Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Media The Internet

Scribd Switches To HTML5 177

drfreak writes "This story from OSNews describes Scribd, a site for uploading and reading documents, switching from Flash to HTML5. The major reason for the decision was that HTML5 supports all the major points of the site's previous functionality, so they saw no point in using Flash any more. The big improvement in the rollout is that documents are now first-class citizens of HTML and no longer need to sit in a Flash 'window.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Scribd Switches To HTML5

Comments Filter:
  • Wow. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mcrbids ( 148650 ) on Friday May 07, 2010 @02:37AM (#32123056) Journal

    You mean an open standard won out over a proprietary implementation?

    Flash is about to be marginalized. It will happen quickly, in much the same way as the open HTML/DOM/Javascript beat out over 20 years of Microsoft "innovations" such as VB and .NOT. And in much the same way as Android is about the slaughter the iPhone.

    See, open standards usually follow proprietary "trail blazers". Once the standard has been defined, copy-cats move in and do the same things, cheaper.

    Apple originally won the desktop computer war, then lost it to the more open (and less expensive) Microsoft, which finally is losing it's lead to the even more open (and inexpensive) web/SOAP API. Apple got it right again with the iPhone, but is already losing it again with the highly proprietary iPhone now rapidly losing market share rapidly against the more open Linux/Google/Android platform. (Android's 4x marketshare growth in a single month - WTF!?!)

    As a note, I have an HTC WinMo phone right now, but my next phone will almost assuredly be... Android!

  • Comment removed (Score:3, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday May 07, 2010 @03:32AM (#32123358)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Re:Wow (Score:5, Interesting)

    by vtcodger ( 957785 ) on Friday May 07, 2010 @04:11AM (#32123548)

    Right on. Scribd has traditionally been a candidate for the worst designed site on the Internet managing to combine flash abuse, baffling layout, slow response, and wretched human factors in one tidy package. I started avoiding Scribd links months ago.

    The bright side. I don't see how HTML5 could possibly make it any worse.

  • by michaelhood ( 667393 ) on Friday May 07, 2010 @04:24AM (#32123602)

    Same here---sort of. Old desktop 2.4GHz P4 and scrolling causes 100% CPU usage in Firefox 3.6 which is supposed to have a decent Javascript implementation, but apparently not. I would test with Chrome, but the installer always fails on this machine with a completely useless error message. Don't know why.

    That's because it's not necessarily a JavaScript issue, it's a omg-that's-a-lot-of-bad-markup (HTML and CSS) issue. And FireFox is getting more and more bloated with every release. I suspect your browser does similar on giant Slashdot threads, too?

  • by DeanLearner ( 1639959 ) on Friday May 07, 2010 @05:49AM (#32124002)
    So from a clients perspective (mine in this case)the HTML5 experience is slow whereas the flash experience is reasonably quick.

    And from the server point of view HTML5 is slower as well...

    HTML5 - Served by app04 in 1.168 secs. cpu: 1.100

    Flash - Served by app10 in 0.482 secs. cpu: 0.420

    What's the point then?
  • by fuzzyfuzzyfungus ( 1223518 ) on Friday May 07, 2010 @08:14AM (#32124730) Journal
    Heck, compared to Acrobat Reader, implementing the PDF spec in Javascript and decomposing the PDF into some combination of CSS-styled text, SVG, and canvas might even be faster...

    Against pretty much any other PDF reader, though, it would probably be strictly a stunt.
  • Re:Wow. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tk77 ( 1774336 ) on Friday May 07, 2010 @08:26AM (#32124834)

    Apple got it right again with the iPhone, but is already losing it again with the highly proprietary iPhone now rapidly losing market share rapidly against the more open Linux/Google/Android platform. (Android's 4x marketshare growth in a single month - WTF!?!)

    I would say, and I believe many would agree, that the normal "user" doesn't care about or even understand what "open" really means. In fact, from reading many comments on various sites I would say that many "geeks" don't even understand what open means or how its applied to the various phones. Regardless, Apple has a single phone (granted with 3 revisions thus far), on a single US network. Android is available on multiple networks and more importantly, Verizon. I know many people that would love to get an iPhone but refuse to simply because they can't have it on Verizon. They complain that they won't be able to use mobile-to-mobile minutes talking to their friends and wont get unlimited sms/mms to their friends. Not one person I know has ever mentioned that they don't want an iPhone because its not "open".

    Android phones are a great alternative to the iPhone on other networks so people will buy it. But to say that Apple is "losing" because they aren't open, I can't see how that can be completely proven as Apple recently announced they surpassed 1 million sold iPads (which run the same "closed" operating system).

    As others have pointed out, you also have to count the iPads and iPod Touches as they all share the same OS and allow non-at&t users to have the "iPhone" experience without having to switch to at&t (or get non-contracted service on their iPad 3G's)

The key elements in human thinking are not numbers but labels of fuzzy sets. -- L. Zadeh

Working...