04-10-2010, 05:33 PM
M A V I C wrote:
JavaScript is often worse than Flash, but most people aren't knowledgeable on the subject to discover that.
Maybe so, but the difference is that javascript is an open development standard under the control of a standards body (the ECMAScript standard). As such, javascript execution can and, in fact, has been highly optimized by many implementers, including Apple in its WebKit framework. In the last couple of years, Apple has been able to improve javascript performance by huge amounts by the development of novel rendering techniques (e.g. SquirrelFish Extreme):
http://www.webmonkey.com/2008/09/safari_...rformance/
With Flash, on the other hand, any and all optimization depends entirely on the whims and corporate goals of a private entity--Adobe. Adobe has shown no interest in optimizing Flash performance for the Mac platform.
Please explain how you can honestly say that. As previously discussed, H.264 is not open, nor a standard. Apple is pushing H.264, it's not an open standard...
H.264 most certainly is a standard!:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264
"H.264/AVC/MPEG-4 Part 10 (Advanced Video Coding) is a standard for video compression. The final drafting work on the first version of the standard was completed in May 2003.
"H.264/AVC is the latest block-oriented motion-compensation-based codec standard developed by the ITU-T Video Coding Experts Group (VCEG) together with the ISO/IEC Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG), and it was the product of a partnership effort known as the Joint Video Team (JVT). The ITU-T H.264 standard and the ISO/IEC MPEG-4 AVC standard (formally, ISO/IEC 14496-10 - MPEG-4 Part 10, Advanced Video Coding) are jointly maintained so that they have identical technical content...
"The H.264 name follows the ITU-T naming convention, where the standard is a member of the H.26x line of VCEG video coding standards; the MPEG-4 AVC name relates to the naming convention in ISO/IEC MPEG, where the standard is part 10 of ISO/IEC 14496, which is the suite of standards known as MPEG-4."
On the other hand, I do agree that H.264 is not "open."
As I pointed out previously, concerns remain that Theora, the current "open" darling of the video codec world, may also be subject to patent enforcement.
Your citation isn't relavant. If Apple's goal was to enforce some sort of QA on user experience, they could have just put that in the EULA.
You're kidding, right? Can you give me an example of the kind of language Apple should put into its EULA to ensure both performance standards and full compatibility with platform technologies?
If you do, I think you'll find it will read something like that new clause that's caused all this bogus controversy.
An interpretation layer can take advantage of the iPhone's strengths.
In theory, perhaps. In practice, it has never happened.
Keep in mind that one of the main goals of "interpretation layers" or code intermediation is to facilitate cross-platform, i.e. lowest common denominator, application development.