<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" 
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" 
	xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/" 
	xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" 
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	
	<channel>
	
		<title>A Survey of JavaScript Timers on Mobile</title>
		<link>http://www.sencha.com/blog/a-survey-of-javascript-timers-on-mobile</link>
		<description>Desktop browsers have had high resolution, high consistency JavaScript timers for the last few years. As a result, many web developers have become used to creating production&#45;quality animations using zero&#45;second callbacks via setTimeOut() and setInterval(). However, on mobile devices, this style of animation programming can have subpar performance and consistency &#8211; we wondered if it was due to poorer timer implementations. We researched the issue and found that while older Androids and iPods have noticeably poorer timer implementations than desktop browsers, the most recent Android and iOS tablets and phones seem to have mostly caught up.</description>
		<dc:language>en-us</dc:language>
		<dc:creator>michael@sencha.com</dc:creator>
		<dc:rights>Copyright 2012</dc:rights>
		<dc:date>2012-07-16T10:15:57+00:00</dc:date>
		<admin:generatorAgent rdf:resource="http://expressionengine.com/" />
		<atom:link href="http://www.sencha.com/blog/comments-rss/11754" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
  
		
  
		<item>
      <title>Comment by Martin de Keijzer</title>
      <description>This sounds all so familiar, I&#8217;ve been using the mobile web as a platform for over a year now. And within that year I&#8217;ve seen many performance gains, especially in animation. But there is definitely still work to be done on that side.

Luckily Google finally did the right thing and released Chrome for Android. Apple could also push things ahead a lot further, I wonder why they&#8217;re holding back. The worst part on the Android side is the (feature) phones which are not able to upgrade, even device manufacturers like Samsung and HTC don&#8217;t put enough effort in keeping their devices up to date in my opinion.</description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This sounds all so familiar, I&#8217;ve been using the mobile web as a platform for over a year now. And within that year I&#8217;ve seen many performance gains, especially in animation. But there is definitely still work to be done on that side.</p>

<p>Luckily Google finally did the right thing and released Chrome for Android. Apple could also push things ahead a lot further, I wonder why they&#8217;re holding back. The worst part on the Android side is the (feature) phones which are not able to upgrade, even device manufacturers like Samsung and HTC don&#8217;t put enough effort in keeping their devices up to date in my opinion.</p>]]></content:encoded>
      <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2012 07:02 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.sencha.com/blog//a-survey-of-javascript-timers-on-mobile#id:31820#date:07:02</guid>
    </item>
  
		
	</channel>
</rss>