
Full quote of what Mark Zuckerberg actually said about HTML5 - ttaubert
http://blog.tobie.me/post/31366970040/when-im-introspective-about-the-last-few-years-i
======
melling
The context wasn't really necessary. I think we all believe HTML5 has a great
future. Hardware gets better at a rapid rate and HTML5 (CSS, Javascript, etc)
is still improving. The point is, and was, that it's probably best to produce
native apps at this time, for the majority of apps. Facebook, for example,
needs a 5 star app.

~~~
bad_user
Not necessarily a majority of apps.

Facebook is a really, really popular app. They cannot get away with good
effort alone. They must make their mobile app flawless and reliable, because
if only a couple of users out of hundreds of millions publicly criticize their
app, this hurts their reputation badly.

I do not agree with what most people are saying. HTML5, CSS, Javascript are
already good enough standards for 99% of all apps.

The real problem lies with the popular mobile browsers. Anybody who ever tried
developing a rich interface for Mobile Safari and for Android knows just how
bad things are - and some people think having to support IExplorer 6 was
painful.

Also, at least on iOS, the browser has better performance than a WebUI
embedded in an app. From what I know the web component doesn't use the same
Javascript engine for instance. Also, not sure if this changed, but on iOS 4
you couldn't upload files from the mobile browser (file fields in forms were
deactivated). You also couldn't automatically place the focus on a form field,
to force the keyboard to pop, because you couldn't trigger any mouse/keyboard
event other than in response to a physical user action (I think this was a
problem with mobile WebKit in general). And I also experienced many problems
with Android's browser. I can't even remember all of them.

~~~
loumf
The difference is that iOS allows Mobile Safari to turn memory areas into code
pages, which is what you need to do to JIT JavaScript. It doesn't trust other
apps not to be able to exploit that somehow, so UIWebView is not allowed to do
this.

~~~
chj
Are you 100% sure?

I believe webkit (either in safari or UIWebView) should be able to run JIT,
while your custom engine can't.

~~~
United857
UIWebView doesn't support JS JIT, as it's still running in your process space.

~~~
chj
thanks, didn't know that. this is really sad.

~~~
loumf
They would rather do that then open an exploit possibility. As a user, I
prefer that trade-off. It would bother me if I relied on PhoneGap or something
similar, but in practice, the performance really isn't that bad.

------
ollysb
"One of the things that’s interesting is we actually have more people on a
daily basis using mobile Web Facebook..."

this is testament to just how bad the app was.

~~~
StavrosK
Not only that. I use the mobile interface rather than the app for two reasons:
Sure, the app is badly done and buggy, but, most importantly, it gives
Facebook permissions that they've shown time and again they shouldn't have.
They've fucked up on more than one occasion, and I know casual users who balk
at installing applications that request too many permissions.

That's definitely a contributing factor, in my opinion.

~~~
omaranto
I haven't used iOS in a while, but a couple of years ago the web app was
faster (!) and had more features (like liking on comments, not just on status
updates) than the native app (presumably because the browser used a JIT for
JavaScript and apps an interpreter). I would use the web app for everything
except uploading pictures.

------
joshaidan
"...One of the things that’s interesting is we actually have more people on a
daily basis using mobile Web Facebook than we have using our iOS or Android
apps combined. So mobile Web is a big thing for us."

I find this part of the quote interesting. Those people who use mobile web,
what platform are they using? Are they using iOS or Android based devices, and
using the web? Or are they using other lower end phones?

Could this number actually decrease if Facebook linked to the apps in their
emails, rather than the mobile site? (I guess this might be hard to pull off,
but would be better in the long run)

~~~
loire280
My girlfriend uses the mobile web version of Facebook on a semi-dumb slider
phone (it might be some variant of Symbian). I find it baffling because the
browser is so terrible and the screen is 320x240, but she's perfectly happy
with it. She never uses it for any other sites. I wonder if Facebook has an
unusually high number of users like that. The demographic would be invisible
to the rest of the web community because those users never leave Facebook.

------
jpswade
Zuckerberg is right. HTML5 isn't suitable for the direction Facebook is going
which is photos (hence why they bought Instagram).

LocalStorage quotas cannot be made bigger than 5MB[1].

I remember trying this Mozilla-built webapp[2] out in Google Chrome, it just
didn't work.

1\. [http://htmlui.com/blog/2011-08-23-5-obscure-facts-about-
html...](http://htmlui.com/blog/2011-08-23-5-obscure-facts-about-
html5-localstorage.html)

2\. [https://hacks.mozilla.org/2010/02/an-html5-offline-image-
edi...](https://hacks.mozilla.org/2010/02/an-html5-offline-image-editor-and-
uploader-application/)

------
dpham
Context absolutely matters! Techcrunch sold the article as Facebook betting
too much on HTML5, period. His quote was that at the time 2 years ago, it was
a mistake betting too much on HTML5 over native for their mobile application.
And it's true, 2 years ago and even now, most phones have a hard time handling
Facebook's intensive need in HTML5. It's true, Facebook could have spent more
engineering resources improving the HTML5 spec and push it forward, but anyone
saying context doesn't matter is just being ignorant.

------
islon
"One of the things that’s interesting is we actually have more people on a
daily basis using mobile Web Facebook than we have using our iOS or Android
apps combined." That's a hint of how crappy those native facebook apps are.
It's barely usable.

