or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple highlights interactive capabilities of HTML5
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple highlights interactive capabilities of HTML5 - Page 6

post #201 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by doyourownthing View Post

no, other browsers aren't blocked to open that content
http://www.sunrisebrowser.com/
all of the demo works perfectly

Then why do users of some other browsers get the message "You'll need to download Safari" when they click on those demos? What exactly are the criteria that Apple is using for which browser gets to view those pages?
post #202 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

HTML 5 is an emerging standard, but not all browsers support all the features. Apple's claim is that Safari supports all the latest HTML 5 features while other browsers do not. However, Apple provides no way for others to test that claim because other browsers are intentionally blocked from opening those HTML 5 pages. Instead, we are just supposed to take Apple's word for it.

They explain what is going on in each demo. You can find plenty of demos for other browsers.

The point of Apple's demos is to market Safari against other browsers, not market HTML5 and CSS3 against Flash.

Here is Apple's site that doesn't force Safari on you when Chrome will work fine, sans the 3D Transforms which only Safari currently uses..You can also change your UA to make other browsers work for some of the demos.
http://developer.apple.com/safaridemos/
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #203 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

Then why do users of some other browsers get the message "You'll need to download Safari" when they click on those demos? What exactly are the criteria that Apple is using for which browser gets to view those pages?

I have no idea, and my first reaction was that it was really stupid of apple to showcase an open source specification that would only work in their browser (Safari) but this isn't the case at all

I doubt sunrise is affiliated with apple...in the code there's probably way to tell if a browser supports a certain feature or not...firefox or opera should take note of that feature because the demo doesn't work in either one (at least on my mac...)
post #204 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Groovetube View Post

sure. And just how many developers out there are churning it all out by the hundreds of thousands, -right now-?

All new technology started at some point with a lot of potential and a small user base. That alone does not determine what will be adopted and what won't.

Quote:
It's all "gonna", just like SJ said about flash. One -could- argue flash is a bit ahead given it's now working quite well in beta for current phones, and would likely work quite well on the new iphone, if, it were even allowed.

I'm not sure what you mean in this comparison. HTML5 isn't in beta. The parts that have been ratified are all in working condition.

Quote:
When html5 finally becomes supported enough for developers to really embrace it, and it will, (despite whether microsloth tries to slow it down or not) flash for mobile will be well into it's second gen version, and on it's way to many more phones. And, it'll likely, (hopefully) be more used for what it should be, and we'll use html5 for the stuff -it- can do.

What are basing this prediction on? HTML5 is hear now, Flash for mobile is promised at some point in the future. I don't believe everyone is going to sit around waiting for Adobe to get its act together.
post #205 of 320
It sounds as if you work for a specific industry with a specific user base. The expectation for your work sounds very different from a web service for the general consumer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Unfortunately none of those young up and coming mobile users are paying my invoices. I work in the medical research / scientific industry where Windows desktops are the rule. Time and time again I suggest that we build alternate content for mobile devices and it always gets shot down.
post #206 of 320
You are placing the wrong emphasis on where the "improvement:" is happening. HTML5 is the web page instead of an addition to the web page. HTML5 is a leaner, lighter, fresher technology. That is the improvement.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

I hope and expect "the future" to be an improvement on the present. Not the same or worse.
post #207 of 320
The only demonstration that didn't work for me was the VR. A message said that I needed to have Safari AND Snow Leopard for it to work. I'm using a Mac Book with OS X 10.5.8 and the latest updates for Safari.

Even an Apple user couldn't view all of the demos using Apple software only a year old. I was a bit annoyed.

If Apple can't get all of the HTML 5 to work on a one and a half year old computer then it is really pushing things. I understand that HTML 5 is for the future, but Apple can't make the argument that it is a good thing today if it won't work on relatively new computers and other browsers.
post #208 of 320
Leopard is actually 2.5 years old now. HTML5 was barely supported back then. There may be some OS specific API's needed that were not built into Leopard. There are a lot of things in Mac OS native apps that are not supported in Leopard because it does not have the newest API's.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels View Post

If Apple can't get all of the HTML 5 to work on a one and a half year old computer then it is really pushing things. I understand that HTML 5 is for the future, but Apple can't make the argument that it is a good thing today if it won't work on relatively new computers and other browsers.
post #209 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

This is completley wrong. Firefox, Chrome, and Opera all support HTML5. They just don't support all of the extensions that Safari supports.

