4 ms·

We're talking about Google, a company who wrote their own cleanroom Java implementation and reverse-engineered ActiveX to create a ChromeFrame implementation st

by asolove 16y ago

We're talking about Google, a company who wrote their own cleanroom Java implementation and reverse-engineered ActiveX to create a ChromeFrame implementation still compatible with anything that ever worked in IE. I think they could speed things up a bit. ActionScript is just JS plus some extra sugar. JS implementations have gotten hundreds of times faster in the last three years, while Flash has gotten slower. Slap a modern JIT on there and we should get some improvement.

sshumaker 16y ago
A lot of what goes on in SWF files is the art data (vector graphics, the 'movieclip' object, etc). Flash comes with a pretty extensive API for manipulating graphics and these objects, all which needs to be rewritten for mobile. There's a lot there, believe me. Unfortunately, much of that content is what causes the problem. Using the artist tools (Flash CS3), you can generate content that simply fumes memory, without writing a single line of code. I'm not sure you can even fix those issues without re-authoring the art content. What makes this worse is that anyone can embed one of these crappy SWFs in a webpage, causing the browser to fume memory too.
- albertzeyer 16y ago
  Or to put it different: Everyone can build a crappy webpage. Flash helps in making that easier.
justsee 16y ago
The Flash player has been getting faster over the years - dramatically so, afaik. Could you provide links to back up your statement that it has gotten slower? I've never heard that before.
est 16y ago
> reverse-engineered ActiveX to create a ChromeFrame Can you elaborate? > while Flash has gotten slower. Slap a modern JIT on there and we should get some improvement. Adobe actually contributed to Tracemonkey's JIT as one of their effort towards ECMAScript engine unification, they even planned to write a engine for WSH Active Script, but failed. IMHO Flash is laggy because of the drawing part, but in this case HTML5 is also laggy as hell. Try set font to 100 in this demo: http://www.ponticstar.com/projects/burning-words/ http://www.ponticstar.com/projects/burning-words/
jcl 16y ago
ActionScript is not JS plus sugar. ActionScript 3.0 adds statically-typed variables and class-based inheritance. A good compiler can use these additional constraints to produce better code -- performing more like Java than JavaScript. It's possible that the VM is not the bottleneck here.
glhaynes 16y ago
I don't think Flash's problem is speed. It could be sped up by 10x and I don't think it would significantly matter to its market position or future prospects.
tomlin 16y ago
> JS implementations have gotten hundreds of times faster in the last three years, while Flash has gotten slower. I don't know about that. Flash may be proprietary, poor coding community, etc, but to suggest it is creeping down to JS performance is pretty outlandish. Flash has two communities. One: Designers trying to do timeline animation with a mix of code snippets they've found. Two: Decent coders who implement the safest, best methods. When Flash performance is subject, it tends to be Flash's poor design that gets the bad rap even though it tends to be the poor developer community at fault. In the same way, JS-based interactive content can also be coded poorly and perform poorly as a result. Honestly, I've seen some pretty intense, balls-to-the-wall sites that I know would absolutely work at a crawl or snail's pace in JS, but work elegantly in Flash. A full open-source file format would be a great move for Adobe.

by asolove 16y ago

sshumaker 16y ago

A lot of what goes on in SWF files is the art data (vector graphics, the 'movieclip' object, etc). Flash comes with a pretty extensive API for manipulating graphics and these objects, all which needs to be rewritten for mobile. There's a lot there, believe me. Unfortunately, much of that content is what causes the problem. Using the artist tools (Flash CS3), you can generate content that simply fumes memory, without writing a single line of code. I'm not sure you can even fix those issues without re-authoring the art content. What makes this worse is that anyone can embed one of these crappy SWFs in a webpage, causing the browser to fume memory too.

albertzeyer 16y ago
Or to put it different: Everyone can build a crappy webpage. Flash helps in making that easier.

justsee 16y ago

The Flash player has been getting faster over the years - dramatically so, afaik. Could you provide links to back up your statement that it has gotten slower? I've never heard that before.

est 16y ago

> reverse-engineered ActiveX to create a ChromeFrame Can you elaborate? > while Flash has gotten slower. Slap a modern JIT on there and we should get some improvement. Adobe actually contributed to Tracemonkey's JIT as one of their effort towards ECMAScript engine unification, they even planned to write a engine for WSH Active Script, but failed. IMHO Flash is laggy because of the drawing part, but in this case HTML5 is also laggy as hell. Try set font to 100 in this demo: http://www.ponticstar.com/projects/burning-words/ http://www.ponticstar.com/projects/burning-words/

jcl 16y ago

ActionScript is not JS plus sugar. ActionScript 3.0 adds statically-typed variables and class-based inheritance. A good compiler can use these additional constraints to produce better code -- performing more like Java than JavaScript. It's possible that the VM is not the bottleneck here.

glhaynes 16y ago

I don't think Flash's problem is speed. It could be sped up by 10x and I don't think it would significantly matter to its market position or future prospects.

tomlin 16y ago

> JS implementations have gotten hundreds of times faster in the last three years, while Flash has gotten slower. I don't know about that. Flash may be proprietary, poor coding community, etc, but to suggest it is creeping down to JS performance is pretty outlandish. Flash has two communities. One: Designers trying to do timeline animation with a mix of code snippets they've found. Two: Decent coders who implement the safest, best methods. When Flash performance is subject, it tends to be Flash's poor design that gets the bad rap even though it tends to be the poor developer community at fault. In the same way, JS-based interactive content can also be coded poorly and perform poorly as a result. Honestly, I've seen some pretty intense, balls-to-the-wall sites that I know would absolutely work at a crawl or snail's pace in JS, but work elegantly in Flash. A full open-source file format would be a great move for Adobe.