.
- lukus_W0
If Firefox 4 continues to sort out it's performance problems I'll use it full time again.
I've been using Chomium, but Firebug and the Web Dev Toolbar are irreplaceable.
- lukus_W0
- "This page requires a browser that supports WebGL.
Click here to upgrade your browser." - and this is a message on Firefox 4Boz - on Firefox 4Boz
- and ChromeBoz
- and Safari..
so how am I supposed to view these? You get my point.Boz - for firefox 4 go to about:config, search for webgl and enable itlukus_W
- for chrome, download the latest nightly buildlukus_W
- "This page requires a browser that supports WebGL.
- detritus0
Boz, you hormone-addled cro-magnon chump - you've picked up an old thread and started ranting at ukit's post of three months ago speculatively looking forward to the *potential* of WebGL like it's an existant, fully-formed vehicle, and you're calling me an idiot retard?
- lukus_W0
WebGL is not ready for general use - but it will be in the near future .. this isn't a reason to ignore it.
- spraycanII0
NERDS
- Boz0
@lukus
I am not against pushing technology so we can do more innovative stuff. Not at ALL.. I embrace it and support it 100%. But it has to do MORE things than what we have, it has to allow us to author content and develop experiences easier than how we did it before that technology.
Why I'm not excited about WebGL and saying it's a joke right now is because it's slow as crap (I get 7fps in those examples), it looks awful (no anti-aliasing or anything of sorts). The example with dressing up a doll looks like something I was doing in 1990s in Flash not something I am supposed to abandon Flash over just because WebGL will work without a proprietary plugin etc etc.
Add to this that there is no public support for WebGL (browsers might support some features) but they all have it disabled because it is in fact a type of plugin as well and it runs like crap. We won't see WebGL run optimally (and I'm not even talking about better than Flash - I'm talking optimally) in the next few years at the stage it is now.
If you can look at those examples and tell me with a straight face that this is the future of the web, I'm seriously questioning your reasoning.
Compare this to Unity and it's night and day. Unity is something that's really promising in terms of 3D in a browser. Interstellar Marines game is awesome example of a game that's built in Unity3D.
But this webGL crap.. no thanks.. not until it runs awesome, it furthers are capabilities and ease of building stuff and it doesn't require PhD in physics to write code for it.
- acescence0
it's funny that chrome owes a lot of thanks for its greatness to apple and safari, they've made the largest contributions to pushing webkit forward.
- Apple owe a debt to the open-source web kit project too.. it's not just Apple who work on it.lukus_W
- Apple owes to Konqueror for khtml, Google started using Webkit not long agoernexbcn
- of course, but since it split from kde, they've made the largest contributions of anyone. much of it has actually been rewritten by themacescence
- Apple invented CANVAS, probably their single greatest contributionukit
- ukit0
Boz, no offense but at some point you might as well just quit commenting on stuff like this.
Last time you were talking about HTML5 not being ready until 2022. I pointed out how you were off by ten years, for all intents and purposes it will be ready by 2012, and you moved on criticizing like there was absolutely no difference.
I guess what I'm saying is maybe you should take the time to look into the basic facts of these things. Granted, maybe you have better things to do, most people do:), but it seems like a prerequisite for having such a strong opinion, especially such a negative one.
- lukus_W0
@Boz;
WebGL isn't being pushed on anyone. It's a standards based implementation of OpenGL that's designed to work as part of the HTML5 spec. It's in its infancy - it's not ready yet. If you get 7fps, maybe you don't have a decent graphics card? I was getting over 40.
Why do I think that technologies like this are good?
It's the same old story. Because they work towards creating open specifications which aren't dependent on commercial or proprietary solutions. WebGL will work within the browser, and will be able to be fully integrated with other features provided by HTML5. Any application will be able to pick up and work with the specification.
This isn't true for other 3D browser plug-ins. For example, unity3D doesn't work with Linux - will it ever work with Linux? Probably not, because they can't commercially justify it. What can people who use Linux do about it? .. pretty much nothing.
- who claimed WebGL was pushed on someone? I said pushing technology.Boz
- I have 2x 8800GT cards in my mac pro.Boz
- You're acting as if you're being forced to use WebGL now .. it's daft behaviour.lukus_W
- No.. I'm just responding to people posting example of WebGL as it is already taking the web by storm.Boz
- Boz0
@ukit
oh sure..why would I be offended when you are saying that everything you say is valid and what I say doesn't make sense.. LOL.. I have no clue what your background is but I'm pretty sure that I'm very qualified to talk about this and you are certainly not going to tell me on what I can and can't comment on just because it goes against your point of view.
