Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Arcade Fire meets HTML5

googleblog.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 55 posts

Re: Arcade Fire meets HTML5

#41

Post by dimarco »

bd wrote: post #20

Very cool, though it would be about 114% better if they used just normal divs inside a single window. If you manage to navigate away from the browser, good luck restoring the state. Also why to spoil beautiful content by putting chrome (lowercase) around it?

I'm not sure about the mechanics of Chrome, but aren't new Chrome windows different processes? thus having their own share of CPU?

Trying to cram everything in a single thread of execution seems like it would have been a mistake.

Re: Arcade Fire meets HTML5

#43

Post by sstrudeau »

dimarco wrote: post #41
bd wrote: post #20

Very cool, though it would be about 114% better if they used just normal divs inside a single window. If you manage to navigate away from the browser, good luck restoring the state. Also why to spoil beautiful content by putting chrome (lowercase) around it?

I'm not sure about the mechanics of Chrome, but aren't new Chrome windows different processes? thus having their own share of CPU? Trying to cram everything in a single thread of execution seems like it would have been a mistake.

Do separate iframes have the same characteristics as separate windows?

Re: Arcade Fire meets HTML5

#44

Post by bd »

dimarco wrote: post #41
bd wrote: post #20

Very cool, though it would be about 114% better if they used just normal divs inside a single window. If you manage to navigate away from the browser, good luck restoring the state. Also why to spoil beautiful content by putting chrome (lowercase) around it?

I'm not sure about the mechanics of Chrome, but aren't new Chrome windows different processes? thus having their own share of CPU? Trying to cram everything in a single thread of execution seems like it would have been a mistake.

Now that would be clever.

Though playing the demo with one eye on Task Manager shows only two processes (for the whole duration) - one hovering mostly around 50-60% CPU load, another at 0-5%.

Checking this with my CPU intensive demos, this looks like normal Chrome behavior (two processes, one with high load). New process seems to spawn only for new tabs.

So it doesn't seem like such optimization was used.

Re: Arcade Fire meets HTML5

#46

Post by tlrobinson »

boredguy8 wrote: post #15

This is very trippy and will take some time to process. Part of me is in revolt: "You shouldn't be able to make a film about me and my house!" And yet, I know that it's not about me or my house per se. Yet this is clearly a portent of things to come: when everything I see is 'about' me. For instance, when people cull Street View data (or something similar) to identify houses with wood siding, and send direct-marketed…

"I've often wondered what people might think if they were to return to this place following a catastrophic collapse of civilization. Now I have a visual inkling of what they might see."

Check out the book "The World Without Us": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_World_Without_Us

Re: Arcade Fire meets HTML5

#47

Post by tlrobinson »

bd wrote: post #44
dimarco wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure about the mechanics of Chrome, but aren't new Chrome windows different processes? thus having their own share of CPU? Trying to cram everything in a single thread of execution seems like it would have been a mistake.

Now that would be clever. Though playing the demo with one eye on Task Manager shows only two processes (for the whole duration) - one hovering mostly around 50-60% CPU load, another at 0-5%. Checking this with my CPU intensive demos, this looks like normal Chrome behavior (two processes, one with high load). New process seems to spawn only for new tabs. So it doesn't seem like such optimization was used.

I think it's something like one process per "connected" set of windows/frames (those which can talk to each other and thus are expected to be single threaded), plus one per Web Worker (V8 is not threadsafe)

Re: Arcade Fire meets HTML5

#48

Post by aidenn0 »

Unfortunately it really donsn't fit on the screen for my macbook. I guess the popups are supposed to tile rather than obscure each other? I can't be the only one in the world with a 1280x800 screen!

Re: Arcade Fire meets HTML5

#49

Post by ryan »

After watching this, I spent an hour browsing around google maps in the area I grew up. Brings back lots of memories :)

It's amazing how far technology has come in 20 years. Gives a very different perspective seeing an area from up above. Trying to decide if I would have wanted this as a kid - I probably had more fun exploring in person.

Post reply on HN