I know this has been asked before but I'm still not convinced there's not a workaround. The reason I'm not convinced is because I managed to keep those gifs animated on a website of mine by accident. I posted this in the chat here and with help from #CarrieKendall came up with this fiddle.
This is obviously not a proper solution so I wanted to post it here for you geniuses to pick apart and try to help me figure out how I can fix this problem (in a way that preferably is not too resource heavy)?
UPDATE:
Ok, so I tinkered a bit more with the jsfiddle and came up with this:
HTML
<img class="link" src="http://i.imgur.com/jsm0x2c.gif">
<img class="link" src="http://i.imgur.com/jsm0x2c.gif">
<img class="link" src="http://i.imgur.com/jsm0x2c.gif">
CSS
#-webkit-keyframes WIGGLE {
0% { -webkit-transform: translate(0px, 0px); }
100% { -webkit-transform: translate(0px, 0px); }
}
keyframes WIGGLE {
0% { -webkit-transform: translate(0px, 0px); }
100% { -webkit-transform: translate(0px, 0px); }
}
.link{
-webkit-animation: WIGGLE 1ms;
animation: WIGGLE 1ms;
}
It's strange, but it works. An animation that does absolutely nothing. Oh and I tried replacing translate with something like scale but that didn't do the trick. This is the "purest" form of this weird bug/solution.
That said though, I'm not quite satisfied yet. I'd love it if someone more knowledgeable than me could have a look at this and try to figure what is REALLY going on that makes this workaround... work. Hopefully there's something in here that can be used, albeit in a more elegant way.
Also, I have no idea how resource intensive something like the above workaround would be, so if someone could help me measure that that'd be awesome.
The same restrictions don't occur on a desktop browser. This is specific to the implementation of scrolling that Apple has on their mobile device. It's a hold-over from their older mobile devices to make sure scrolling stays smooth, as earlier iPhones made judicious use of accelerated rendering throughout their OS.
Triggering hardware acceleration changes the render path of the page. In a non-accelerated page, the browser renders directly to the onscreen texture. When scrolling, all other execution is stopped, because the smooth scroll renderer takes control of rendering. This is not limited to just GIFs. If javascript would have changed the page content, it would also not show until the page finished scrolling.
In an accelerated page, the accelerated objects are actually sent to the compositor. The compositor puts all the layers of objects in the right place, and then creates a composite texture to put on the screen. Scrolling is actually part of the compositor's job, and since the compositor is in charge of rendering from end-to-end, animations will continue.
Unfortunately, due to the design of Apple's system compositor, there is really no 'right' way. In fact, as Apple has been making updates to iOS, there have been changes to what is hardware accelerated, and what isn't. For example, in iOS6, preserve3d no longer triggered acceleration. Supposedly,
-webkit-backface-visibility: hidden;
-webkit-perspective: 1000;
should still work. In your case, I believe it works because you are using keyframes.
In terms of performance/resource impact, your page won't use any more resources than any other accelerated page.
Have you tried -webkit-transform-style: preserve-3d;, -webkit-transform: translate3d(0,0,0); or other CSS selectors that might trigger hardware acceleration in your animations 0% and 100% or in the .link class etc... on the iOS device?
Read more from another answer to a similar problem:
- https://stackoverflow.com/a/10170170/1380685
.link{
-webkit-animation: WIGGLE 1ms;
animation: WIGGLE 1ms;
-webkit-transform-style: preserve-3d;
-webkit-transform: translate3d(0,0,0);
}
The solution came with giving "position:relative;
z-index:1000;display:block" css properties to the whole container that
holds the scroll element and there is no need to give translate3d to
child elements.
Reference URL's
http://en.kuma-de.com/blog/2011-12-26/494
http://indiegamr.com/ios6-html-hardware-acceleration-changes-and-how-to-fix-them/
http://cantina.co/thought_leadership/ios-5-native-scrolling-grins-and-gothcas/
It looks to be a problem others are having though:
http://en.kuma-de.com/blog/2011-12-26/494
-webkit-animation stops when scrolling on mobile safari
If you can get away with it you can use an old-school technique below to have animation persist with less resource intensive operations
You could always use the Base64 encoded asset technique within your initial loaded CSS file.
I recently posted to another question recently asking something kind of related. This way the animation is continuous and preloaded and cached for easy and fast recall via css. Also you can use SVG, PNF, JPG and many other image formats for scaling and re-sizing.