~~~
kzahel
That was the interesting part for me, too. I am confused that none of the
other comments in this thread touch on that. At first I thought maybe there is
a third class of phone that we are omitting, where there is no option for a
native app, and so the browser is used. But I don't know what mobile device
that would be. Certainly not a nokia phone (though maybe oneday!) I personally
started using Safari on my iOS for gmail. The HTML5 experience is simply
better than iOS native email experience.

------
tokenizer
As a web developer, this is a great thing to hear. Larger companies should
focus on the web, and with this context, I don't have to be worried anymore
about learning a native phone language.

------
akennberg
I used to work on mobile products at Google using both, HTML5 for mobile and
native. When betting on HTML5 you get the benefit of quick updates across
multiple platforms and smaller team size. However, most of your time is
allocated towards finding work arounds for strange browser bugs. Mostly
glitches in the UI. With native, things work the right way most of the time,
so you can quickly create exciting new features, which excites the team. The
down side of native, is that you'll be implementing that exciting new features
N number of times for each platform.

Now that I am doing a lean startup, the reality is that the first app will be
re-written completely. My bet is to focus short-term on one platform and write
using native code for speed and lack of bugs (higher moral). For longer-term
multi-platform play and if you plan to stay small and lean, I would recommend
HTML5 or a hybrid.

------
grandalf
I think it was mostly the design of FB's mobile web app that was bad, not that
it was made in HTML5. It was too heavy and didn't optimize well to the iPhone
screen size.

------
francov88
Context always matters. People always forget that a rush too quickly into
things (kind of like Facebook and an emerging technology).

However in the case of Facebook, the error was still made.

------
Zigurd
That's a tautology: users prefer a Web interface over sucky apps. Which says
fairly little about what user might prefer when the apps don't suck.

------
cicero19
I think HTML5 at the moment is great for making prototype mobile apps. Getting
traction before investing in a native app hedges a lot of risk. The approach
(native vs. web) also depends on the type of app and the customers you are
trying to reach. There is a time and place for both and i think the times and
places for HTML5 will only increase in the future.

------
lemiffe
I think he could have phrased it better; Did anyone else think what he said is
rather redundant? I don't think context is that important, it's all in the
choice of words, and the relations in the discourse. If he failed, it was with
making himself clear, not on the matter of HTML5 vs Native.

~~~
mindstab
Maybe everyone doesn't have a constent quotable filter on thinking "is this
quotable?" :P

People talk poorly in normal conversation. It takes time to craft a good
quote.

------
vco
"One of the things that’s interesting is we actually have more people on a
daily basis using mobile Web Facebook than we have using our iOS or Android
apps combined."

Yes, a lot of people used the FB mobile web app because Mobile Safari ran
their web pages better than the web views of the old native FB app.

~~~
mullingitover
Stole the words right outta my keyboard. There's a reason people are going
back to the web site after trying the apps.

------
beerglass
I guess what he really meant is hybrid apps (native apps with HTML 5 rendering
inside them) are not ideal..

------
rjzzleep
who cares what zuckerberg said tbh, i doubt he wrote the html5 port and i
doubt he was the one who convinced people to go back to native. he's just
repeating what some engineer told him.

fact is html5 is slow, even more so on none apple phones/tablets. everyone
who's worked with it knows it.

------
gadders
The main issue I had with the Android Facebook app wasn't that it was
particularly bad in itself, it was just that it depended on a perfect, always
on mobile data connection.

