Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Sony The Internet Entertainment Games

Sony Claims PS3 Javascript Performance Is Better Than IE7's 112

Posted by Soulskill
from the ouch dept.
Scorpinox writes "According to Sony Online Entertainment, the latest 2.50 update to the Playstation 3, which added Flash 9 support, is 'not up to the level of Google Chrome,' but 'beats Internet Explorer 7' in Javascript performance. The article goes on to say 'Sony has actually been working on Flash 9 support for quite some time — as far back as late last year. To get it running on the PS3, Sony ended up customizing a separate Flash implementation that was provided to it by Adobe.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Sony Claims PS3 Javascript Performance Is Better Than IE7's

Comments Filter:
  • by Mad Merlin (837387) on Tuesday October 28, 2008 @11:12PM (#25550625) Homepage

    IE7's Javascript is painfully slow, it'd be an embarrassment if Sony couldn't do better than IE7.

    Wake me up when they're on par with some useful browsers.

  • nonsense (Score:5, Insightful)

    by inzy (1095415) on Tuesday October 28, 2008 @11:13PM (#25550631)

    ps3 is hardware, ie7 is software. how can one be faster than the other?

    if they want to compare browser with browser, they need to do it on the same platform (hardware). if they want to compare hardware, they need to do it with the same software. too many variables, this means nothing.

  • by rsmith-mac (639075) on Tuesday October 28, 2008 @11:15PM (#25550647)

    Is the fact that something is beating IE7 really news? IE7 is not known for its stellar Javascript performance, it's basically a generation-old browser that pre-dates the modern push for high-performance Javascript execution. I would certainly hope that the PS3's browser is faster than IE7, or Firefox 2, or any other browser that old. It's like touting the PS3 is faster than the PS2 - good for you Sony, but it's supposed to be faster in the first place.

    Now if they could beat the Firefox/Safari nightlies, or what the final version of IE8 can do, then that would be noteworthy, as they'd be very near the top.

  • Better? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Yvan256 (722131) on Tuesday October 28, 2008 @11:15PM (#25550651) Homepage Journal

    The PS3 is a platform with fixed hardware specifications. Unless they got IE7 running on a PS3, well... what's the point of reference?

  • Optimized? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by cgenman (325138) on Tuesday October 28, 2008 @11:24PM (#25550701) Homepage

    So a piece of software optimized for a very specific, limited platform can run faster than software written for a very general and not very well defined platform. This ought to be a no-brainer.

  • Re:nonsense (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jonaskoelker (922170) <.jonaskoelker. .at. .gnu.org.> on Tuesday October 28, 2008 @11:43PM (#25550793) Homepage

    if they want to compare browser with browser, they need to do it on the same platform (hardware). if they want to compare hardware, they need to do it with the same software.

    True.

    too many variables, this means nothing.

    False.

    Comparing PS3 + Sony Software to Dell box + Microsoft software doesn't tell you how each individual component performs, comparatively. That much is true. But it does tell you something about how each system as a whole performs, compared to the other.

    As a typical end-user of those systems, is there anything that's more relevant? Great, so I can know how well IE performs on a PS3, or how well the PS3 browser performs on windows. But I'm not going to install one platform's browser on the other platform; remember, typical end-user.

  • by fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) on Wednesday October 29, 2008 @12:28AM (#25551055) Journal
    It might also be instructive to see what computer IE7 was running on. Most of the IE/FF/Opera performance shootouts have been conducted on a given PC(and, while I'm sure that their could be complexities there as well) comparing IE7 running on something to something running on PS3 seems slightly underspecified.

    PS3 javascript better than IE7 on a screaming rig? Moderately interesting, if largely a sign of IE's suckitude. PS3 javascript faster than IE7 on an elderly Celeron? boring and irrelevant.
  • Re:Sweet! (Score:2, Insightful)

    by powerspike (729889) on Wednesday October 29, 2008 @01:13AM (#25551273)
    absolutely not, what is best for their shareholders is best for everyone.
  • Re:WTF? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by skaet (841938) on Wednesday October 29, 2008 @03:43AM (#25551879) Homepage

    Sony was more than likely willing to pay premium moolah for the implementation. Something that other vendors probably can't justify for the licensing costs.

    Either that or Sony had some serious dirt held over Adobe's head...

  • Re:WTF? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by marsu_k (701360) on Wednesday October 29, 2008 @04:30AM (#25552017)

    Adobe have consistently refused to give their code to anyone. They wouldn't even give it to Apple for use on the iPhone.

    Code, perhaps, but it seems they're happy to port the software for some $$$. At least I have Flash 9 out of the box on my Nokia N800 (Linux/ARM). I think it's Apple that doesn't want Flash...

  • Re:WTF? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by X0563511 (793323) on Wednesday October 29, 2008 @09:56AM (#25553999) Homepage Journal

    So, they can port flash to PPC and ARM, but they won't port it to x86_64.

    Something seems funny to me...

Take care of the luxuries and the necessities will take care of themselves. -- Lazarus Long

Working...