Nice job!
Here are the results on my Windows Vista box:
Firefox 2: yahoo better than animator, but both hang during the animation
IE7: broken
Opera9: works very well with both libs, far the best, except the very first
time, because it starts the animation while loading the image, so you see an
On 4/16/07, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But the size difference makes animator
better pick i think.
When I compare the sizes of whats loaded on the two pages it's:
Animate.js: 80kb
Yahoo: 70kb
Where the javascript part is
Animate.js: 23kb
Yahoo: 9kb + 4kb
So when Yahoo page
Of course, I haven't optimized/compressed animate.js, which Yahoo has
done for its scripts.
Martijn
On 4/16/07, Frank Bille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 4/16/07, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But the size difference makes animator
better pick i think.
When I compare the sizes of
Martijn Dashorst a écrit :
All,
I've been working for a while now on an animated homepage for wicket
(not that we *have* to use it, it is a gimmick), and it was originally
based on animate.js (the proposed animation library). I also converted
it to yahoo animation (which is quite similar), and
On 4/16/07, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Of course, I haven't optimized/compressed animate.js, which Yahoo has
done for its scripts.
Sure. After only decompression yahoo is 44kb, which is much more that
animate which still isn't optimized.
But yahoo runs smother here (FF on
I think it's really not that relevant which one is smoother. The site
is not a common usage of anim lib. If you want bouncing logo, you
should use flash probably. It's not the javascript that matters here,
it's browser's rendering engine.
-Matej
On 4/16/07, Frank Bille [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All,
I've been working for a while now on an animated homepage for wicket
(not that we *have* to use it, it is a gimmick), and it was originally
based on animate.js (the proposed animation library). I also converted
it to yahoo animation (which is quite similar), and this way we can
see the
Firefox 2.0, OSX, both animations perform roughly the same, yahoo
being little bit smoother. But the size difference makes animator
better pick i think.
Also this is not the general use-case for animations imho :)
-Matej
On 4/15/07, Martijn Dashorst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All,
I've been
Nice work!
On my PC (linux, firefox 1.5), the animation.js version is *much* snappier.
On 4/15/07, Matej Knopp [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Firefox 2.0, OSX, both animations perform roughly the same, yahoo
being little bit smoother. But the size difference makes animator
better pick i think.
Also