Some of Apple's 'demos' use specific Webkit elements, not really anything HTML5 about that, other than the VR demo elememnts, which would probably get added to Chrome at some point later on.

It's about as fair and balanced as MS' HTML5 demos page, which uses specific elements to IE9. Yea.

And I don't plan on using Safari, as it has almost zero features, and it's poor, security wise. I'll wait until Google may or may not add this Webkit specfic elements to Chrome.

If all these demos were HTML5 exclusively, I wouldn't have to switch to another browser to use them (or like this morning, fuss around with the user agent). As far it remains, the Tron and VR demos don't work in Chrome. Boo.

And the biggest issue, is that on the Safari dev page, they list it as Safari technology demos, which is accurate, in order to get the best experience...but on the regular demo page, it's just "HTML5 and web standards". It's a bunch of BS.
post #210 of 320
yeah wait for chrome, because safari is documented to be non secure, where that is documented though in anyone's guess...
post #211 of 320
From what can best be discerned without Apple's confirmation is that they used webkit extensions on features that are not fully ratified for HTML5. Apple wants the demos to work perfectly and Safari is the only browser they control. But Apple clearly states that this technology is intended for all browsers.

For example as you see in here Safari is the only browser that supports CSS 3D Transformations HTML5 & CSS3 READINESS. One of the major features used in Apple's demonstration.


Quote:
Originally Posted by guinness View Post

Some of Apple's 'demos' use specific Webkit elements, not really anything HTML5 about that, other than the VR demo elememnts, which would probably get added to Chrome at some point later on.
post #212 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post

From what can best be discerned without Apple's confirmation is that they used webkit extensions on features that are not fully ratified for HTML5. Apple wants the demos to work perfectly and Safari is the only browser they control. But Apple clearly states that this technology is intended for all browsers.

For example as you see in here Safari is the only browser that supports CSS 3D Transformations HTML5 & CSS3 READINESS. One of the major features used in Apple's demonstration.

I have to wonder if part of the heavy use of W3C's 3D Transforms is to get the other browser engines on-board with this great CSS option. Despite this being a working draft for over a year now and supported since Mobile Safari v3.1 and Safari v4.0, no one else but WebKit is supporting it. I'm not even sure how much Chrome, Android and other WebKit-based browsers support it, if at all.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #213 of 320
Yes I do think its intention is to light some fires under some arses. Apple did indeed get their attention.

Opera Software man Haavard Moen is not amused. "When the page doesn't work in Opera or other browsers it isn't because these browsers don't support HTML5," he blogged. "It's because Apple uses browser sniffing and vendor prefixes, and in addition to that they aren't really testing a lot of HTML5 at all. Most of their demos seem to have got nothing to do with HTML5, as a matter of fact."

Mike Shaver, chief technology officer with Mozilla, the open-source operation that builds Safari-rival Firefox, was less diplomatic on Twitter. "Having difficulty suppressing my contempt for Apple's arrogant and ridiculous HTML5 positioning today," he said.

I can understand their being angry at Apple. But at the same time, its clearly known what your browser can support and what it can't. Webkit is clearly far beyond every other rendering engine in its support of HTML5 features.

I have the feeling the precedes something big for HTML5 at WWDC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

I have to wonder if part of the heavy use of W3C's 3D Transforms is to get the other browser engines on-board with this great CSS option. Despite this being a working draft for over a year now and supported since Mobile Safari v3.1 and Safari v4.0, no one else but WebKit is supporting it. I'm not even sure how much Chrome, Android and other WebKit-based browsers support it, if at all.
post #214 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism

Car analogies are like buses, you may despite them but another one will be along in a few minutes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

Another one won't be along soon if you live in L.A.

From Main, you Spring to Broadway... then over the Hill to Olive... oh, isn't it Grand to Hope to find a Flower on Figurora?

Desde El Pueblito de Nuestra Señorita la Reina de los Angeles del RÃ*o de Porciúncula.

