Odd question

[Wozzaaah]

Ok, this may sound an odd question but I'll explain the reason for me asking it in a little while. You can all see the running greyhound pic at the foot of my posts but approximately how long does it take for the pic to cycle? I timed it at just under 2 seconds (1.86 to be precise). Like I said, strange question but please let me know. Thanks.

 

[Welderpaul]

2.5 seconds.

 

[Wozzaaah]

thanks paul, a few more results and I'll explain the reason I asked

 

[Barking Mat]

About 3.5 in Wales

 

[TAITSIE]

Approx 1.9 sec

 

[Hitch]

Id say just under 2 seconds

 

[Wozzaaah]

Thanks chaps, now I'll explain. I'm getting an annoying crash in internet explorer and it's driving me mad so I thought I'd try out Firefox instead. I installed it and opened migwelding to see how it looked and my greyhound was going like the clappers! The cycle time is approx 0.6 seconds in firefox compared to around 2 seconds in IE7. having two of my posts open simultaneously in both browsers side by side shows how incredible the speed difference is. Anyone else use firefox? Try it out and you'll see what I mean.

 

[irondarren]

well if your betting on which greyhound will win, put me down for a fiver on the fire fox one if it runs faster lol

 

[JimM]

Yep, I use Firefox and couldn't work out how the other guys were timing it as to my eye there wasn't enough time to start and stop the stopwatch and get an accurate result.

Jim

 

[Barking Mat]

This computer is very slow this evening, but surely its the processor speed playing the animation and nothing to do with the hinternet (german version).

 

[Wozzaaah]

It's only an animated gif so there's negligible processing power needed to show it so it must be browser related.

Jim, if you've still got IE, open it up and see the difference.

 

[bump]

From memory, IE7 doesn't cache GIF's. It shows at the same speed using Firefox, Opera and IE7 here, but it does reside on my proxy server, so as a result is pulling from the local LAN rather than the internet.

 

[Wozzaaah]

I'm doing a side-by-side comparison of the two browsers and I've got to say, I'm quite impressed with Firefox so far. It seems much quicker than IE. The only thing I don't like so far is that the fonts are different and I can't get them to look the same as IE.

I've just loaded that gif in Ulead gif animator and the running time for the 19 frames is 0.57 seconds (I was pretty close at 0.6 ) so it must be IE that's slow.

 

[bump]

Yep, IE will be downloading it in the background at the end of each cycle, so will in effect stretch it to fill the space (a proxy will prevent this).

I prefer Firefox, especially when you get into the extensions that are available, I keep the others running on this machine only top check for cross browser discrepancies in my coding.

Fonts for browsers slowly become fairly unimportant, there is a way to alter it though. I'll have a look.

 

[bump]

Go to Tools, Options, Content then it's about half way down and references your windows fonts folder.

 

[shenion]

About 2 seconds in IE

About 0.6 seconds in Firefox

 

[drjim]

If you are trying firefox, get yourself some plugins. I have forecastfox which gives a weather forecast at the bottom of the browser, gmail notifier to tell me if I have gmail, and the all in one gestures which mean you can navigate around using right mouse button and moving the mouse (not much use on a laptop with touchpad though!

Jim

 

[storm monkey]

I use firefox, and definitely prefer it, although not all web based apps will run in it.

As for the mutt, it keeps speeding up and slowing down in my window!

Must be getting tired.

Phil

 

[Drains]

Where's it gone?

 

[malcolm]

Puppy still there for me.

I tried the IE vs Firefox thing and have the same - much faster in Firefox. That's neat. Should imagine they use different conventions for timing rather than it being a download thing - once it's downloaded it repeats rather than asking to be downloaded again.

IE is good at different conventions.