<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
OK, numbers ar fine. Well, when I try to use them in arguing with our
secretary girl I'm loser. She can feel the difference between OL and GM
significantly on her 5 years old machine with IE6 (map in OL doesn't
move but jumps). And she is not alone. It wasn't me who came with
problem using panning but users. Maybe they are too demanding but how
can I give reasons for this? So I looked in the code and found some
possible problems as I wrote sooner.<br>
Of course on my quite new PC I don't have such big problems. Still map
in OL slightly jumps now and then during move. When I try it in Safari
it's much better but I need it fast in FF and IE.<br>
After all, I'm happy to hear about improvements between 2.5 and 2.6
versions. 35% is great result and I'm looking forward 2.7. Continue in
good work but don't forget people will be comparing OL to GM, YahooMaps
and other mapping portals (ie. mapy.atlas.cz in our country) no matter
the functionality OL offers.<br>
<br>
Tomas<br>
<br>
<br>
Christopher Schmidt wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:20080407201416.GA19605@metacarta.com" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 09:35:50PM +0200, <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:tomas.novotny@tmapy.cz">tomas.novotny@tmapy.cz</a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">The link to OL example Guillaume posted is also the case I wrote about.
Let's try it (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.openlayers.org/dev/examples/fullScreen.html">http://www.openlayers.org/dev/examples/fullScreen.html</a>).
Please switch off overlay for fair-play and zoom in the map. Then make a
few large circles with map using mouse. Try the same with GM. And don't
try to tell me you have the same feeling (at least in FF 2 and IE7).
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Well, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but on my browser on my
computer, they feel about the same.
This is backed up, to some extent, by empirical evidence: using a
stopwatch, I dragged each map around in circles, clockwise, for 5
seconds, with the Firebug profiler turned on for each.
OpenLayers: 944.26ms, 57342 calls
Google Maps: 820.147ms, 44818 calls
So, it appears that OpenLayers could be said, based on the empirical
evidence on my browser, to be about 15% slower than Google Maps: given
the limited scope of the specific test here, I would say that's not
really a big enough difference to complain about.
Interestingly enough, this is apparently a significant change from 2.5:
OpenLayers 2.5: 1469.714ms, 138497 calls
So, we've gained a 35% performance improvement without even trying. Not
bad.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">And I've made lot of such tests with same result.
I have absolutely nothing personal against OL, I really like them from
many points of view. I also understand and agree with Christopher when he
talks about freedom of influencing OL code. But if I try to solve that
panning problem I would do so significant change that I would be really
worried about the rest of the code.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Well, without understanding what is behaving slowly for you, it's hard
for anyone to fix it, but as I said, there is no intention to be slow,
and I don't see any serious evidence to indicate that OL is any worse in
this case than any other mapping API on my platform of choice.
Regards,
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>