Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #6860 > unrolled thread

Pointer Events finalized, but Apple/Google say no

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  Pointer Events finalized, but Apple/Google say no RS Wood  <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2015-02-28 21:15 +0000
    Re: Pointer Events finalized, but Apple/Google say no Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2015-02-28 22:57 +0000
    Re: Pointer Events finalized, but Apple/Google say no Huge <Huge@nowhere.much.invalid> - 2015-03-01 11:18 +0000

#6860 — Pointer Events finalized, but Apple/Google say no

From the «pointing at you with one middle finger» department:
Title: Pointer Events finalised; Apple, Google refuse to support it
Author: Thom Holwerda
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 11:05:11 -0500
Link: http://osnews.com/story/28340/Pointer_Events_finalised_Apple_Google_refuse_to_support_it

But here's the current reality, one that has been accurate for awhile. Apple
has a very, very strong influence over what standards get adopted and what
standards do not. Partly it's market share, partly it's developer bias (see,
for example, how other vendors eventually felt forced to start supporting the
webkit prefix due to vendor prefix abuse). Apple simply does not play well with
other vendors when it comes to standardization. The same sort of things we once
criticized Microsoft for doing long ago, we give Apple a pass on today. They're
very content to play in their own little sandbox all too often. All this
specifically pertaining to the Touch Events/Pointer Events dichotomy. The
latter is superior, but Apple refuses to support it, while the former couldn't
be adopted because of patent threats from Apple. So, Pointer Events is now
finalised, but Apple will not implement it. They're not the only ones to blame
for yet another childish, nonsensical, anti-consumer spat in web
standardisation - Google is just as much to blame. This is what a Google
engineer has to say on the matter: No argument that PE is more elegant. If we
had a path to universal input that all supported, we would be great with that,
but not all browsers will support PE. If we had Apple on board with PE, we’d
still be on board too. Android is the biggest mobile platform, and Chrome is
the most popular desktop browser. Had Google the stones, they'd implement
Pointer Events and help paint Apple in a corner. They refuse to do so, thereby
contributing just as much to this nonsense as Apple. All this reeks of
specifically wanting to hurt the web just because these companies are
competitors elsewhere. Bunch of children.


--
Posting to comp.misc, sci.misc, and misc.news.internet.discuss

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#6862

RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
> From the «pointing at you with one middle finger» department:
> Title: Pointer Events finalised; Apple, Google refuse to support it
> Author: Thom Holwerda
> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 11:05:11 -0500
> Link: http://osnews.com/story/28340/Pointer_Events_finalised_Apple_Google_refuse_to_support_it

> But here's the current reality, one that has been accurate for
> awhile. Apple has a very, very strong influence over what standards
> get adopted and what standards do not. Partly it's market share,
> partly it's developer bias (see, for example, how other vendors
> eventually felt forced to start supporting the webkit prefix due to
> vendor prefix abuse). Apple simply does not play well with other
> vendors when it comes to standardization. The same sort of things we
> once criticized Microsoft for doing long ago, we give Apple a pass on
> today. They're very content to play in their own little sandbox all
> too often. All this specifically pertaining to the Touch
> Events/Pointer Events dichotomy. The latter is superior, but Apple
> refuses to support it, while the former couldn't be adopted because
> of patent threats from Apple. So, Pointer Events is now finalised,
> but Apple will not implement it. They're not the only ones to blame
> for yet another childish, nonsensical, anti-consumer spat in web
> standardisation - Google is just as much to blame. This is what a
> Google engineer has to say on the matter: No argument that PE is more
> elegant. If we had a path to universal input that all supported, we
> would be great with that, but not all browsers will support PE. If we
> had Apple on board with PE, weâ??d still be on board too. Android is
> the biggest mobile platform, and Chrome is the most popular desktop
> browser. Had Google the stones, they'd implement Pointer Events and
> help paint Apple in a corner. They refuse to do so, thereby
> contributing just as much to this nonsense as Apple. All this reeks
> of specifically wanting to hurt the web just because these companies
> are competitors elsewhere. Bunch of children.


Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat
them.

You can take the above paragraph, and perform the following
substitution:

  s/Apple/Microsoft/g

And get a very close description of what happened from 1995+ as far as IE
was concerned.

You can also perform the following substitution:

  s/Google/Microsoft/g

And again get a very close description of what happened from 1995+ from
MS with IE.

You can also do this substitution:

  s/Apple|Google/Microsoft/g

And again, get a very close description of what happened during the
heyday of the "browser wars".



Slowly, but surely, the 'browser wars' problems are returning, just
under another name, and from different corporate mogols.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6867

On 2015-02-28, RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> wrote:
> From the «pointing at you with one middle finger» department:
> Title: Pointer Events finalised; Apple, Google refuse to support it
> Author: Thom Holwerda
> Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2015 11:05:11 -0500
> Link: http://osnews.com/story/28340/Pointer_Events_finalised_Apple_Google_refuse_to_support_it
>
> But here's the current reality, one that has been accurate for awhile. Apple
> has a very, very strong influence over what standards get adopted and what
> standards do not. Partly it's market share, partly it's developer bias (see,
> for example, how other vendors eventually felt forced to start supporting the
> webkit prefix due to vendor prefix abuse). Apple simply does not play well with
> other vendors when it comes to standardization. The same sort of things we once
> criticized Microsoft for doing long ago, we give Apple a pass on today. 

Well, "you" might, but I don't! Apple & Microsoft are just opposite sides of
the same coin.

-- 
Today is Setting Orange, the 60th day of Chaos in the YOLD 3181
I don't have an attitude problem.  If you have a problem with my attitude,
                    that's your problem.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web