5 ms·
I ran two three minute tests, one in Safari and the other Firefox on a 2.8GHz C2D w/ 4GB RAM and nothing else really open. In Safari 5.0.1 your link didn't ren
by mishmash 16y ago
I ran two three minute tests, one in Safari and the other Firefox on a 2.8GHz C2D w/ 4GB RAM and nothing else really open.
In Safari 5.0.1 your link didn't render a single frame in three minutes.
Firefox 4b3 did render, but the animation would not normally be watchable. The opening scene ran the best, probably around 15fps while during second and third scenes the galaxies would jump about an inch with each frame. I don't know what the fps were, but it was updating the screen less than one time per second with a single core maxed out.
Also, on launch, FF was using 76MB of RAM yet after the three minute test it was using 168MB of RAM.
So your link didn't function in one browser, used 2.8GHz of processing power and ~90MB of RAM in another yet was completely unwatchable.
Was I supposed to be impressed?
- kevingadd 16y agoIt runs great in Chrome.
- elblanco 16y agoWell, the demo is an amazing demonstration of HTML 5, and the limitations of HTML 5...if your browser can swing it. It runs pretty great in Chrome, not so great in FF and sucks everywhere else. What if this were a Flash demo? Only be mildy interesting -- and that's only for the presentation itself. From a technology perspective it'd be ho-hum. I think more important than that is that it's not even interactive. Interactivity with HTML 5 apps has light years to go compared with Flash even if browser vendors can lick the performance problem. In other words, HTML 5 as a content delivery platform has a very long way to go...and as it is is certainly not anywhere near as a cross platform as Flash is. It's just not a swap out substitution for Flash yet and forces developers to produce software that's just simply not of the same quality as Flash is able to handle.