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #215 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

And therein lies the issue of transitioning away from Flash to JS/CSS/HTML5, developers have to sniff out the browsers and provide working content for each and every one of the popular ones. (BTW I believe you meant prefixes)

We have always had conditional browser code. Some people still insist on coding <noscript> even though .00001% people turn off JS these days.

For every browser that you want to target besides the one that has the best JS/CSS/HTML5 support means hours of extra coding and testing. it isn't so much about HTML 5 per se as it is about JS and CSS3 and the canvas tag, the later which isn't even part of HTML 5 but is the main area of interest in the discussion of replacing Flash.

Flash always worked the same in every browser for me. Sure the haters will say no it doesn't on a Mac, but I have never had any problem running Flash on any of my Macs so I will have to disagree with that argument. But there is no argument that developing equivalent functionality in JS/CSS/HTML5 takes waaaay longer and can't really achieve the same level of complexity either.

However that could be a good thing actually. I don't care how long it takes provided the client is willing to pay for my time. If they want JS/CSS/HTML5 and no Flash, I'm all for it.




On a iMac 24 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo 4 GB RAM

No windows or tabs open running Flash!


.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #216 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post



On a iMac 24 2.8GHz Core 2 Duo 4 GB RAM

No windows or tabs open running Flash!


.


Looks like you have a computer. Nothing else can be discerned from your post.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #217 of 320
I don't know how you've managed that, but no matter what I do, I can't get that certainly not with no tabs with no flash running.

I have 4 flash sites running, and it varies from 15 to about 60ish % depending on if something intensive starts going. I can do the same thing with html5 animations pretty much. The other test machine with the newer 10.1 beta is far smoother and uses less cpu. Youtube vids run about 25-30ish %.

It'll be interesting once we get past the handful of 'experiment' sites and start seeing sites in full production with major multiple animations etc all going at once so we can finally compare.
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
post #218 of 320
Wow I'm on a Macbook / Safari and the Tron video won't even play. Spinning beach ball. And now the fans are starting as if the video was like Flash

The gallery works because it's simply photos but not the video.

shame shame

not to mention the controls look like kindergarten buttons.

EDIT: Quit safari, now my fans stopped.
post #219 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by success View Post

Wow I'm on a Macbook / Safari and the Tron video won't even play. Spinning beach ball. And now the fans are starting as if the video was like Flash

The gallery works because it's simply photos but not the video.

shame shame

not to mention the controls look like kindergarten buttons.

EDIT: Quit safari, now my fans stopped.

That's strange, because my "crippled" iPad handles it like a champ.
post #220 of 320
This is fail.

http://html5test.com

Chrome: 142/160
Safari: 113/160.
(@foad who said Chrome is behind Safari for having html5 support)


And requiring a quicktime plugin?

Apple just lost the moral high ground in the crusade against proprietary flash. :P
post #221 of 320
Chrome was more recently updated with improvements to its rendering engine and added more HTML5 features. Safari hasn't had a major update since late 2009. If you run Safari using the Webkit nightly builds, the score should be quite different.

Browsers are constantly one upping each other as they update with more features. Which is ultimately a good thing for us all. Chrome still doesn't support 3D Transform which is used in Apple's HTML5 demo.


Quote:
Originally Posted by suzysatsuma View Post

This is fail.

http://html5test.com

Chrome: 142/160
Safari: 113/160.
(@foad who said Chrome is behind Safari for having html5 support)

Apple just lost the moral high ground in the crusade against proprietary flash. :P
post #222 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post

Then why do users of some other browsers get the message "You'll need to download Safari" when they click on those demos? What exactly are the criteria that Apple is using for which browser gets to view those pages?

It's just a cheap user-agent detection gimmick to get people to download a browser they'd otherwise never bother with.

Those of us enjoying extensible browsers were able to find a plugin for browsing with multiple user agents, and got into the page with no problem.

On Firefox most of it works fine, and I'm told that on Chrome it's nearly or at 100%.

Since all three are based on WebKit, it looks like Apple has another contribution to post to the repository to keep their FOSS usage in order....
post #223 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by success View Post

Wow I'm on a Macbook / Safari and the Tron video won't even play. Spinning beach ball. And now the fans are starting as if the video was like Flash

The gallery works because it's simply photos but not the video.

shame shame

not to mention the controls look like kindergarten buttons.

