Originally posted by profoundWHALE
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
The OS That Switched From Linux To BSD Is Now Making Its Own GUI
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by sarmad View PostBecause HTML isn't a high performance technology. It's slow and its memory consumption is bad. It's quite hard, if not impossible, to get an HTML based UI to have a fluid, reponsive, 60fps animations.
Comment
-
Originally posted by phoronix View PostPhoronix: The OS That Switched From Linux To BSD Is Now Making Its Own GUI
JabirOS, the distribution formerly powered by Ubuntu that changed to a FreeBSD base and then proclaimed itself an independent FreeBSD fork, is trying to invent its own user-interface...
http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTc0MTM
Comment
-
Originally posted by rstat1 View PostI'm sorry but that's just WRONG. The language itself has no effect on the performance. It's the implementation, that's slow and has high memory consumption. Also it's perfectly possible to have "fluid, responsive, 60FPS animations" in HTML5. Windows 8.x's HTML5 apps do it quite well.
For something like HTML5 the fact that it's a suggestion as opposed to a standard (loose standards aren't real standards), which the w3c has dictated must *NEVER* error off, means that the interpreter is required to be far far more complicated in order to handle people being stupid, which means significantly more memory usage, and in fact a browser is basically required to have at least 3 HTML engines (one for the strict interpretation of the standard, one for a looser interpretation of the standard, and one "people are stupid" interpretation of the standard) on top of any compatibility engines that they might want to have (because due to HTML not actually being a real standard you get to play the "Let's rely upon implementation specific behavior" game). Now this wouldn't be so bad except that it's shackled to a scripting language designed for basic interactivity, that also happens to be a loose standard that must never fail to execute. Which means more overhead, more memory usage and more undefined behavior.
Now not being able to get 60+FPS on a web page is a rather hyperbolic thing to say but an implementation can only be as fast as the limitations of the standard it's implementing allow it to be.
If you want to be using web technologies and not PNaCl, then XHTML2+, and Dart are where you should really be looking.
Comment
-
Originally posted by profoundWHALE View PostIt's not that surprising that they'd go with HTML5 and BSD, since BSD is well known for its server performance.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Muhammadreza Haghiri View PostBSD is the best choice for servers, but it's a "desktop environment", and not related to server.
I suppose bsd fanboys write about servers, because it's an only place bsd market share is little higher than 0,0%. However, if it's 5% it doesn't mean it's the best choice. What logic is this? I just checked: it doesn't even have 5%.
Last edited by Guest; 15 July 2014, 03:09 AM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Pawlerson View PostGood joke. Linux is known to be much faster in server performance while BSD sucks. That's the reason BSD server market share is even lower than Windows in this market.
Where do such bullshit come from? It is a known fact it has much lower server market share and this is because Linux has wiped it out from this market. Linux is known of being the best as a server.
I suppose bsd fanboys write about servers, because it's an only place bsd market share is little higher than 0,0%. However, if it's 5% it doesn't mean it's the best choice. What logic is this? I just checked: it doesn't even have 5%.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_s...n_the_Internet
I'm afraid that evaluating the share of operating systems in the server sphere is not simple. So no one here has any legs to stand on for making definitive statements. But if you'll look at the web, you'll notice BSD does evidently have a big share - NetFlix's streaming servers for one.
As for 'Linux is faster in server performance' - [citation needed].
Comment
-
Originally posted by rstat1 View PostI'm sorry but that's just WRONG. The language itself has no effect on the performance. It's the implementation, that's slow and has high memory consumption. Also it's perfectly possible to have "fluid, responsive, 60FPS animations" in HTML5. Windows 8.x's HTML5 apps do it quite well.
Comment
Comment