Comments on: The problem with SproutCore http://dynamicflash.com/2008/07/the-problem-with-sproutcore/ Confessions of a serial code abuser Fri, 21 Nov 2008 00:45:51 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: steviant http://dynamicflash.com/2008/07/the-problem-with-sproutcore/#comment-66231 steviant Mon, 13 Oct 2008 23:16:27 +0000 http://dynamicflash.com/?p=159#comment-66231 <p>Complaining about the lack of graceful degradation is a bit rich coming from a Flash developer don't you think? when Flash's idea of "progressive enhancement" is a message telling you the equivalent of piss-off if you don't use one of Adobe's "blessed" architectures.</p> <p>The only way to get a worse degradation experience is to use Microsoft's Silverlight - which supports even less platforms than Flash.</p> <p>At least it's possible to get the source to a number of independent working JavaScript implementations without having to hitch your success to the whim of a commercial entity who could decide it to be financially or strategically expedient to cut your air supply at any moment.</p> Complaining about the lack of graceful degradation is a bit rich coming from a Flash developer don’t you think? when Flash’s idea of “progressive enhancement” is a message telling you the equivalent of piss-off if you don’t use one of Adobe’s “blessed” architectures.

The only way to get a worse degradation experience is to use Microsoft’s Silverlight - which supports even less platforms than Flash.

At least it’s possible to get the source to a number of independent working JavaScript implementations without having to hitch your success to the whim of a commercial entity who could decide it to be financially or strategically expedient to cut your air supply at any moment.

]]> By: Bookmarks about Plugins http://dynamicflash.com/2008/07/the-problem-with-sproutcore/#comment-57736 Bookmarks about Plugins Tue, 26 Aug 2008 17:23:53 +0000 http://dynamicflash.com/?p=159#comment-57736 <p>[...] - bookmarked by 5 members originally found by TakaSohma1 on 2008-08-13 The problem with SproutCore http://dynamicflash.com/2008/07/the-problem-with-sproutcore/ - bookmarked by 6 members originally [...]</p> [...] - bookmarked by 5 members originally found by TakaSohma1 on 2008-08-13 The problem with SproutCore http://dynamicflash.com/2008/07/the-problem-with-sproutcore/ - bookmarked by 6 members originally [...]

]]> By: Steve M http://dynamicflash.com/2008/07/the-problem-with-sproutcore/#comment-56815 Steve M Mon, 18 Aug 2008 12:53:54 +0000 http://dynamicflash.com/?p=159#comment-56815 <p>How does the fact that MobileMe costs $99 per year play into this discussion? Doesn't that in many ways narrow down the audience of possible users? I would guess that a $99/yr service is targeted at a smaller audience than say free gmail, or some other site. How many people willing to spend that much per year for this service are really running a browser that isn't capable of running these apps?</p> How does the fact that MobileMe costs $99 per year play into this discussion? Doesn’t that in many ways narrow down the audience of possible users? I would guess that a $99/yr service is targeted at a smaller audience than say free gmail, or some other site. How many people willing to spend that much per year for this service are really running a browser that isn’t capable of running these apps?

]]> By: shaggy http://dynamicflash.com/2008/07/the-problem-with-sproutcore/#comment-55756 shaggy Fri, 08 Aug 2008 20:07:15 +0000 http://dynamicflash.com/?p=159#comment-55756 <p>You're a flash guy. I think your response is predictable. I guess the way i'd state it is sproutcore is just a bad as flash but doesn't use a plugin. (;</p> You’re a flash guy. I think your response is predictable. I guess the way i’d state it is sproutcore is just a bad as flash but doesn’t use a plugin. (;