EDIT: Quit safari, now my fans stopped.

LOL, you're hilarious. I have a 2 1/2 year old 2.4Ghz iMac (w/o h.264 hardware acceleration) and Safari plays it fine. Safari is taking up 12% of the CPU. I found the same video on YouTube and Flash was using 72%.

Give me a break.
post #224 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by TailsToo View Post

This is really stupid on Apple's part. When you're trying to say how open standards are better, don't force users to download your browser - you've totally undermined your position!

I hope Apple pulls this embarrassing page quickly.

FireFox doesn't support nearly all the HTML5 features Safari does but WebKit and Chrome do. Of course Apple is going to say download our browser when it's THEIR site.

FireFox and Opera are way behind in their support of HTML5 so to truly push the technology they have to use a browser that has great HTML5 support.
post #225 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzysatsuma View Post

This is fail.

http://html5test.com

Chrome: 142/160
Safari: 113/160.
(@foad who said Chrome is behind Safari for having html5 support)


And requiring a quicktime plugin?

Apple just lost the moral high ground in the crusade against proprietary flash. :P

HTML5 video uses whatever plugin is required by the system to play the video. In fact if the video was OGG Vorbis and you had Perian installed it would also use QuickTime. That's what handles video. On Windows that would most likely show Windows Media and on Linux whatever player is used to play video... probably VLC.

Safari uses QuickTime so of course it's going to show video in QuickTime.

Also my Nightly build of WebKit which is the open source version of Safari shows 137 out of 160. Release version of Safari is always behind nightly WebKit.
post #226 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by RationalTroll View Post

It's just a cheap user-agent detection gimmick to get people to download a browser they'd otherwise never bother with.

Those of us enjoying extensible browsers were able to find a plugin for browsing with multiple user agents, and got into the page with no problem.

On Firefox most of it works fine, and I'm told that on Chrome it's nearly or at 100%.

Since all three are based on WebKit, it looks like Apple has another contribution to post to the repository to keep their FOSS usage in order....

The only one here full of it is you. FireFox is NOT based on WebKit only Chrome and Safari are. FireFox is based on Gecko which isn't fully compliant with HTML5.

This test isn't as full a test as you'd expect either. The more rigorous test is here:

http://acid3.acidtests.org/

Safari and WebKit score 100/100 (not a percentage). FireFox is way below and Opera is pretty good although it shows 100/100 it does error on one of the tests so doesn't get a full pass.
post #227 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Looks like you have a computer. Nothing else can be discerned from your post.

Apparently your discernment is highly lacking.

Clearly there is something wrong when a high end Mac running nothing but a window with Flash in it causing the machine to run at 100.4% CPU and running with 728.5MB of physical RAM and 804.5MB of virtual RAM for a total of 1.5GB RAM usage.

If you see nothing wrong with that then bugger off to the PC world where crap like that is expected.
post #228 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzysatsuma View Post

This is fail.

http://html5test.com

Chrome: 142/160
Safari: 113/160.
(@foad who said Chrome is behind Safari for having html5 support)


And requiring a quicktime plugin?

Apple just lost the moral high ground in the crusade against proprietary flash. :P

You missed a few things. Mobile Safari scores 133/160 in v4.0, this doesn't appear to be testing any CSS3 which is a huge part of these demos, some of those things (Ogg, for example) we know will never come, you didn't test the nightlies which are surely closer to the next version of Safari than to Chrome 5 which recently came out (note, it's expected Safari will be a focus next week), and, most importantly, that site doesn't seem to be testing CSS which is a large part of th demos Apple is promoting.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #229 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by solipsism View Post

You missed a few things. Mobile Safari scores 133/160 in v4.0, this doesn't appear to be testing any CSS3 which is a huge part of these demos, some of those things (Ogg, for example) we know will never come, you didn't test the nightlies which are surely closer to the next version of Safari than to Chrome 5 which recently came out (note, it's expected Safari will be a focus next week), and, most importantly, that site doesn't seem to be testing CSS which is a large part of th demos Apple is promoting.

Hmm. Wasn't CSS3 an optional addon to HTML5? So why include it? Just so Apple would get a better score?

