> Dick,
>
> The Flash examples you mention run fine on my machine and I do not
> notice any significant sluggishness.
I am only talking about one example -- and I have run this with my
normal mix of other apps and as the only thing running -- one browser
window with the Code Explorer popup.
It takes about .5 - 1.5 sec to expand collapse the top Code explorer
node, often with a noticeable pause.
I am running on a 1GHz Mac PB with ! Gig RAM. Here are my numbers
(activity monitor) for resource utilization of the Code Explorer>
Mozilla 1.6 Mac OS X 10.3.3 CPU % Threads
Real Mem Virt Mem
----------------------------------- -------- -------
--------- ----------
No windows open......................... .6% 11
33M 402M
Mozilla Home page HTML (1).............. .6% 12
35M 404M
Flex Product page (2)................... 9-13% 16
48M 420M
Flex Samples (Code) Explorer Popup (3).. 15-24% 20
67M 441M
Flex Explorer Popup (4) 7-10% 12
61M 432M
(1) Simple animation (gifs, etc)
(2)
http://www.macromedia.com/software/flex/?promoid=home_prod_flex_111703#
(3) takes 7 seconds to load and about 3 seconds to render)
(3) these measurements have the flex product page and the popup open
concurrently
(4) Popup window is the only window open
I don't the problem is a slower machine.
The resource utilization issue is an important one -- As multiple RIA
windows compete with each other and other desktop applications.
> On slower machines I do see some issues but I think the comparisons
> you are drawing are not exactly fair. The XUL examples I have seen are
> not exactly visually stunning. Also, currently XUL is very limited on
> what browsers it can be ran on.
>
I agree, but RIA, does not necessarily connote "visually stunning". I
would suggest that: Rich on Function, Rich in Intuitiveness, Rich in
Performance and Rich in Usability are at least as importance as
appearance.
> I reviewed several of the examples at
> http://www.xulplanet.com/tutorials/xulqa/ and they are all pretty
> simple UI's. Although they are more responsive they do not look
> anything like the examples that Flex provides.
>
I agree, the examples are poor, the tutorial, even worse. You wouldn't
believe how long I had to search for an example or explanation of how
to do a nested tree menu.
A point, worth noting though, A "simple UI" is often the best UI.
> If you look at how the flash player has changed over the last few
> versions you will see that performance has improved and the
> actionscript language has continued to evolve as well. Performance
> enhancements are high on the priority list for the Flash player and
> performance issues are not being ignored.
>
I have to agree with that -- until recently I would not have considered
Flash for a pedestrian UI -- just for special needs. The performance
improvements in Flash MX have certainly broadened the places where it
can be used -- I just want more!
I did try one app with a data grid and Flash Remoting to perform
real-time sparse updating of table cells -- performance was twice as
slow as a complete page refresh of the equivalent html table and 4
times slower than a hidden frame sparse update.
But I will keep trying until one (or both) of us gets it right
Dick
> Brandon
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
