..... When it comes to programming, there is a plethora of ways to skin the cat, and no tool is the best for all cases (and in some cases one and one tool only cannot do the job at all), which is why it is inherently wrong to restrict development to only one channel. Case in point, HTML is not even close to the best way to describe a layout (due to its top/down origins), and JavaScript is inherently difficult to manage, debug and reuse (due to its lack of extensive set of natives, strict typing and prototype-based OOP - some of which were changed only recently). Sure, it's easier to create an info page with some basic interactions in HTML/JS combo than it is, for example, in C++, but writing something more complex, for example a game engine or some face recognition software in HTML5 (even if it would provide direct access to the webcam's feed) is a daunting task to be taken only by enthusiasts to prove that it can be done at some level. Not to mention that you have to rewrite every single library, that has been brewing for decades, into JavaScript, if possible at all, just to use features that you're accustomed to. And that's only from development POV, performance is a whole other subject. HTML5 suffers from the same problem that all previous iterations of HTML suffered - .... I personally don't mind having an option of developing close-to-native HTML5 apps, for many use cases it is the most optimal solution, but making it prime-and-only development option is just wrong. Qt is probably the best of both worlds when it comes to portability vs performance, which is why I condoned that direction (as long as there is alternative, of course), HTML5 is a step in a wrong direction.