If you want to try and pimp up Apple score by going the Nightly route, you'd have to test the nightlies and Betas of the all the competition as well. Do you know when the next Safari build is coming out to end users? (yes I know WWDC is close). How about others? Which one's are bringing out a browser this year? Then test their nightlies and Betas as well. Please do that by all means. It would be interesting academically, but hasn't got that much to do with real end users.

Regs, Jarkko
post #230 of 320
Nothing to add to the conversation other than a few observations:

-- The average person can't be bothered to read, and when they do try, they can't comprehend it.
-- They also think that after their lack of comprehension, they are obligated to come to a forum and post that fact as a confirmation to their lack of basic reading skills.
-- If left up to the average Joe Six-Pack, we would still be using typewriters and Telex machines... possibly Morse Code(?) Nah... too difficult.
-- Problem-solving and future possibilities does not seem to be a Western Cultural attribute any longer. If it doesn't work NOW(!)... it NEVER will! Right?
-- Because Apple doesn't reverse-engineer Flash, Firefox, IE, Opera, Chrome, etc. (which they probably could do) to make it work with future web standards (and a DEMO none the less!), they should ABSOLUTELY NOT show off what THEIR very own "futuristic" Safari or devices can do. NEVER!
-- Trust me: if it (your website) doesn't work or look good on a mobile device, including 'Droid, iDevices, or Win7 Mobile, within the next 2 years... you can hang it up.
-- Pageviews and mobile connection devices will dwarf by the power of 5, all desktop access combined.
-- Keep on standing still people... and get ran over by the HTML5 Train, because that's what will be powering all those mobile devices... and it appears you're comatose on the tracks to the future.

PS: the guy that linked to the horrid Flash website, meant just that: it's an example of Flash-Friggin'-Fluff!
Worthless!
For losers (not "lo-o-sers")!
They're thinkin' their site over there doesn't stink. It's putrid!!! Got it?
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
Knowing what you are talking about would help you understand why you are so wrong. By "Realistic" - AI Forum Member
Reply
post #231 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Looks like you have a computer. Nothing else can be discerned from your post.

Look closely:

100.4% CPU utilization by the Flash plugin,,, after the windows containing Flash had been closed.

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #232 of 320
I've had 100% cpu by safari alone and general web tricks. No flash.

Whoopdee freaking doo!

Now back to the subject. the html5 demos run fine on my iphone. Though, I'd like to see more intense examples, more than just playing a video or flipping an image. I noticed hen I watched the cpu usage, if you put the text in half alpha and rotated it, cpu usage spiked. What will happen when you much more going on on the page?
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
What I got... 15" i7 w/8 gigs ram,iPad2 64gig wifi, 2.0 mac mini, 2.0 17" imac, appleTv, Still running my old G4 466 upgraded to 1.2GHz maxed ram as a pro tools machine, and 2 iphones.
Reply
post #233 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Look closely:

100.4% CPU utilization by the Flash plugin,,, after the windows containing Flash had been closed.

.


Sorry, I'm a scientist. I don't see any evidence just a picture. It is easy to write crappy code that will crash your computer. It is also easy to write clean code that will run with minimal resource requirements. All I see is a picture, no code, no evidence and no control sample. Nice try.

Besides, you are trying to make it look like 100% CPU usage is a bad thing. I wish FCP could use 100% of any core when rendering a movie.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #234 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

What good are supposedly open standards if they only work on the latest hardware and the latest browser?

Apple needs to post a web page that is comparable to Flash in terms of complexity with animation, audio and lots of interactivity. Then we can make a fair comparison.

The example pages are a bit underwhelming.

Totally agree regarding complexity and interactivity.

One other question comes to mind: say these standards become widespread, will this result in all (for instance) web photo galleries looking the same (or choosing from a limited set of styles)?
post #235 of 320
Copy this HTML 5 code and save it in a file with .html extension. Load the file in Safari and check you activity CPU usage.

