> > What's best is relative ;-) I personally haven't used IE in years, so I > wouldn't know. > Of course ;). For the record, neither have I (which would explain my outdated info, see below)
On Thursday, 6 November 2014 20:23:46 UTC+1, Jameson wrote: > > Completely OT and [citation needed]. However, fwiw, IE didn't add SVG > support until IE9 > Sorry, sorry. I was just joking because I remember IE being the first to support hardware accelerated SVG and surprising everyone by beating the other browsers in this department [0]. My own tests at the time had similar results. But that was a lot of versions ago, if I run some more recent benchmarks[1][2], they're much closer. On Windows, that is -IIRC Firefox doesn't have hardware acceleration on Linux yet, for example. Anyway, the only real issue seems to be that SVG still still doesn't scale very well[3] (in terms of elements, not resolution of course), so as long as you don't have too many GUI elements it shouldn't matter much. [0] http://joeloughton.com/blog/web-applications/svg-vs-canvas-performance/ [1] http://jsperf.com/html-vs-svg-vs-canvas/26 (FF beats Chrome beats IE on my machine) [2] https://www.mapbox.com/osmdev/2012/11/20/getting-serious-about-svg/ - (check the unrounded/rounded performance links, Chrome beats IE beats FF on my machine) [3] http://frozeman.de/blog/2013/08/why-is-svg-so-slow/
