Comments for Pacoup.com http://pacoup.com Wed, 25 Apr 2012 18:44:47 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 Comment on List of True 16:9 Resolutions by 16:9 resolution below 720p? - Electronic Arts UK Community http://pacoup.com/2011/06/12/list-of-true-169-resolutions/comment-page-1/#comment-13106 16:9 resolution below 720p? - Electronic Arts UK Community Wed, 25 Apr 2012 18:44:47 +0000 http://pacoup.com/?p=1717#comment-13106 [...] steps in f0CUS's post, create new 16:9 resolutions - Game now has new resolutions you created. List of True 16:9 Resolutions | Pacoup.com Go to that link and only pick the ones highlighted in green. May I ask your laptops specs? I have [...] [...] steps in f0CUS's post, create new 16:9 resolutions – Game now has new resolutions you created. List of True 16:9 Resolutions | Pacoup.com Go to that link and only pick the ones highlighted in green. May I ask your laptops specs? I have [...]

]]> Comment on Flash vs HTML5 Performance (Updated January 2012) by Goodbye Flash world? Hello SVG world? | Grio's Blog http://pacoup.com/2011/02/03/flash-vs-html5-performance/comment-page-1/#comment-13096 Goodbye Flash world? Hello SVG world? | Grio's Blog Thu, 19 Apr 2012 05:22:37 +0000 http://pacoup.com/?p=1657#comment-13096 [...] The most popular benchmark of Flash’s performance vis-a-vis SVG’s is a 2D particle simulator which counts the number of “frames” per second it’s able to render. It isn’t an accurate benchmark of anything in particular, since it doesn’t distinguish between rendering times, calculation times and document modification times, and it’s also dependent on the author’s ActionScript vs. Javascript implementations, but it is a living demonstration of the current state of affairs, since you can see the tests play right in front of you on a variety of browsers. What I see when I look at them is that, with minor quirks, SVG is more or less in parity with Flash, except on Firefox (I’m looking at v11), where Flash is still the clear winner. Here’s a summary of results from early 2012. [...] [...] The most popular benchmark of Flash’s performance vis-a-vis SVG’s is a 2D particle simulator which counts the number of “frames” per second it’s able to render. It isn’t an accurate benchmark of anything in particular, since it doesn’t distinguish between rendering times, calculation times and document modification times, and it’s also dependent on the author’s ActionScript vs. Javascript implementations, but it is a living demonstration of the current state of affairs, since you can see the tests play right in front of you on a variety of browsers. What I see when I look at them is that, with minor quirks, SVG is more or less in parity with Flash, except on Firefox (I’m looking at v11), where Flash is still the clear winner. Here’s a summary of results from early 2012. [...]

]]> Comment on VP8 (WebM) vs H.264 (MP4) – August 2010 by Pacoup http://pacoup.com/2010/08/09/vp8-webm-vs-h-264-mp4-august-2010/comment-page-1/#comment-13093 Pacoup Tue, 17 Apr 2012 00:20:37 +0000 http://pacoup.com/?p=1291#comment-13093 Yes, I realize this. In fact, in my oft-postponed revision of this test, I have been using CPU time to measure encoder performance and decoder performance. Of course, there is a difference, both since both are from the standard FFMPEG stack, it's fair to say they're fairly comparable. Then again, none of this matters once you've got a DSP doing the decoding. Yes, I realize this. In fact, in my oft-postponed revision of this test, I have been using CPU time to measure encoder performance and decoder performance.

Of course, there is a difference, both since both are from the standard FFMPEG stack, it’s fair to say they’re fairly comparable. Then again, none of this matters once you’ve got a DSP doing the decoding.

]]> Comment on VP8 (WebM) vs H.264 (MP4) – August 2010 by Suricou Raven http://pacoup.com/2010/08/09/vp8-webm-vs-h-264-mp4-august-2010/comment-page-1/#comment-13091 Suricou Raven Mon, 16 Apr 2012 06:45:39 +0000 http://pacoup.com/?p=1291#comment-13091 Observing CPU usage at a point is a very inaccurate way to gauge requirements. There are programs under windows that can do it right, but nothing built-in. Under linux, you can just use the 'time' command when invoking the playback. WebM is improving, but remember h264 has had a a long head start. From what I've read by those more knowledgeable than myself, there is nothing in the bitstream format that would give either one a decisive advantage - it just comes down to which has the most finely-tuned and polished encoder. Observing CPU usage at a point is a very inaccurate way to gauge requirements. There are programs under windows that can do it right, but nothing built-in. Under linux, you can just use the ‘time’ command when invoking the playback.

WebM is improving, but remember h264 has had a a long head start. From what I’ve read by those more knowledgeable than myself, there is nothing in the bitstream format that would give either one a decisive advantage – it just comes down to which has the most finely-tuned and polished encoder.

