What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Follow the Dragon Age: Origins development team on Twitter view!
twitter.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
51 Comments
- ThomasHardy, on 06/28/2009, -1/+46JavaScript animation is often scoffed at, "Flash is way better" and all that.
For the non-believers, look at the scripty 2 examples:
http://scripty2.com/demos/cards/
It'll blow your mind away. - kamikaze134, on 06/28/2009, -2/+31Very impressive! It would be nice to see these replace Flash, particularly since JavaScript doesn't use 100% of your CPU when idling.
- restlessdesign, on 06/29/2009, -2/+231. Flash is still superior in animation quality because it's not restricted by the browser's frame rate (it can even run off the GPU now).
2. No, Flash isn't good at screen reading or SEO. In fact, it's quite dreadful, which is why it shouldn't be used for giant sites.
3. No Flash site should be taking up 100% of your CPU while idle. If it is, then the developer didn't know what they were doing or is animating way more than they need to be at one time.
That said, go jQuery! =D - inactive, on 06/29/2009, -2/+23JS > Flash. Screen readers can't do ***** with flash.
But I mean, anything is going to top jQuery? - MrNonchalant, on 06/29/2009, -0/+19I recommend checking out Processing.js. This is what I built in about a day having never used it before: http://reportermag.com/experiments/graph/
- inactive, on 06/29/2009, -0/+17HA! IE adopting a standard? That will be the day.
- N01SE, on 06/29/2009, -1/+13Why are these not used in place of Flash? Well, most developers in the web industry do not understand that animation development in the rest of the graphics industry is created by digital artists/graphic designers that use animation tools. Pixar does not have programmers sitting in front of computers hand-coding animation routines. This is because, maintaining/building complex animations by coding is highly inefficient. Adobe understood that (along with 3dsMax, Maya, etc.) and so built the Flash editor to create animated content for the web.
So, while these might be efficient for doing trivial animations, they are not well suited for complex animating, editing, and from a flexibility standpoint, not to mention they can't be used by animation artists. We will need an editor for javascript animations and SVG to become fully implemented in every browser (SVG has been standardized, canvas has not) before we can replace Flash's vector and raster animating capabilities on the web.
The web is decades behind the rest of the graphics industry and I applaud Adobe for showing the web community what is possible. While we're desperately trying to round corners in HTML/CSS, flash has allowed for the proliferation of video/audio players, drawing/image editors, games, visualizations. It's on the browser developers and the W3C communities to get it caught up. - TheJuggernaut, on 06/29/2009, -1/+11CSS3's animation features are incredible, and even leaner than jQuery. If only IE would adopt them.
- skelooth, on 06/29/2009, -1/+9No mootools or scriptaculous?
- Me1000, on 06/29/2009, -0/+8Scriptaculous is now Scripty2 I believe.
- specialK16, on 06/29/2009, -4/+12Very cool/ But the puzzle (http://scripty2.com/demos/puzzle/index.html) is impossible to solve because the pieces keep ***** moving around.
- Me1000, on 06/29/2009, -0/+6and you don't need an Application framework to write applications if you know what you're doing in C.
No need to reinvent the wheel. - N01SE, on 06/29/2009, -1/+5That's because they're not mutually exclusive.
- gamepr0, on 06/29/2009, -0/+4Not yet but it will be when it's out of alpha/beta stages
- wallyson, on 06/29/2009, -0/+4having used mootools, scriptaculous, rico, prototype and many others I will have to say that.....jQuery is the best one out right now and the jQuery UI is very impressive.http://jqueryui.com/
My 2 cents. - a3r0, on 06/29/2009, -0/+4Pieces always shift right and down, so find the top left and go to the right and down from there. Easy
- stubear, on 06/29/2009, -1/+5I'm with special. The puzzle pieces do not shift properly in a few places. It's cool but if it doesn't work right then it's useless.
- mutantHive, on 06/29/2009, -0/+3Agree with wallyson - JQuery Lib and JQuery UI = so impressive.
- tgc1, on 06/29/2009, -6/+9I find this kinda funny, considering all of these methods use the same type of timed loop for the animation. The basis for all of those animations is the setTimeout and clearTimeout functions. Without them, the animations on the page would be static.
Frameworks? I think people just need to crack open a Javascript programming guide and learn it. You don't need frameworks when you know what you're doing. And if you want to argue productivity, the gains are offset by having to learn the framework, when you could just learn to code the damned thing from scratch either way.
I'd much rather add to my existing knowledge of Javascript with new projects that enhance my understanding rather than take the time to learn a framework and have to wait for releases and updates to them, rather than again compounding the knowledge I already have with Javascript. You can do amazing things with it, if you just spend the time to learn it. - Mikjryan, on 06/29/2009, -0/+3The reason is that flash reneders the same in every browser , javascript can often render differently depending on your browser not too mention how much easier it is to recreate some of these works. Although it is impressive its more complex than if it were done in flash
- Almightymole, on 06/29/2009, -0/+3Is that if I call now?
- elitedw, on 06/29/2009, -0/+3Processing is an amazing program that turns code into art. Its just beautiful.
- jggube, on 06/29/2009, -0/+3The one thing I don't like with Processing.js right now is that it leans on the Canvas element.
