



Interestingly, Google's move actually gives some teeth to statements from Apple about HTML5 being a fully supported "completely open, uncontrolled platform," a response to criticisms about the locked-down nature of the App Store. It also could end up vindicating RIM's "you don't need an app for the web" stance as well, although that theory leans on Flash a bit more heavily. Indeed, the fault line comes down to Flash once again: the main Chrome apps that don't work on the iPad are ones that use Flash or rely on a keyboard. This won't be a hurdle for the PlayBook, or a theoretical Chrome OS tablet or Android tablet,



Oh, and speaking of Android tablets: we tested out some of these more HTML5-intense Chrome web apps (like the finger-friendly New York Times viewer) on the Galaxy Tab and didn't have much luck. Google itself said it wasn't fully supporting all of this functionality in Android yet, or even on the Google TV's Chrome-lite browser, but hopefully that's only a temporary problem.



Here are a few examples of standout Chrome Web Apps and their stats:





Utilities

Music

News

Underlying tech: FlashCompatibility: Chrome, iPad (app), Galaxy Tab (web)Offline: NoUnderlying tech: HTML5Compatibility: Chrome, iPad (app, almost web), Galaxy Tab (phone app, almost web)Offline: NoNotes: The iPad and Galaxy tab seemed to load Flixster's UI just fine, but none of the movies in the main content pane would show up when we selected them.Underlying tech: HTML5Compatibility: Chrome, iPad (app), Galaxy Tab (phone app)Offline: NoUnderlying tech: HTML5, FlashCompatibility: Chrome, iPad (phone app), Galaxy Tab (phone app)Offline: NoUnderlying tech: HTML5, FlashCompatibility: Chrome, Galaxy Tab (web)Offline: NoNotes: It's super slow on the Tab, but it works.Underlying tech: HTML5Compatibility: Chrome, iPad (different app, almost web), Galaxy Tab (phone app, almost web)Offline: NoNotes: Similar to the Flixster problem, the page loads on the iPad and Galaxy Tab, but none of the content shows up.Underlying tech: HTML5Compatibility: Chrome, iPad (almost web)Offline: YesNotes: Everything looks great on the iPad, but you can't scroll the articles, so it's essentially useless.Underlying tech: HTML5Compatibility: Chrome, iPad (app, web), Galaxy Tab (phone app)Offline: YesUnderlying tech: HTML5Compatibility: Chrome, iPad (app, web), Galaxy Tab (phone app)Offline: YesUnderlying tech: HTML5, FlashCompatibility: Chrome, iPad (app, almost web), Galaxy Tab (phone app, full web)Offline: NoNotes: The site loads perfectly on the iPad, but the audio doesn't work because it's Flash-based.Right now one of the biggest problems we see with these apps, as opposed to their boring non-HTML5 website counterparts and native application competition, is the somewhat sluggish performance we've witnessed on the iPad, including in their actual App Store "native" app incarnations, and on the underpowered Cr-48 hardware . Hopefully this is something that WebKit engineers are hard at work at improving, and we have to say that a touch of hardware acceleration wouldn't hurt. And, of course, this doesn't even touch on the fact that the functionality on display so far doesn't quite match the power of many native iOS and Android applications.It's also worth remembering that Apple actually tried and failed miserably to rely on web apps when it launched the iPhone initially, and while we've come a long way in browser power, UI innovation, and mobile chipsets, it's possible that tech still isn't mature to make web apps a compelling alternative to native apps -- or at least not mature enough to be an OS's primary crutch.Over time we'll be curious to see how closely applications adhere to strict HTML5 and iPad-compatible, touch-capable UIs, or if the freedom of Flash and power of the keyboard / mouse tag team will make this rash of early synergy merely a beautiful anomaly. Is HTML5 the undisputed " future of the web "? Can it be the future of apps as well?