In an interesting development regarding web standards and the browser wars, Ars Technica reports that Mozilla is taking Internet Explorer’s problematic webpage rendering into its own hands starting with a plugin for HTML5’s canvas element.
IE’s shortcomings won’t hold back the Internet for much longer, however, because Mozilla plans to drag IE into the next generation of open web technologies without Microsoft’s help. One of the first steps towards achieving this goal is a new experimental plugin that adapts Mozilla’s implementation of the HTML5 Canvas element so that it can be used in Internet Explorer.
Vladimir Vukićević says it’s “a very direct way of getting 2D (and soon 3D) graphics into web pages, and removes many of the barriers between developers and graphics rendering.” Here’s a screenshot of how it works:
HTML5 Canvas on IE, by Vladimir Vukićević
Mozilla doesn’t stop there, though. It plans bring its “next-generation JavaScript engine directly into Microsoft’s web browser” through a project called ScreamingMonkey. The plugin strategy will also be employed here.
Mixed reactions
Reactions from the crowd range from amusement to confusion to outrage. On the one hand, this move from the makers of the record-making Firefox browser is commendable. It shows that in the midst of IE’s dominating market share and FF’s sheer drive to beat it, Mozilla still wants the Web to work, one way or the other. Even if it means having to “drag IE” itself. Indeed:
Is it a sad or happy day for Microsoft, when their competitors get bored with beating them, and instead try to improve the Microsoft products to make them competitive - for free?
And what does Microsoft have to say about this? Isn’t this an insult wrapped inside a well-meaning gesture since it is coming from a competitor? Anything that gets Microsoft’s attention to hurry things up in the web standards compliance department is okay by me.
Try Adobe
But it’s not just about the browser vendors but the users themselves. How many of them will take the time to install this not-so-popular plugin? Do they care enough to see the advantages? Ars Technica thus wonders if Adobe could have been the better messenger, since Flash is ultimately indispensable these days:
This is purely speculation, but If Adobe decided to ship Screaming Monkey and the Canvas functionality as part of the next major iteration of the Flash plugin, it would rapidly accelerate adoption and get it onto lots of computers.
Cross-browser nirvana? Not quite
News of this plugin suggests that it’s taking a so much effort to make IE play nice that even competing browsers have to step in. And we’re only talking about the HTML5 canvas element here, a far less common feature, or should we say issue, than things like the double-margin bug or pixel font sizes.
A few weeks ago Google announced that it can now extract and index textual content from Adobe Flash files. We all know that creating websites in pure Flash is a big no-no if you care about being found through search engines. So is there nothing left that’s stopping web designers from switching from plain old HTML and CSS to rich interactive Flash? I have yet to find somebody who agrees with a resounding “yes!”
Rand Fishkin, CEO of SEOmoz, believes that this new development isn’t compelling enough to start building sites with Flash.
Flash content is fundamentally different from HTML on webpage URLs and being able to parse links in the Flash code and text snippets does not make Flash search-engine friendly. I think it’s great that Google’s digging deeper into Flash, but I don’t believe web developers should be any less wary than they’ve been in the past about Flash-based websites or Flash-embedded content.
If anything, I commend Google for continuing to convince web designers and search engine marketers alike to embrace web standards by pushing for the best practices in coding websites. Of course it’s the most logical thing both parties: search spiders need to parse content properly so that they can index it, and a well-formed webpage makes this possible; webmasters need not wade through nested tables and unnecessary tag soup when there’s a better way. And Google should, since it’s way more influential than Opera or any other web company out there.
However, Google’s efforts to read Flash still seem to be in the premature stages. Typical Google, they always release their products in beta without being wary of the consequences.
By consequences I mean clients who are now running around telling their web designers to create animated intros and the extravagant interfaces for their websites. I can’t really shoot down this little achievement by Google—except that it’s getting scarily smarter everyday and should try to have more features than issues when they launch a product.
More importantly, I can only continue to condemn those who misuse Flash without any regard for accessibility, much less usability, whatsoever.
We’re not sure when Adobe Creative Suite 4 will actually arrive, but now that beta releases, reviews, and even rumors are starting to clog the internet pipelines, we’re starting to get a clearer picture of what the programs will be like.
Try it
Adobe has just announced that the newest versions of several Creative Suite titles, namely, Dreamweaver, Fireworks, and Soundbooth, can now be downloaded for a test run.
There’s a catch. If you’re not currently using the CS3 versions of Dreamweaver and Fireworks, the trial period for these programs will end within 48 hours. Otherwise you can request serial numbers to use them during Adobe’s prerelease period.
As for Soundbooth, the same rules apply except that you can use the serial number of any CS3 product. That is, “including but limited to Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, Fireworks, etc.”
If you’re curious about what these CS4 versions have in store but don’t or can’t try them for yourself, CNET has a brief rundown of new features. For example, Fireworks “finally resembles those of other applications in the Creative Suite” and “features compatibility with Adobe’s AIR, Flash, and Flex Builder as well as HTML”.
Here are more in-depth reviews of the three programs:
Widgetize it
John Nack says that CS4 applications will be extended with “lightweight, cross-platform, network-aware widgets…via SWF panels (palettes) created in Adobe Flash or Flex.”
It seems inevitable to employ widgets in this day and age, whether you’re a desktop app or a web app. And Flash is really taking center stage in Adobe’s pursuits.
Abuse it
Nack also shoots down rumors that the next Photoshop will be released this October 1st, and that it’s not really called “CS4″. But since the CS4 moniker is already plastered all over place, we might as well shrug our shoulders on that one.
But the rest of TG Daily’s report on GPU acceleration support for CS4 programs seems real enough. Clearly, Adobe is continuously looking for ways to harness hardware power and push the capabilities of its graphics programs, regardless of rumors.
According to the latest episode from the Boagworld podcast, “you might be wasting your time designing with CSS” because now that Flash is open source, it’s “going to be everywhere and is the platform we should now be developing on”.
Flash versus CSS? What?
Let’s backtrack a bit. Adobe recently announced the Open Screen Project, which will implement a “consistent runtime environment” for Flash (and AIR) across all platforms. All, as in every medium imaginable: computers, mobile devices, TVs, and everything in between. Adobe working hand in hand with some of the biggest names in media and electronics to make this possible. For a company that’s always created proprietary technologies, moving to an open mindset is a bold move. But this will cement the popularity and innovativeness of Flash.
So how does Flash compete with CSS? We shouldn’t take the Flash vs. CSS part literally. It should be more like Flash vs. HTML and CSS. Or HTML and CSS and JavaScript. Wait, what about AJAX? And Silverlight?
See how silly this bout has become? All these web technologies are not direct competitors. (Except for Silverlight, perhaps, but I’m not even sure if it still stands a chance.)
But there’s a very real question being posed here. Should HTML/CSS coders move on to what seems to be the greener pasture that is Flash?
I firmly believe that not every website in the world has to be done in Flash for it to be jaw-droppingly awesome. There will be Flash developers who believe exactly the opposite. There will be hybrid web designers who can straddle between both and don’t really feel the pressure. Any of the three will prevail in the future, but from the looks of it right now, there’s still a place for plain old HTML and CSS no matter how big Flash has become.
Besides, both camps are still considerably immature. The web in general is, actually. It’s just that with all the effort spent into creating websites and the money that can be made from them, web technologies seem complete already. But they are just as dynamic and unpredictable as the web itself.