- gamepr0, on 06/29/2009, -0/+2@dafragsta: well when IE adopts the <video> tag and there's an agreement on the codecs used flash won't be needed there either
- gamepr0, on 06/29/2009, -1/+3It's not about solvig the puzzle, it's a demo for drag-drop, animation, etc
- N01SE, on 06/29/2009, -0/+2SVG has already been standardized and has similar if not more expressive animation capabilities, of course I don't think any browser has yet to implement them. CSS 3.0 will probably not become a recommendation until 2012, I'm not sure if they are going to keep the animation capabilities or not.
- inactive, on 06/29/2009, -1/+3It's not impossible, you just have to put it together in this order:
123
456
789
or the reverse - KimNovak, on 06/29/2009, -0/+2It sucks animation-wise.
- MtheoryX, on 06/29/2009, -0/+2^^ That sounded really snarky, now that I think of it. Here's the deal, not EVERYONE using frameworks is a copypasta programmer.
For those who actually know what they're doing with JS, things like jQuery can make development time much, much faster with very minimal overhead. - gamepr0, on 06/29/2009, -0/+2jquery seems a bit overrated to me, I'm far from an expert though.
- theaceoffire, on 06/29/2009, -0/+2The sad thing is, the flash-plugin for Linux currently uses said 100% for even a banner (At least, the version I am using right now does).
If you download the flash object, it runs in VLC with 3-8% cpu. - theblt, on 06/29/2009, -1/+3It looks like no one seems to be distinguishing the difference between a library and a framework -- almost as if they're interchangeable words.
http://continuity.tlt42.org/Library_vs_Framework - inactive, on 06/29/2009, -0/+2BS, I want fireworks
- Almightymole, on 06/29/2009, -0/+2The main problem is currently Microsoft and Internet explorer and its rate of adoption of standards. Also Flash does have the advantage of having an intuitive editor and wide use. This is obviously the main hindrance in SVG/ canvas with JavaScript animations falls short.
However those aside, I do not think it is up to the browser to provide a tool to edit and create these. But perhaps tools based on these frameworks shown to have a tool built round them. I would attempt (and most likely fail) at creating a tool my self if I had the time. Since these provide the simple mechanisms to produce (simple) animations. Getting a program to produce more complex animations from these should be possible. - restlessdesign, on 07/23/2009, -0/+1I'll agree that it is sad, but unfortunately Linux is such a small majority that Adobe couldn't care less. I feel for you though, because they absolutely SHOULD build their software correctly... =/
- ezzalgames, on 07/12/2009, -0/+1where is the jquery and moo.fx ?
- Aidenf77, on 06/29/2009, -0/+1jQuery is extremely powerful in the way it utilizes CSS selectors. But as an animation engine... there are better solutions out there; scriptaculous and prototype being one of them that I've used.
- dafragsta, on 06/29/2009, -0/+1a well designed site takes basic HTML and does the presentation with JS and CSS. This allows virtually any site done this way to be accessible and search engine friendly, while allowing for multimedia rich sites. Flash is always going to be necessary for making custom video and audio players, however, unless there comes a standard for a skinnable multimedia players.
- inactive, on 06/29/2009, -0/+1Dunno why you're being dugg down. setTimeout on an objects' left/top properties is not a drastically complicated concept.
- JKAL, on 06/29/2009, -0/+1you need to solve from top -> bottom
- N01SE, on 06/29/2009, -0/+1All flash objects have accessibility properties that are processed by most popular screen readers. Javascript alone is also not accessible, you have to combine it with ARIA attributes for it be fully accessible. Have you ever even used the flash editor?
- MtheoryX, on 06/29/2009, -0/+1HERE'S HOW TO ORDER...
- tonychenyj, on 06/29/2009, -4/+5Good list, but yes, we need more. 10 is not enough.
- ajaxifier100, on 06/29/2009, -1/+1It seems like Six Revisions is always hitting the front page
- MtheoryX, on 06/29/2009, -1/+1You're assuming that people using JS frameworks don't also know vanilla JS.
I've never seen a JS framework that doesn't also let you use plain vanilla JS.
Also, productivity doesn't mean not knowing what you're doing. If you already know JS, and you KNOW how ***** annoying it is to code some things that a frameworks solves in a few lines... you'd pretty much be a ***** idiot to choose to hand code it every single time.
Abstraction and DRY... you may want to look into it sometime. - Stupidumb, on 06/29/2009, -1/+1So even if you write the setTimeout yourself your refuse to put it into a function? I hope you don't keep rewriting the same code over and over.
- adifferentuser, on 08/04/2009, -0/+0N01SE,
Better don't talk about facts that you don't know about.
1. Pixar DOES have programmers sitting in front of computers hand-coding animation routines. They do this since day one. They design their own animation engines to achieve effects/quality etc that standard software simply cannot provide. They recently have been bought by Disney though...
2. Adobe just bought Macromedia who invented Flash. Actually they have bought too many companies the last few years. Does this make them a great company? Of course not. Great companies compete by creating value, not by buying the value of other companies. - veeracs, on 07/07/2009, -0/+0you have the point but one minor correction!! Adobe did not build the Flash editor, Macromedia did.
- CrayonNo9, on 07/12/2009, -0/+0These demos work on iPhones too. Best Flash workaround I've seen for that issue.
-
Show 51 - 54 of 54 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is