These things need to work on an asynchronous basis, more like email, to get
status updates, post to walls etc.

------
mmuro
No, the context is irrelevant here because Techcrunch got it right. It's a
direct quote.

------
se85
All the context that is needed is said in the first sentence.

To claim this was facebook's biggest mistake is surely one of the most
ridiculous things i've ever seen or heard the guy say.

edit: Mark Zuckerberg has his head up his arse :-)

------
anuraj
HTML5 makes sense for what it is meant for. Web development. It is not a
desktop or mobile app replacement technology. As long as one is clear about
that, everything is fine.

~~~
natrius
Part of HTML5's origin is a draft standard called Web Applications 1.0. HTML5
is meant to be a desktop and mobile app replacement technology.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HTML5#Standardization_process>

~~~
anuraj
Intent do not always translate to reality. HTML5 does not deliver for
mobile/desktop. End of story.

~~~
natrius
Plenty of products are successfully using HTML5 for applications where it
makes sense and are succeeding with it. Blanket generalizations are usually
wrong.

~~~
anuraj
I think you simply refuse to understand - a nail may be pinned using a
pickaxe, but when you have a hammer available, which does the job neat , why
would you go for the pickaxe? HTML5 is the pick axe which does the job ugly.
Mobile developers have little reason to adopt it.

------
tonetheman
Ha yeah context is not needed. HTML5 is nice but betting a billion dollar
business on it does not seem like a great idea.

------
rburhum
I am one of those people that had the native app installed and opted for using
the web version instead. Why? We all know why!

------
gubatron
Issues I have with HTML5:

\- Javascript

\- Javascript

\- Javascript

\- Fragmentation like no other

\- Lack of APIs

\- Sandboxed environment

\- A bunch of morons writing "frameworks" without a clue of computer science
(same thing as many popular Wordpress PHP plugins written by people who have
no clue of even how memory allocation is supposed to work)

\- A bunch of other morons copying and pasting the work of other morons.

\- No real memory management

\- No real anything or poor support at anything (no sockets, no primitive
types, no threads, cross domain BS)

\- Internet Explorer

\- Javascript

\- Internet Explorer

\- Javascript

...

It's just not what the foundation was meant for.

It only took Steve Jobs talking about how bad flash was and closing the
endless array of development options that we have outside Objective-C and
HTML5 to make the world try to reinvent the wheel in javascript, all the while
ignoring the fact we have more powerful desktop computers than ever, all the
while putting more money in the pockets of those that run cloud
infrastructure.

I hope more guys like Zuck come out on the record and let the world know this
is ludacris, that all these decades working on out of this world compiler
optimizations and technology that's light years away from the browser can't be
forgotten.

Yes, we need to be in the browser, but give me a break, Javascript?

It's just sad seeing the turn of events of our industry going in this
direction, I'm glad of this whole "App" revolution and Zuckerberg saying this
at his first appearance after the IPO, I hope it sobers up a bunch of decision
makers.

~~~
amix
I can't believe this biased and unintelligent rant is being upvoted. HTML5
does not suck because of JavaScript, or because of using greedy algorithms, or
because people allocate too much memory. It sucks because browser support
isn't there and Apple/Google/MS does not give a damn about HTML5. And if you
think about it, it makes sense, it's much better for Apple/Google/MS that
developers develop exclusively for their platforms and not for HTML5 (a
platform that could be run on any OS).

What we need is an independent browser vendor (Opera, Mozilla) to do an
amazing HTML5 experience.

~~~
mirsadm
The story of the web up until now: It sucks because browser X doesn't support
technology Y correctly.

------
markmm
HTML5 is fine, but it's for developing web UI's not mobile apps. Sure it would
be nice if all the main mobile OS's used the same language and frameworks but
they don't, people need to get over that and start developing natively.

~~~
TheFuture
It's the glittering lure of write-once run-everywhere.

Devs still fall for it, even though we should know better.

------
pyrotechnick
This is what HTML is capable of: <http://ro.me>

~~~
markmm
I get "We are sorry, but it appears that your browser does not support WebGL.
Please download Google Chrome and try launching this site again."

Using Google Chrome

~~~
tmh88j
Using chrome and it works for me. Absolutely amazing!

------
goggles99
His statement is calculated so he does not receive too much criticism from
over-hyped HTML5 cool aid drinkers (which abound in great numbers).

I see the wind starting to turn finally, it had been fairly steady since Steve
Jobs hot air concerning HTML5.