]]> Comment on Flash vs HTML5 Performance (Updated January 2012) by Pacoup http://pacoup.com/2011/02/03/flash-vs-html5-performance/comment-page-1/#comment-13082 Pacoup Wed, 11 Apr 2012 19:17:02 +0000 http://pacoup.com/?p=1657#comment-13082 You have a point, but on the other hand, Firefox is not in any way a benchmark for canvas performance. Microsoft has already shown this countless times with its significantly faster hardware acceleration. But then again, this comes back to precisely what you've been pointing out: differences in implementation across different browsers. But you have to account for mobile technologies too. One of the reasons I think Flash is going away as a run time is its poor support on mobile platforms. The plugin as a "boxed" execution does not fit the mobile Web model very well either. So many features are being baked in mobile browsers right now to account for varying pixel densities and other such variables. Flash is clearly lacking here and the focus is not there. Logically, unless you're targeting a purely desktop/laptop demographic, Flash doesn't make sense. And that's another issue, as increasingly, the focus is on well-integrated app stores enabling easier implementations of payment systems and better visibility for developers. If there's one thing Flash is truly good for, games, it's about to have it taken away as well, given the clearly more attractive app stores, not even counting the lack of Flash in IE10 on Windows 8 and Adobe's own dismissive attitude of Flash as a mobile technology. In fact, Adobe is even implementing HTML5 exporting abilities in Flash CS6, clearly pointing out to the trend that is slowly taking over the Web. At this point, any hope or thought the Flash run time will remain important in any form is wishful thinking. However, as a developer, I would not dismiss the Flash Professional software or ActionScript because just as they can be used to makes games for BlackBerry Tablet OS 2.0 now, they might be used to create HTML5 games later. After-all, the Canvas is a much lower level framework than the Flash run time and there is clearly space for many frameworks to be built on top of canvas to provide more sophisticated means of programmatic animation. Alternatively, with Adobe AIR, Flash could be relegated to the jobs of a general third party framework such as Java, although I can see those disappearing as well. You have a point, but on the other hand, Firefox is not in any way a benchmark for canvas performance. Microsoft has already shown this countless times with its significantly faster hardware acceleration. But then again, this comes back to precisely what you’ve been pointing out: differences in implementation across different browsers.

But you have to account for mobile technologies too. One of the reasons I think Flash is going away as a run time is its poor support on mobile platforms. The plugin as a “boxed” execution does not fit the mobile Web model very well either. So many features are being baked in mobile browsers right now to account for varying pixel densities and other such variables. Flash is clearly lacking here and the focus is not there.

Logically, unless you’re targeting a purely desktop/laptop demographic, Flash doesn’t make sense. And that’s another issue, as increasingly, the focus is on well-integrated app stores enabling easier implementations of payment systems and better visibility for developers. If there’s one thing Flash is truly good for, games, it’s about to have it taken away as well, given the clearly more attractive app stores, not even counting the lack of Flash in IE10 on Windows 8 and Adobe’s own dismissive attitude of Flash as a mobile technology.

In fact, Adobe is even implementing HTML5 exporting abilities in Flash CS6, clearly pointing out to the trend that is slowly taking over the Web.

At this point, any hope or thought the Flash run time will remain important in any form is wishful thinking. However, as a developer, I would not dismiss the Flash Professional software or ActionScript because just as they can be used to makes games for BlackBerry Tablet OS 2.0 now, they might be used to create HTML5 games later. After-all, the Canvas is a much lower level framework than the Flash run time and there is clearly space for many frameworks to be built on top of canvas to provide more sophisticated means of programmatic animation. Alternatively, with Adobe AIR, Flash could be relegated to the jobs of a general third party framework such as Java, although I can see those disappearing as well.

]]> Comment on Flash vs HTML5 Performance (Updated January 2012) by James Cole http://pacoup.com/2011/02/03/flash-vs-html5-performance/comment-page-1/#comment-13076 James Cole Sun, 08 Apr 2012 14:24:28 +0000 http://pacoup.com/?p=1657#comment-13076 Its interesting to see how the systems are running. I will point out, and I am sure others have mentioned it too, when you script in flash using the stage3d system, these stats start becoming meaningless. (stage 3d is the real comparison to canvas as both should rely on the gpu). I am currently developing a game in flash and html5, and the difference is vast. for websites, i can see html5 being very useful in standardizing the platform and bringing it up to date, but canvas isn't quite matching up to flash. Using a framework like starling on stage3d you can produce about 1000 sprites with 256 x 256 images at about 58fps. canvas 3d with gpu acceleration on Firefox hits about 15 fps doing something this intensive. I think flash and html will still have a long standing side by side relationship for many years to come unless there is a huge shift in the canvas performance. It may also be worth noting, that flash has a much higher consistency across the board which makes it much easier to develop for. Don't get me wrong, i certainly want html5 to work out... but the other factors like javascript, jaggered implementation from browsers, and the adoption of various standards (including video standards) will be a major hindrance which i hope the browser developers can overcome. Its interesting to see how the systems are running. I will point out, and I am sure others have mentioned it too, when you script in flash using the stage3d system, these stats start becoming meaningless. (stage 3d is the real comparison to canvas as both should rely on the gpu).
I am currently developing a game in flash and html5, and the difference is vast. for websites, i can see html5 being very useful in standardizing the platform and bringing it up to date, but canvas isn’t quite matching up to flash. Using a framework like starling on stage3d you can produce about 1000 sprites with 256 x 256 images at about 58fps. canvas 3d with gpu acceleration on Firefox hits about 15 fps doing something this intensive.
I think flash and html will still have a long standing side by side relationship for many years to come unless there is a huge shift in the canvas performance. It may also be worth noting, that flash has a much higher consistency across the board which makes it much easier to develop for.
Don’t get me wrong, i certainly want html5 to work out… but the other factors like javascript, jaggered implementation from browsers, and the adoption of various standards (including video standards) will be a major hindrance which i hope the browser developers can overcome.

