SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Both Facebook and Netflix implemented their eponymous apps with Web. Despite spending millions of dollars, neither of them could achieve an iPhone-like user experience (60 frames per second and less than 100ms response to user inputs) on anything less powerful than a system-on-chip (SoC) with four ARM Cortex-A9 cores.
In contrast, numerous products like infotainment systems, in-flight entertainment systems, harvester terminals and home appliances prove that you can achieve an iPhone-like user experience (UX) on single-core Cortex-A8 SoCs. Our above-mentioned manufacturer HAM Inc. (renamed for the sake of confidentiality) verified these results by building both a Web and Qt prototype.
In this white paper, Burkhard Stubert explains how he could save one of the world's largest home appliance manufacturers millions of Euros by choosing Qt over HTML. The secret? Qt scales down to lower-end hardware a lot better, without sacrificing user experience.
With a five times smaller footprint, four to eight times lower RAM requirements and a more efficient rendering flow than HTML, Qt provides faster start-up times and maintains the cherished 60fps and 100ms response time, where HTML would struggle. The calculations show that being able to just downgrade your SoC by just one tier like this, Qt can reduce your hardware costs by over 53%.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 23 2018, @01:06AM (7 children)
Which is faster, more portable and cheaper to develop? Which users give a fuck about response time down to the microseconds if the app is useful and non-trivial?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by pipedwho on Friday February 23 2018, @01:53AM (5 children)
The enormous proliferation of high latency UIs these days shits me to tears. You can't even go to an ATM and expect to enter your PIN without the UI lagging so badly that makes you wish you went with 4 digits instead of 12.
Back in the day CD players had pretty much 'instant on'. You hit the button, and some unnoticeable time later music was playing. The came along DVD players, you hit the button, waited a few seconds, and your CD (yes music on a DVD player) or started playing. Now we have Bluray players, where you hit the button, go get a cup of coffee while the OS boots, and finally, the music starts playing.
Latency is growing more and more as time goes on, and people don't seem to care.
It makes me sad.
(Score: 2) by Dr Spin on Friday February 23 2018, @08:33AM
Back in the day CD players had pretty much 'instant on'.
CD players do not have Intel processors and Microsoft software. There is no need for lag.
Warning: Opening your mouth may invalidate your brain!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 23 2018, @10:41AM
Yeah, it was even better back in the day, with those instant on tube radios...
(Score: 3, Informative) by DannyB on Friday February 23 2018, @05:38PM
All Blu Ray players implement Java.
Yes. Really.
I'm not even kidding.
Every performance optimization is a grate wait lifted from my shoulders.
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Friday February 23 2018, @11:00PM
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 1) by toddestan on Sunday February 25 2018, @07:34AM
The same thing with computers. I've got a couple of old Windows 2000 and XP machines kicking about for various things. I don't use them very often, but when I do one of things I always notice is just how snappy and responsive the UI is compared to the more recent versions of Windows. Granted, these machines are kind of high end by 2000/XP standards, but are pretty dated by today's standards.
Of course, on the Linux side XFCE is also very snappy and responsive, though still doesn't seem quite as fast as it used to be.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by FatPhil on Friday February 23 2018, @04:46AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves