One of the nifty things about Flash is its fast vector drawing API and the ability to manipulate in-scene objects for maximum effect.
Enter Phong.com, the website of a famed Photoshop master and Flash-math god. (For the good stuff, check under "Astro")
Anyone want to try to create a Wpfong.com? Since .NET (and consequently, WPF) are compiled, would you get better performance?
(Granted, I've known about Phong.com since 2001, but his stuff still impresses to this day).
Actually, scratch the bit about WPF since that's seriously beefy. How about WPF/E aka Silverlight? Since that's a better competitor to Flash.
-
W3bbo
Work hard; increase production; prevent accidents, and be happy.
-
Minh
WOOH! WOOH!
WPF > Silverlight > Flash
* The 1st ">" doesn't take into account the deployment story
* The 2nd ">" is subjective and is based on several criteria:
- .Net code is better than a scripting language
- Flash uses hardware acceleration, Silverlight does not (for now)
- There will be more Silverlight devs than Flash devs -
stevo_
Human after all
Is WPF slow and bloated? I keep hearing this, oooh its a bahemoth and its slow..
I thought this was going to be a platform to compare to the core graphics of os x..?
And then people saying that silverlight is faster than WPF.. given silverlight 2.0 that runs in the CLR, it doesn't use the graphics card for rendering (unlike at least parts of WPF does?) so how could it be faster.. and if it is.. what the hell went wrong with WPF?
These platforms they started with Vista and .NET FX 3.0 I thought were going to get the foundation of a new Windows API.. -
PaoloM
Hypermediocrity
stevo_ wrote:Is WPF slow and bloated?
No. -
PaoloM wrote:
stevo_ wrote:
Is WPF slow and bloated?
No... given the right video hardware. My ex-companies app was WPF and had horrendous issues except for a small set of video cards. -
W3bbo
Work hard; increase production; prevent accidents, and be happy.
Minh wrote:Flash uses hardware acceleration, Silverlight does not (for now)
Since when? AFAIK/IIRC it's always painted to its window using OS-provided APIs (i.e. GDI). Adding in support for stuff like DirectX and OpenGL would make the runtime much larger.
Sure you're not getting confused with the increasingly deprecated Director/Shockwave environment, which supported D3D and OGL for rendering 3D scenes?Minh wrote:There will be more Silverlight devs than Flash devs
I'd say Flash "developers" currently outweigh Silverlight many times more, and waaaaay more Flash "designers".
-
stevo_
Human after all
Well I'm not expecting a miracle of it pushing performance out of a voodoo 3 3000..
What about some of the recent intel onboard graphics cards for example? could I do most 2D animations in that? such as the somewhat common tech demo image gallery examples where images are re sorted and they all flip their positions around rather than just 'appearing' in their new order, at a constant UI framerate (whats that? 25fps+?)? -
stevo_
Human after all
Flash is def not hardware accelerated, thats what shockwave is for.
-
stevo_ wrote:Well I'm not expecting a miracle of it pushing performance out of a voodoo 3 3000..
What about some of the recent intel onboard graphics cards for example? could I do most 2D animations in that?Yes more than likely, you'll just need to keep an eye on the handle count if it is a long-running application. On one onboard intel (945?) we were losing dozens of handles a second when doing opacity, another box with the same hardware only lost one or two a second - and they were both identical new builds.I'd try and get a Tier 2 card though if you want to be entirely safe
-
Minh
WOOH! WOOH!
Oh really?stevo_ wrote:Flash is def not hardware accelerated, thats what shockwave is for.
You do know that graphics hardware expose 2D drawings APIs, right?
-
Minh
WOOH! WOOH!
W3bbo wrote:
Minh wrote:
Flash uses hardware acceleration, Silverlight does not (for now)
Since when? AFAIK/IIRC it's always painted to its window using OS-provided APIs (i.e. GDI).
GDI contains 2D hardware acceleration. BitBlt is an example. And I believe Flash has hardware acceleration OUTSIDE of GDI.W3bbo wrote:
Adding in support for stuff like DirectX and OpenGL would make the runtime much larger.
Acceleration doesn't always mean 3D.W3bbo wrote:Minh wrote:
There will be more Silverlight devs than Flash devs
I'd say Flash "developers" currently outweigh Silverlight many times more, and waaaaay more Flash "designers".
That's why I say "will". I think it's easier for .Net programmers to learn a new display system, than for Flash animators to learn Flex.
-
W3bbo wrote:
Since when? AFAIK/IIRC it's always painted to its window using OS-provided APIs (i.e. GDI). Adding in support for stuff like DirectX and OpenGL would make the runtime much larger.
GDI is hardware accelerated on pre-Vista versions of Windows.
Thread Closed
This thread is kinda stale and has been closed but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums,
or Contact Us and let us know.