There is an older article on this blog about PhoneGap/Cordova templates for VueJS with Framework7 from January 2017, so I thought it’s time for an update since a lot has happened after one year. F7 had a major upgrade to V2 so all templates had to be brought up to date as well.
These are the latest template releases that come shipped with F7 v2, Vue and PhoneGap/Cordova:
I didn’t include installation/configuration instructions this time since everything is written on their GitHub/NPM websites. Hope you enjoy and let me know what your experience with these templates is!
The video recording of my talk at Adobe PGDay EU 2017 is online! :D Thanks to the PhoneGap team for making this available! Make sure to also check out all the other videos from the conference in the playlist below:
I am sure, you’ve all heard about Apple’s recent release of the new Macbook AIR which comes without Flash preinstalled as well as their claims of longer battery lifetime without Adobe’s RIA platform. The computer manufacturer even announced a maximum of 5-7 hours runtime based on some new series of tests they made by browsing the web without the Flash plugin installed.
In fact though, these tests are not objective. Without Flash, no animated ads are being displayed while you surf the web which probably cause most CPU load (besides video playback).
I actually agree with Adobe’s CTO Kevin Lynch who said in an interview (see below) that replacing all Flash-ads with HTML5 canvas content would not increase battery life.
Animation => CPU-load
It’s in the nature of animations to cause higher CPU-load than static content, no matter if it is being provided by Flash or HTML5 canvas.
Actually, HTML5 canvas animations require more CPU power than Flash animations do, no matter on which browser (even on fast Webkit-based ones).
If you don’t believe, I recommend to read my recent thesis about RIA performance analysis.
Section 184.108.40.206 proofs that HTML5 canvas animation is currently inferior to Flash-based animation performance which implies that more CPU power is required to reach an equal fps rate which again leads to higher energy drain.
Apple’s smart. Really smart.
If people would only take off their Apple-glasses they would realize that the daily experience with Flash-based animations (which often tend to cause high CPU load) probably influences their attitude towards Flash.
Whenever we see Flash-based content like ads or video, our computer’s CPU requires more energy. That shortens battery lifetime, often forces the fan to run faster. This experience makes us think: Flash=bad, but it isn’t. It’s not McDonald’s fault that people are getting fatter and fatter. Burgers and fries simply are fat but people still want them.
Apple’s trick to run their battery-test without Flash returns false results. It’s no wonder that battery lifetime goes up without Flash since animations usually cause most CPU load while surfing the web (besides video playback).
If they’d done the test correctly, they should’ve converted all Flash-content to HTML5 and then re-run the test.
I am not an Adobe/Flash fanboy.
I own and love many Apple products.
Actually, this blog entry was written on a Macbook Pro and I’d probably never trade it for a Windows- or Linux-based notebook. I even recommend Macs whenever I can to friends but as much as I like Apple’s products in general, I really dislike their recent behavior towards Flash.
In a nutshell
Animations (like Flash-ads) can cause a lot of CPU load while surfing the web. It’s in the nature of animations to do so. Replacing those ads with HTML5 canvas animations would make things only worse.
HTML5-based video playback seems to require much less CPU power than Flash-video. Since most ads rely on animations rather than video playback, this argument does not really apply.
Apple’s accusation of Flash being a battery-drainer is wrong. Animations drain power, not Flash. Thus, their test-series of battery lifetime on the new Macbook AIR is not objective.
Yay! I just got my CS5 Master Collection (Educational-version)!
Before I bought it, I checked on some infos you might want to know. For example, I was curious if I was allowed to keep the suite even if I am not a student any more and if I may use it for commercial purposes. The following list should give you the answers you need:
The EDU versions are a lot cheaper. My Master Collection for example cost only € 662,-, while the non-EDU version costs € 3688,-.
You must be a student or teacher in order to be able to purchase an EDU version of the Creative Suite. A verification document (with picture of you on it) is required.
You’re allowed to use the EDU version for commercial purposes.
When you’re not a teacher/student anymore, you won’t have to delete the software or purchase an upgrade. You may just keep using your EDU-version.
You can upgrade your EDU package to a “normal”, higher non-EDU version later for the standard price. That means, an upgrade from CS5 EDU to CS6 non-EDU for the “normal” price is possible even if you’re not a student or teacher anymore.
Here we have an interesting Flash2HTML5 converter which seems to work up to (parts of) Flash8. Check out smokescreen.us for demos and more info (Thanks to Antonio for the link).
Seems like it works pretty decently regarding movies and animations but I wonder if “real” applications would work with it, like for example such which were built using the Flex framework.