]]> Comment on Shorthand conditional statements by jason H http://pacoup.com/2009/03/11/shorthand-conditional-statements/comment-page-1/#comment-13038 jason H Fri, 23 Mar 2012 15:07:39 +0000 http://www.pacoup.com/?p=267#comment-13038 Note that the Python example is only good for Python 2.5 and later. One can still put use a simple if (no else) with: if(condition) : (do something in one line here) Note that the Python example is only good for Python 2.5 and later. One can still put use a simple if (no else) with: if(condition) : (do something in one line here)

]]> Comment on Flash vs HTML5 Performance (Updated January 2012) by Pacoup http://pacoup.com/2011/02/03/flash-vs-html5-performance/comment-page-1/#comment-12996 Pacoup Mon, 05 Mar 2012 15:57:07 +0000 http://pacoup.com/?p=1657#comment-12996 Yes, I'm afraid you're right. It's very difficult to benchmark HTML5 and Flash in any meaningful way, or benchmark anything for that matter, simply because of different underlying engines. In any cases, I think this is beyond the point. Adobe has already clearly shown Flash as a technology they will not support, in favor of HTML5, for which they are already developing animation tools. In my opinion, Flash Professional itself will eventually be repurposed into an HTML5 animation/IDE, maybe even with an ActionScript to JavaScript translator, which would frankly be appreciated, given AS3's Object Oriented Programming qualities. I'll update my article to make mention of this. Yes, I’m afraid you’re right. It’s very difficult to benchmark HTML5 and Flash in any meaningful way, or benchmark anything for that matter, simply because of different underlying engines.

In any cases, I think this is beyond the point. Adobe has already clearly shown Flash as a technology they will not support, in favor of HTML5, for which they are already developing animation tools. In my opinion, Flash Professional itself will eventually be repurposed into an HTML5 animation/IDE, maybe even with an ActionScript to JavaScript translator, which would frankly be appreciated, given AS3′s Object Oriented Programming qualities.

I’ll update my article to make mention of this.

]]> Comment on Flash vs HTML5 Performance (Updated January 2012) by Alex http://pacoup.com/2011/02/03/flash-vs-html5-performance/comment-page-1/#comment-12984 Alex Thu, 01 Mar 2012 17:38:18 +0000 http://pacoup.com/?p=1657#comment-12984 Seriously, it's time to STOP using this benchmark as a means of comparing Flash to HTML5. I've heard some people say that the HTML5 versions aren't optimized well, and I'm sure they're not. But the Flash version is ABSOLUTELY AWFUL. Look at the code! The author basically used ActionScript just as if it was JavaScript. No types. No use of the BitmapData routines. He has absolutely no clue what he's doing. I didn't even know Flash could be run with the type of code he used. With Flash 10, I rewrote this demo in ActionScript to use the BitmapData.copyPixels method. Flash was able to achieve 60fps with 15,000 objects (compared to this "benchmark" which shows Flash struggling with 500 because of the ridiculous coding approach). And with Stage3D my results have been beaten soundly. Seriously, it’s time to STOP using this benchmark as a means of comparing Flash to HTML5. I’ve heard some people say that the HTML5 versions aren’t optimized well, and I’m sure they’re not. But the Flash version is ABSOLUTELY AWFUL. Look at the code! The author basically used ActionScript just as if it was JavaScript. No types. No use of the BitmapData routines. He has absolutely no clue what he’s doing. I didn’t even know Flash could be run with the type of code he used.

With Flash 10, I rewrote this demo in ActionScript to use the BitmapData.copyPixels method. Flash was able to achieve 60fps with 15,000 objects (compared to this “benchmark” which shows Flash struggling with 500 because of the ridiculous coding approach).

And with Stage3D my results have been beaten soundly.

]]> Comment on PAE vs 64 bit – What manufacturers don’t want you to know by Pacoup http://pacoup.com/2009/05/27/pae-vs-64-bit-what-manufacturers-dont-want-you-to-know/comment-page-1/#comment-12925 Pacoup Tue, 21 Feb 2012 14:49:58 +0000 http://www.pacoup.com/?p=375#comment-12925 Thanks for the info. I think whatever I wrote here back in 2009 is pretty much irrelevant today anyway. I mean, if your new computer can't do 64 bit... and any other computer not 64 bit ready is getting pretty old now. Thanks for the info. I think whatever I wrote here back in 2009 is pretty much irrelevant today anyway. I mean, if your new computer can’t do 64 bit… and any other computer not 64 bit ready is getting pretty old now.

]]>