W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2010

Re: requestAnimationFrame

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2010 02:01:59 +0100
To: "Gregg Tavares (wrk)" <gman@google.com>
Cc: "public-webapps@w3.org" <public-webapps@w3.org>
Message-ID: <rll3e6567nuvjn8qqoa35136jormidrsuf@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
* Gregg Tavares (wrk) wrote:
>There is plenty of flash content that has a lower than 60hz (or fast as
>possible) refresh rate. When something is instead implementing in HTML5
>instead of Flash what should they do to get the similar results? Checking
>cnn.com, time.com, arstechnica.com, wired.com and msnbc.com I found that 7
>ads were set to run at 18hz, 3 were set to run at 24hz, 2 were set to run at
>30hz. I used SWF
>Info<https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/45361/>to check
>the fps setting. I have no idea why they don't choose "run as fast
>as possible." I could be laziness, it could be that it makes the pages too
>slow and unresponsive to set them to "as fast as possible", it could be that
>rendering 3 times more then necessary, 60hz vs 18hz would eat battery
>life, it could be an artistic choice, it could be just that flash makes you
>pick one vs defaulting to "fast as possible".

The frame rate is a number in the swf header that cannot be set to a "as
fast as possible" value.
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Tuesday, 16 November 2010 01:02:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 27 October 2017 07:26:28 UTC