3 ms·
how does performance compare with famo.us? they're also css haters, to quote > “We saw Javascript could do a raw game rendering engine, but we found a way to r
by dcsan 12y ago
how does performance compare with famo.us? they're also css haters, to quote
> “We saw Javascript could do a raw game rendering engine, but we found a way to render an app and pass that render to the GPU, skipping all the things that we were waiting on the browser companies to fix. We found a way to bypass it by having a direct mathematical conversation with the GPU.”
IMHO famo.us seems more oriented toward taking over the whole app and providing a view-level API, where velocity is more for animating page DOM elements? For some basic things like delay: the velocity API [1] seems a lot simpler than the equiv [2] with famo.us, whereas famous has things like a "Grid" or ScrollView out of the box.
[1] http://julian.com/research/velocity/#delay http://julian.com/research/velocity/#delay
[2] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/23330771/how-to-add-a-delay-to-a-famous-transition http://stackoverflow.com/questions/23330771/how-to-add-a-del...
- purpleturtle 12y agoExactly right -- Velocity is a jQuery plugin and jQuery UI/CSS transitions replacement whereas Famo.us is a full-fledged app framework built around a physics engine. As for a performance comparison, their demos have crashed my phone. So I have no idea. Looks like they've also pulled their demos link for now: http://famo.us http://famo.us. It's a pretty awesome concept though. I hope they succeed.
- spyder 12y ago> they're also css haters They (Famo.us) cannot hate CSS too much because they use CSS transforms to do their animations. http://www.infoworld.com/t/web-applications/fast-and-flashy-famous-javascript-framework-revealed-232046 http://www.infoworld.com/t/web-applications/fast-and-flashy-...