FlexFlash equivalent (the best I can do with limited knowledge of
both).
Here's the XUL:
http://67.124.145.42/XUL/XULSampleTreeMenu.xul
CPU 0.5% Real Mem 54.38 MB
and the FlexFlash:
http://67.124.145.42:8100/Flex/myTree.mxml
CPU 6.50% Real MEM 64.98 MB
The FlexFlash:
1) takes longer to load
2) Takes longer to render
3) performs slower with noticeable delays (shudders)
4) consumes over 10 times the CPU cycles (when inactive)
5) consumes 20% more real mem when inactive.
6) has a significant impact on other RIAs on the desktop
I will say this, however, the XML that defines the Flash tree is much
more concise (and easy to write) than the XUL equivalent.
AFAIK, there is no animation in the Flash example (unless it is there
by default)
Dick
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
