Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

15491RE: [svg-developers] Macromedia promises better Web apps

Expand Messages
  • ronan@roasp.com
    May 1, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      (If this goes out then roasp.com is not yet down)

      This snippet particularily made me smile.

      I deliver stock quotes (streaming, live, etc, and all the bells and
      whistles, just for fun, too - well, if you cal call unpaid work fun :)) )

      I've still not seen anything in Flash 5 or 6 that delivers quotes like
      fxconsole does. And That's the product of 1 guy for a couple of days. Then
      again, fxconsole has no dancing flames or wavy flags, which is what flash is
      so good at...

      And my stock qotes engine can deliver the quotes for 50-500 bytes -
      depending on the additional info you want. So if I make the same comparison
      as Kevin Lynch does, what kind of a strawman technology can't deliver
      streaming stock quotes at under 1K??? Clearly it's foolish to PAY for
      something that's less than 1/2 as good as the free alternative?

      Now, all that said, it does not take a great deal of data to bring a stock
      quote to a page. This Kevin Lynch certainly has an inflated opinion of the
      relevance of the delivery format...
      I mean - 100K? for HTML??? 5K, maybe. 2k certainly.


      Here's a stock quote displayer. Doesnt seem that big to me...

      But a 100k stock application... Now that would be bloat ware. Sounds like he
      is actually attacking applets rather than HTML. Poor man can't tell
      technologies apart. No wonder he's on the Wrong Team.

      Just my 2rappens worths (rappen == Cent in German-speaking Switzerland ,for
      those of you going to SVG:Open)


      ?Last I looked, Kevin Lynch worked for Macromedia. So when he says that
      ?a stock quote application in Flash MX is better than HTML because, and
      ?I quote:
      ? "By using a Flash-based application, the broker can deliver quotes
      ? with less than 2KB of data, as opposed to the old HTML format that
      ? required a 100KB download and up to 20 seconds of waiting for each
      ? quote "
      ? http://news.com.com/2100-1040-893705.html?type=pt
      ?then I guess he is speaking for Macromedia? That sounds so wonderful,
      ?a 98% reduction in download size just for a stock quote. Makes you
      ?wonder why anyone used the "old HTML format" in the past. Its just
    • Show all 17 messages in this topic