Code:


<html>
<head></head>
<body>

<canvas width="800" height="450"></canvas>
<script>

var context = document.getElementsByTagName('canvas')[0].getContext('2d');

var lastX = context.canvas.width * Math.random();
var lastY = context.canvas.height * Math.random();
var hue = 0;
function line() {
context.save();
context.translate(context.canvas.width/2, context.canvas.height/2);
context.scale(0.9, 0.9);
context.translate(-context.canvas.width/2, -context.canvas.height/2);
context.beginPath();
context.lineWidth = 5 + Math.random() * 10;
context.moveTo(lastX, lastY);
lastX = context.canvas.width * Math.random();
lastY = context.canvas.height * Math.random();
context.bezierCurveTo(context.canvas.width * Math.random(),
context.canvas.height * Math.random(),
context.canvas.width * Math.random(),
context.canvas.height * Math.random(),
lastX, lastY);

hue = hue + 10 * Math.random();
context.strokeStyle = 'hsl(' + hue + ', 50%, 50%)';
context.shadowColor = 'white';
context.shadowBlur = 100;
context.stroke();
context.restore();
}
setInterval(line, 50);

function blank() {
context.fillStyle = 'rgba(0,0,0,0.1)';
context.fillRect(0, 0, context.canvas.width, context.canvas.height);
}
setInterval(blank, 40);

</script>

</body>
</html>



Now find the part that says shadowBlur and change the value from 100 to 1000. Now give it a try.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #236 of 320
I wonder if Apple's latest stunt will spur a wave of browser-blocking antics across the internet:

First, proponents of open standards will block Safari browsers from their websites in protest of Apple. Apple haters will start doing the same thing and block Safari browsers from their sites.

Then Apple fanboys will respond by blocking non-Safari browsers from their own sites.

Eventually, the browser developers themselves (Microsoft, Mozilla, etc.) will step in and start making exclusive corporate sponsorship deals with online retailers, banks, online newspapers, magazines, etc. to only support their browser and block others.

Apple could then take action in one of two ways:

They could drop this stunt and stop blocking other browsers. Steve will write an open letter called "Can't We All Just Get Along?" Apple will be hailed by Apple fanboys as the champion of open standards.

Or Apple could start making exclusive deals of their own. Apple then starts blocking even more of their web site from non-Safari browsers. The Apple fanboys will of course rationalize and defend Apple for doing the same thing that Micro$oft gets criticized for.

The web eventually becomes even more fragmented than it already is. Then everybody starts pointing fingers at each other, each claiming that it is the other's fault.
post #237 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Sorry, I'm a scientist. I don't see any evidence just a picture. It is easy to write crappy code that will crash your computer. It is also easy to write clean code that will run with minimal resource requirements. All I see is a picture, no code, no evidence and no control sample. Nice try.

Besides, you are trying to make it look like 100% CPU usage is a bad thing. I wish FCP could use 100% of any core when rendering a movie.

I see your point! The "picture" was taken 09/29/09 using SnapzPro to capture the Activity monitor display. I annotated it with Preview.

I was on a forum discussion about how poorly Flash performs on a Mac.

I typically run 1 Safari window with about 19 tabs (MacRumors, DF, AI...). and several other windows as needed (usually about 10-15) pointing to specific topics of interest... say a forum thread that I am following.

I run Click2Flash to prevent automatic loading of Flash... sometimes overriding (loading Flash) for a particular video.

On this particular day I had three windows open where Flash had been run... the all were stopped.

While posting to the Flash thread, noticed that I was getting delays while typing and position. So, I fired up Activity Monitor. Then I closed all the Flash windows and several others that were no longer needed.

Performance improved quite a bit, but was still sluggish. I noticed the Flash Plugin usage, than captured and posted it as described above.

Interesting, if you will look a little closer, the second line down from the highlighted "Flash Plugin" is the activity for the entire Safari browser at 5.4% CPU (1 twentieth of the Flash plugin) and lower Real and Virtual memory figures.

Later, I killed the Flash plugin task and performance returned to normal.




That's what happened, to the best of my recollection, and why this particular image even exists.

In the past I have programmed in Flash (described on other AI threads) and had performance issues on my platform of choice, the Mac.

In one instance I worked with MacroMedia and Adobe people to see if they could determine why a particular Flash application performed poorly on the Mac, but fine on the PC. After quite a bit of effort, I was told by these Flash experts that that's the way it was on the Mac, and they recommended a JavaScript/hidden frame approach instead. Again this is posted in another thread which I will not repeat here.