First of all I didn't claim HTML5 will not be ready by 2022.. You obviously like to take out some meaning you imagined out of my posts that suit your arguments. I said it won't be ready for at least next 5-10 (maybe 10 is too long but definitely 5) years for any real professional usage with tools and experiences due to many of the specifications still not being finalized. We can start looking at HTML5 starting it's life on the web really after 2012. Which is like 2 years from now and for real tools and support to come out (in terms of libraries, additional frameworks and APIs) we are looking at probably around 5. It took JS 10 years to get stuff like JQuery and similar. It's common sense if anything.
I quoted the statements on why those conclusions are drawn and the state of HTML5 standardization you obviously dismiss because they just don't computer in your head and against what you already imagined.
And again, you are portraying my view of HTML5 as negative. All i'm saying and with facts actually is that HTML5 is not ready, WebGL is in it's infancy. It will be some time before we can use any of this new stuff in professional projects because we need to have all of these browsers support this stuff properly and publicly. Right now everything is in experimental stage.
Maybe a better statement would be that we won't see tools for designers and development suites that are on the level of Flash for example come in the next couple of years at least. For WebGL, maybe even longer.
The bottom line is we will see.. I guess we might have this discussion in next 3-4 years and see where everything is.. if you don't change your username or something.
So you are saying that we will see the web and tools and HTML5 being adopted by everything by 2012? Is that your claim? And webGL will be blowing our minds with capabilities and tools by then too?
I mean what I don't get about you is what you are trying to say? You are making such wide statements and show some experimental links and demos that half don't work, half you have to download some alpha builds and you tell me how I'm the one who doesn't really get it?
Pretty wild.
- You can start using parts of HTML5 now -> http://www.modernizr…lukus_W
- It's worth remembering that the move to HTML5 is going to be incremental.lukus_W
- Follow principles of progressive enhancement -> http://en.wikipedia.…lukus_W
- ukit0
???
I think its pretty clear that in posting such links all I'm saying is, hey look at this cool new thing. Without trying to judge whether it can instantly be used in a commercial setting.
Over the long term, sure, I do see Canvas and WebGL as overtaking Flash. But I really don't care that much and certainly not about the timeline...why would I?
Having said that, I don't see where your prediction of 5 -10 years is coming from. One of the biggest misconceptions people seem to have is that we are waiting for years for the spec to be done, when in fact the HTML5 features designers care about - and by that I mean CANVAS, SVG, VIDEO, WebGL and so on - either are done or will be done in a very short time frame.
As an example, Google just posted on their blog that they expect the WebGL spec to be completed this year. And progress in the nightly builds - of course that's important. In case you haven't noticed, its turning into kind of an arms race between Microsoft, Google and Apple - and all of them strongly support HTML5 and are trying to develop it, and push features like WebGL out there, as fast as possible.
Now once that happens, I absolutely agree that doesn't mean it's ready for use on your average web design project. Designers need to show some intelligence in terms of using which technology, same as always.
But why is this even an issue? No one's going to try to use it if they can't figure it out, or if the experience isn't available to the audience they want to reach - in other words, there's nothing to worry about.
I'm just sitting here laughing at the idea that we shouldn't be excited about or talking about new technologies in our field that are on the verge of being implemented, just because there might be a couple years lag before you can use it on your average corporate site.
- It's just like the late 90s again - Wild West Frontier fun! Yeehaw. *pew, pew*detritus
- ukit0
It's funny too because if you go on the Chrome blog, the IE blog, the Mozilla blog...this is what they are talking about - HTML5, CANVAS, WebGL. They talk about it way more than any of us do. Google just put up some pretty impressive demos of WebGL.
Sure, there are glitches, it doesn't run perfect if you have a slow machine but as a proof of concept, it's pretty damn impressive.
It's almost like these people making the browsers think these are going to be viable technologies...what a bunch of neophytes.
- ernexbcn0
Boz is a good man, he just tries that us silly peons don't waste energy on things that can be already done with Flash!
- Boz0
There you go..
I am all for HTML5.. I want Flash to evolve and be replaced with HTML5/WebGL and all that good stuff.. but I just don't see it being ready at Flash level any time soon.
It's exciting what we can do without a plugin now with Canvas but those are in the overall scheme of things pretty simplistic things as far as animation and other things are concerned. And you have to code everything by hand.. no tools etc etc..
THis will change, but I want us to switch to all this in parallel, not killing of something that's clearly better now (Flash) over something half-baked like HTML5/WebGL..
