sadly the browser companies couldnt come to a set video standard so the <video> tag isnt what it should be.

there is still some very interesting crap in HTML5, and im glad to say that FireFox 3.6 has some compatibility, and 3.7 will be amazing at it.

it actually wasnt that bad for web pages, only issue was the resources needed. Its retarded how much is still needed using flash 10.1.

The reason I will never accept IE6 as being a decent browser was how MS steadfastly refused to conform to any kind of web standards with the browser. It launched during the heyday of Microsoft's "we're gonna do everything OUR way" mentality and was a development nightmare. You had to code a site for browsers... and then re-code a lot of it for IE6.

And then MS ran it out on the market for WAY too long and it became entrenched, much to the chagrin of the development community.

it was that mentality that caused them so many headaches  in the recent months.

Most IE6 users are businesses who have software that would break running on anything other than IE6, hence why it still has marketshare. Maybe with the GFC slowing improving businesses will start to putting the necessary money into IT to upgrade all legacy software that relies on IE6.

OT, personally don't see why people other than Mac users are jumping on the flash hate bandwagon so much. I browse the internet heavily, including a lot of flash heavy websites, and my browser crashes probably once every month or so.  CPU usage on my older Centrino Solo never spikes more than 30% at the start of a flash file when its buffering and decoding. If people hate on flash because of flash ads, well then a world with html5 will simply mean html 5 ads, which will be just as annoying and harder to block without breaking whole websites. If people hate on flash because its proprietary, then html5 won't improve it, because it too in some instances relies on third party IP for video decoding.

Given the lack of browser support for all of html5 (including h.264 decoding), I just can't see the appeal of HTML5 at this stage. Yeah it could be good, but is it any better than what flash is capable of right now. So far I haven't seen it. And as for Mac/iphone users, well I'd be blaming Apple more than Adobe, for not having a viable DirectX equivalent on MacOS X that allows software developers access to 3D acceleration hardware. Yes, its got Quicktime X, but its no where near as useful for accelerated video decoding as DirectX.

Quite a lot of potential.

HTML 5 will freakin make all these browsers even more uber awesome.

If you're a site owner, you're THRILLED about HTML5 ads. I know you guys love to block ads, but I hope you realize that's where sites like VGC earn pretty much all their money. If you appreciate VGC and its contributors, you shouldn't be complaining about a tech that will make it harder to block ads, especially when so much of ad revenue is based on per-click. OTOH, I'm right with you on sound-enabled ads. I HATE them. In my opinion, it's a bad move for sites where a good portion of the users browse while at work. But I won't block ads that are unobtrusive. I don't think it's fair to the site owners who work so hard to give us a place to play.

And actually, as I said in another post, I have no problems with Flash ads or Flash apps. My problem is with sites who use the tech too heavily, putting unnecessary animations or swf files in their site. Using it for banners, ads, and that sort of thing... well, that's what Flash does well. Where it doesn't work well is using it for key site components, which most sites don't do anymore anyway.

But I'm not a site owner, and neither is 99.9% of internet users. Maybe I've just been surfing too many Mac forums, but just seems so many people are lighting torches and sharpening pitch forks ready to kill flash, when they don't seem to realise it won't make their internet experience any better. Ads will still be annoying but harder to block, websites will continue to get larger and larger requiring more and more bandwidth, potentially it will be just as flaky with iffy browser support, and it will still monster your CPU if you try and play h264 video unaccelerated in your browser.

I mean I support HTML5, because I believe standards shouldn't be controlled by one company. But Flash is a defacto standard, and computers have used many defacto standards without harm over their evolution.  Until HTML5 is definitely better and more efficient and more stable than flash, then I'm happy to keep using it.

I agree with you on sites using too much flash, its annoying as hell just for the obscene bandwidth costs and load times. But then again I'm old fashioned and never saw the need for the overcomplicated design most websites use these days to appear 'fresh' and 'modern'. Hate website redesigns just for the sake of redesigns, even when half the time it makes navigating the website worse. Bring back HTML frames and GIF images I say, and get off my lawn.

QFT. HTML is a stateless protocol; AJAX doesn't really help in most cases, and the Javascript mess is incomprehensible. How about a completely new HTML?