]]> By: Steve http://dynamicflash.com/2008/07/the-problem-with-sproutcore/#comment-54291 Steve Fri, 25 Jul 2008 08:59:44 +0000 http://dynamicflash.com/?p=159#comment-54291 <p>kenfegore: I'm sorry you lost interest, but the statistics I have available show that Flash Player 9 has a greater reach than JavaScript. The comparison with Flash Player 10 (which hasn't even been released yet, except in Beta form) was around one specific feature - local file access - and wasn't a central pillar of this article.</p> <p>The "Flash is proprietary" argument is actually pretty meaningless these days. Yes, it is developed by a single company rather than a standards body like the W3C, but that could be said to work in Flash's favour. The pace of change within the W3C is glacial, as is evident by the slow, ponderous pace of the XHTML2 and HTML5 standards. Adobe as a company will only make money if developers build on their platform, and they will only do that if there is sufficient ubiquity in the platform. Unlike the W3C or browser manufacturers, Adobe has a vested interest in maintaining Flash compatibility cross platform. If you want to see evidence of this, you just need to look at the Linux Flash Player, which once lagged behind the Windows and Mac versions by as much as 2 years but is now released at the same time with the same features.</p> <p>As for cross-platform compatibility, it's interesting to note that SproutCore's own compatibility page admits that it will only run on a handful of web browsers and excludes the likes of Opera (<em>very</em> important if you want to try and build mobile applications) and IE6 (the browser with the biggest market share on the Internet today). By contrast, Flash is supported by all browsers that support ActiveX and/or the Netscape Plugin interface, across a range of platforms.</p> <p>Finally, progressive enhancement is just as possible with Flash as it is with standards-based technologies, and the notion of building two sites has been outdated for a good few years now. See <a href="http://www.wait-till-i.com/2008/01/17/reason-21312-to-build-accessible-data-tables-convert-them-directly-to-yui-flash-charts/" rel="nofollow">Christian Heilmann's progressively enhanced Flash charts</a> for a perfect example of Flash progressive enhancement done right.</p> <p>It should be noted that this article wasn't pushing Flash application development over SproutCore. It was pushing the concept and virtues of progressive enhancement, which is something that SproutCore fundamentally does not support.</p> kenfegore: I’m sorry you lost interest, but the statistics I have available show that Flash Player 9 has a greater reach than JavaScript. The comparison with Flash Player 10 (which hasn’t even been released yet, except in Beta form) was around one specific feature - local file access - and wasn’t a central pillar of this article.

The “Flash is proprietary” argument is actually pretty meaningless these days. Yes, it is developed by a single company rather than a standards body like the W3C, but that could be said to work in Flash’s favour. The pace of change within the W3C is glacial, as is evident by the slow, ponderous pace of the XHTML2 and HTML5 standards. Adobe as a company will only make money if developers build on their platform, and they will only do that if there is sufficient ubiquity in the platform. Unlike the W3C or browser manufacturers, Adobe has a vested interest in maintaining Flash compatibility cross platform. If you want to see evidence of this, you just need to look at the Linux Flash Player, which once lagged behind the Windows and Mac versions by as much as 2 years but is now released at the same time with the same features.

As for cross-platform compatibility, it’s interesting to note that SproutCore’s own compatibility page admits that it will only run on a handful of web browsers and excludes the likes of Opera (very important if you want to try and build mobile applications) and IE6 (the browser with the biggest market share on the Internet today). By contrast, Flash is supported by all browsers that support ActiveX and/or the Netscape Plugin interface, across a range of platforms.

Finally, progressive enhancement is just as possible with Flash as it is with standards-based technologies, and the notion of building two sites has been outdated for a good few years now. See Christian Heilmann’s progressively enhanced Flash charts for a perfect example of Flash progressive enhancement done right.

It should be noted that this article wasn’t pushing Flash application development over SproutCore. It was pushing the concept and virtues of progressive enhancement, which is something that SproutCore fundamentally does not support.

]]> By: kenfegore http://dynamicflash.com/2008/07/the-problem-with-sproutcore/#comment-54235 kenfegore Thu, 24 Jul 2008 20:41:09 +0000 http://dynamicflash.com/?p=159#comment-54235 <p>I somehow lost interest when reading: "Flash Player 9 is viewable by an average of 97.4% of web users across all markets. That compares very favourably with the 95% of users who have JavaScript enabled"</p> <p>compares favourably?</p> <p>That is Flash Player 9, not Flash Player 10, which is used as a comparison for its advanced features.</p> <p>What about Flash being proprietory without any guarantee to supply the same features across all platforms?</p> <p>What about mobile Flash restrictions and full Flash memory and (for mobiles) battery requirements?</p> <p>And where is the 'progressive enhancement' in Flash applications? It is called the 'build two sites' technique, which would equally work for SC.</p> I somehow lost interest when reading: “Flash Player 9 is viewable by an average of 97.4% of web users across all markets. That compares very favourably with the 95% of users who have JavaScript enabled”

compares favourably?

