PureBasic Forums - English

nice but wrong.

javascript was not design for this and people exagerate using flash in other reason was created.

javascript was not created to animations that use your processor up to 85% or more than usual
flash is everyday bad used the people forgot was created to see stream movies , or stream sounds or small banners just all.
the people use wrong flash to create websites entirely in flash ...ha ha ha ha ha ha ha so after they finish "the job" they discover spiders like google or yahoo can not grab content from their websites so is not seo friendly websites .
at this point they make a map.html with stupid links to join content from flash pages(i mean they redirect to that pages) so they combine : NOTHING

so why someone is interested if small text is loading faster(html) and it's confusing with running stupid animations in javascripts is faster / or isn't than flash animations.

hahahahahahaha

maybe i don't speak very well but other people just said "flash is a garbage" they right !!!
http://techcrunch.com/2010/06/01/steve- ... 3-seconds/

so Billy-redmond-pie has decide to invent sirverlight ... ha ha ha ha
is the same garbage so you must have only a "recycle bin" prepared , look ... i never install flash in my computer , and i said no to silverlight too , so i am wondering and i ask me myself:

if i build websites from 2000 why i will be so stupid to ask others a wrong question like "is flash faster than html5" ?!?!?!?!?!?

what you show me there is a looser's script coded wrong because he's using setinterval ,hahahahahahaha
that's a bomb for mono processor's computer because if they using a old browser the browser can grow up the processor consume up to 85-100% and to make impossible to access to other open windows.

so what programmers we are,we are building web applications or we crash the other's computers ?

hahahahah ))))

On my iMac using Safari 5.1 flash 11 beta 64bit OS/X Lion

Flash 47

Html 101

Flash is very slow

spacebuddy wrote:On my iMac using Safari 5.1 flash 11 beta 64bit OS/X Lion

Flash 47

Html 101

Flash is very slow

Interesting but I don't see how flash on your iMac wouldn't max out at 60fps if you are getting 101fps in HTML?

anyway...here are the tests(see the difference)


with flash
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/607/flashe.jpg/


with javascript
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/26 ... riptm.jpg/


without your scripts my i5 centrino breath fresh air
http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/36 ... ripts.jpg/




but look i still think that was a stupid ideea to use flash/javascript to do these and i still think the all other people wrong using this thinks for animations `cause the life battery of a laptop is directly long or short is pointing over the s**ts are installed over.
so every time your processor is over 35% on battery is meaning you'll must charge quick because the battery is empty , so every time the battery is discharged faster your battery life cycle is shorter.
so think twice

J. Baker wrote:

spacebuddy wrote:On my iMac using Safari 5.1 flash 11 beta 64bit OS/X Lion

Flash 47

Html 101

Flash is very slow

Interesting but I don't see how flash on your iMac wouldn't max out at 60fps if you are getting 101fps in HTML?

Will not pass 50 FPS, not sure if this is due to running the 64bit beta of Flash.

spacebuddy wrote:

J. Baker wrote:

spacebuddy wrote:On my iMac using Safari 5.1 flash 11 beta 64bit OS/X Lion

Flash 47

Html 101

Flash is very slow

Interesting but I don't see how flash on your iMac wouldn't max out at 60fps if you are getting 101fps in HTML?

Will not pass 50 FPS, not sure if this is due to running the 64bit beta of Flash.

Yeah, the flash 11 beta could still be buggy.

the.weavster wrote:Chromium (on my old laptop which is running CrunchBang)
Flash 45
HTML5 32

I just did it again, this time using IceWeasel:

Flash 42
HTML5 8 (eight)

Awesome!

Using Opera 12 beta, the html5/canvas particle test now runs at 122 fps on Windows XP. On the regular html (not html5) it went from 20 to 68 fps in the new beta.

http://www.opera.com/browser/next/
http://themaninblue.com/experiment/Anim ... rk/canvas/

Here are my tests:

AMD Triple Core @ 2.1Ghz
Win7 x64

Waterfox x64 with Flash x64
18% CPU - 50 FPS

Chrome x32 with Flash x64 plugin
18% CPU - 50 FPS

Waterfox x64 HTML5
40% CPU - 20 FPS

Chrome x32 HTML5
50% CPU - 30 FPS

It's quite clear that HTML5 canvas does not have direct access to the GPU has Flash 11 does.

In fact i can play 3D with the new Flash, never going beyond the 20 / 25% CPU.

Test here:
http://alternativaplatform.com/en/demos ... 033online/

Warning takes time to load all the 3d and flash 11 is MANDATORY!

Renders 131.000 triangles @ 60 fps with 20% CPU

I use FF 7 most of the time but just for another data point...

IE 9

Flash : 40 fps
HTML5 : 53 - 59 fps (constantly changing)

It's a XHTML 1.0 Strict site running a Javascript, why do people call this HTML5?

Did you guys try this link, http://themaninblue.com/experiment/Anim ... rk/canvas/ , with the new Opera 12 Beta, http://www.opera.com/browser/next/ ?

This is what was running at 122 fps that I mentioned above.

I got about 370FPS with Opera Next.

Shield wrote:I got about 370FPS with Opera Next.

That's great!

It appears on Mac, the Safari browser still out does the new Opera 12. I got about 60 fps using Opera 12 and about 190 fps using Safari on Mac. It would probably help more if Apple would update the OpenGL from 2.1 to at least 3.0. Either way, this definitely will help out browser gaming no matter what OS your using.