Finally, based on my personal experience, I do not like Flash (Ads, Performance, Crashes, Usability). However, I have better things to do than gen-up false situations and phony images to knock Flash. There is no vendetta here, just a willingness to offer whatever factual information I can to support my experience, opinion and assertions.

As with anything on the web (or in print) you are free to believe me/them, or not!

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #238 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Finally, based on my personal experience, I do not like Flash (Ads, Performance, Crashes, Usability). However, I have better things to do than gen-up false situations and phony images to knock Flash. There is no vendetta here, just a willingness to offer whatever factual information I can to support my experience, opinion and assertions.

As with anything on the web (or in print) you are free to believe me/them, or not!

Not saying you are lying. By your own admission you had 20 different things going on at the same time. We have no way of knowing the quality of the Flash code, any other conflicts, or user error might have been involved. Just way too many variables for any valid conclusions. Clearly your personal bias against Flash is not going to lend itself to a fair evaluation either. Just try my sample code above if you think stupid programming can't exist in HTML 5 as well.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #239 of 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Copy this HTML 5 code and save it in a file with .html extension. Load the file in Safari and check you activity CPU usage.

Code:


<html>
<head></head>
<body>

<canvas width="800" height="450"></canvas>
<script>

var context = document.getElementsByTagName('canvas')[0].getContext('2d');

var lastX = context.canvas.width * Math.random();
var lastY = context.canvas.height * Math.random();
var hue = 0;
function line() {
context.save();
context.translate(context.canvas.width/2, context.canvas.height/2);
context.scale(0.9, 0.9);
context.translate(-context.canvas.width/2, -context.canvas.height/2);
context.beginPath();
context.lineWidth = 5 + Math.random() * 10;
context.moveTo(lastX, lastY);
lastX = context.canvas.width * Math.random();
lastY = context.canvas.height * Math.random();
context.bezierCurveTo(context.canvas.width * Math.random(),
context.canvas.height * Math.random(),
context.canvas.width * Math.random(),
context.canvas.height * Math.random(),
lastX, lastY);

hue = hue + 10 * Math.random();
context.strokeStyle = 'hsl(' + hue + ', 50%, 50%)';
context.shadowColor = 'white';
context.shadowBlur = 100;
context.stroke();
context.restore();
}
setInterval(line, 50);

function blank() {
context.fillStyle = 'rgba(0,0,0,0.1)';
context.fillRect(0, 0, context.canvas.width, context.canvas.height);
}
setInterval(blank, 40);

</script>

</body>
</html>



Now find the part that says shadowBlur and change the value from 100 to 1000. Now give it a try.

Mmm... It does significantly degrade performance. With only that one window open It spiked CPU at 91%... No I am not going to publish a picture

However, I was able to open several other windows and they performed well-- with minimal testing.

To what do you attribute the slowdown?

I tried various values and the tipping point appears about 500.

Is this a defect in HTML5, JavaScript, The Safari implementation, poor programming or a combination of the above.

I don't do web development anymore, so I am not up-to-speed with HTML5... looking for answers from those with more knowledge and experience.

The reason I ask, is that at some point I will, likely, need to become proficient to support/develop iAds, etc.

TIA

Dick

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -
"He who laughs, lasts!" - Mary Pettibone Poole -
Reply
post #240 of 320
Transparency is the killer for HTML 5 and Flash. Because transparency is such an easy thing to do in Flash and the results are visually pleasing, you see it everywhere. The power required to add the shadowBlur and render the underlying objects while animating the top layer is where the whole thing goes south.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Mmm... It does significantly degrade performance. With only that one window open It spiked CPU at 91%... No I am not going to publish a picture

However, I was able to open several other windows and they performed well-- with minimal testing.

To what do you attribute the slowdown?

I tried various values and the tipping point appears about 500.

Is this a defect in HTML5, JavaScript, The Safari implementation, poor programming or a combination of the above.

I don't do web development anymore, so I am not up-to-speed with HTML5... looking for answers from those with more knowledge and experience.

The reason I ask, is that at some point I will, likely, need to become proficient to support/develop iAds, etc.

TIA

Dick

.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Apple highlights interactive capabilities of HTML5