That is Flash Player 9, not Flash Player 10, which is used as a comparison for its advanced features.

What about Flash being proprietory without any guarantee to supply the same features across all platforms?

What about mobile Flash restrictions and full Flash memory and (for mobiles) battery requirements?

And where is the ‘progressive enhancement’ in Flash applications? It is called the ‘build two sites’ technique, which would equally work for SC.

]]> By: SproutCore - Standards Stupid? - McArthur GFX - Standards Compliant CSS Design http://dynamicflash.com/2008/07/the-problem-with-sproutcore/#comment-54159 SproutCore - Standards Stupid? - McArthur GFX - Standards Compliant CSS Design Wed, 23 Jul 2008 22:56:34 +0000 http://dynamicflash.com/?p=159#comment-54159 <p>[...] Webster recently wrote an article about how horribly standards-stupid SproutCore (the Javascript framework Apple used to make MobileMe) is. He kind of has the right [...]</p> [...] Webster recently wrote an article about how horribly standards-stupid SproutCore (the Javascript framework Apple used to make MobileMe) is. He kind of has the right [...]

]]> By: Naseer http://dynamicflash.com/2008/07/the-problem-with-sproutcore/#comment-53349 Naseer Thu, 17 Jul 2008 06:20:32 +0000 http://dynamicflash.com/?p=159#comment-53349 <p>They key is: what captures the imagination of the main audience right now... And right now, that's the developers. Apple's big push is to move further in that since there are new energies being created and spent in the Cocoa programming environment... for the iPhone, feeding back to the desktop, and now moving to the web. SproutCore plugs into that with MVC, bindings, etc. Making it easy for new developers to jump in is a wise move, because today's adopters are tomorrow's providers.</p> <p>[I know this is a business and people dynamics comment in a tech heavy discussion, but I hope you see the point. And full disclosure: I own the stock!!!]</p> They key is: what captures the imagination of the main audience right now… And right now, that’s the developers. Apple’s big push is to move further in that since there are new energies being created and spent in the Cocoa programming environment… for the iPhone, feeding back to the desktop, and now moving to the web. SproutCore plugs into that with MVC, bindings, etc. Making it easy for new developers to jump in is a wise move, because today’s adopters are tomorrow’s providers.

[I know this is a business and people dynamics comment in a tech heavy discussion, but I hope you see the point. And full disclosure: I own the stock!!!]

]]> By: Andrew http://dynamicflash.com/2008/07/the-problem-with-sproutcore/#comment-53219 Andrew Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:17:15 +0000 http://dynamicflash.com/?p=159#comment-53219 <p>@Ben who replied, I'm sorry you missed the point. Apple doesn't have to worry about users that might enjoy progressive enhancement. Firefox and Safari users upgrade their browsers, and Apple doesn't care about IE users.</p> <p>SproutCore is great for Apple. Maybe not for you.</p> <p>If you're implemented an equivalent service to MobileMe (or OWA, or Gmail) without Javascript or Flash, you're a rockstar. The world would love to see it. It's not the problem Apple wants to solve, but mazel tov.</p> @Ben who replied, I’m sorry you missed the point. Apple doesn’t have to worry about users that might enjoy progressive enhancement. Firefox and Safari users upgrade their browsers, and Apple doesn’t care about IE users.

SproutCore is great for Apple. Maybe not for you.

If you’re implemented an equivalent service to MobileMe (or OWA, or Gmail) without Javascript or Flash, you’re a rockstar. The world would love to see it. It’s not the problem Apple wants to solve, but mazel tov.

]]> By: Ben http://dynamicflash.com/2008/07/the-problem-with-sproutcore/#comment-53207 Ben Tue, 15 Jul 2008 19:22:21 +0000 http://dynamicflash.com/?p=159#comment-53207 <p>@Andrew who commented, I'm sorry you're an idiot. I've successfully implemented a <em>very</em> similar version of what apple has done with me.com using progressive enhancement and best practices to great success. To say its OK to turn away users is just plain old stupid.</p> @Andrew who commented, I’m sorry you’re an idiot. I’ve successfully implemented a very similar version of what apple has done with me.com using progressive enhancement and best practices to great success. To say its OK to turn away users is just plain old stupid.

]]>