Please read the information posted on the link below to red more about this.
https://stackoverflow.com/a/25224086/1380685
https://developer.apple.com/library/safari/documentation/internetweb/conceptual/safarivisualeffectsprogguide/Using2Dand3DTransforms/Using2Dand3DTransforms.html
Related
First of all; Hi all! I'm just new in the community. I've been using stack overflow without an account for years since I've always been able to find my answers. This one I can't and it keeps bugging me!
I'm using text-shadow on a h2 element in the header of one my sites. It displays correctly on my desktop (current Chrome, Edge and Firefox versions). On my mobile (iPhone, current Chrome and Safari versions) it results in what you see in the via stack overflow linked image below.
In this image you'll see 'blocks' with some sort of gradient shade instead of text-shadow
Does anyone have any idea what happens here / seen it before and knows a solution?
Site: http://schuttershoeve.nl
CSS:
.content h2 {
text-shadow: 0 0 20px #000000;
}
P.S. you can't reproduce the error now; I've used media queries to remove the shadow from mobile sites as a workaround for now
Your solution is Polyfills.
I.e, use CSS text-shadow where supported, and use a css background-image, where unsupported.
See http://modernizr.com/ for detection of support of text-shadow among others.
Tutorial on how to use Modernizr: http://www.hongkiat.com/blog/modernizr/
TLDR:
Modernizr will add a CSS class .no-textshadow to your HTML element, if it detects that the browser does not support text-shadows.
Then it's a matter of providing a fallback in your CSS along the lines of .no-textshadow .text-stroke{}
SOLUTION: Ok, it had to do with a box-shadow in combination with the text-shadow. The gradients you see are the box-shadows. I decided to use a non-gradient box-shadow solution on all screen widths to make my text more readable. Thx for the input!
Currently doing the simple parallax effect of background-attachment: fixed and background-size: cover only to realize that iOS does not want to play nice at all with background-attachment: fixed At this point given the repaint costs as well, I want mobile/tablet to not have background-attachment: fixed at all.
Which would be better, remove background-attachment: fixed from mobile or add it back in for desktop. Further more, which would be easier from a media query stand point. Repeating the same css over and over for different devices sounds like a bad time.
Also, trying to avoid JS as much as possible to maintain as much compatibility as I can with office computers who may have it disabled.
So I understand that translate/translate3d utilizes the GPU, but for some reason it is causing large graphics to render in blocks/chunks on the iPad. I'm having difficulty finding anywhere that states a maximum width/height for images when using translate.
I'd love to be able to use css transitions on the transform property, but can't because of this issue. Even css transitions on the 'top' property are performing more slowly than using something like jQuery.animate().
Any advice on this?
I had exactly the same problem, and had a lot of success with this little CSS gem:
-webkit-backface-visibility: hidden;
I found that adding this to any element that was being animated resolved the "blocky" rendering. In some cases I also had to add it to child elements, eg. I had a large wrapper div and was using translateX to adjust the x-position. I added the magic line of CSS to the wrapper div, and also the direct children of that div (which were my content areas). Have a play around with it and you'll hopefully get it sorted out!
I'm developing a game in as3 for iPhone, and I've gotten it running reasonably well (consistanty 24fps on iPhone 3G), but I've noticed that when the "character" goes partly off the screen, the frame rate drops to 10-12fps. Does anyone know why this is and what I can do to remedy it?
Update - Been through the code pretty thoroughly, even made a new project just to test animations. Started a image offscreen and moved it across the screen and back off. Any time the image is offscreen, even partially, the frame rates are terrible. Once the image is fully on the screen, things pick back up to a solid 24fps. I'm using cacheAsBitmap, I've tried masking the stage, I've tried placing the image in a movieclip and using scrollRect. I would keep objects from going off the screen, except that the nature of the game I'm working on has objects dropping from the top down (yes, I'm using object pooling. No, I'm not scaling anything. Striclt x,y translations). And yes, I realize that Obj-C is probably the best answer, but I'd really like to avoid that if I can. AS3 is so much nicer to write in
Try and take a look at the 'blitmasking' technique: http://www.greensock.com/blitmask
From Doyle himself:
A BlitMask is basically a rectangular Sprite that acts as a high-performance mask for a DisplayObject by caching a bitmap version of it and blitting only the pixels that should be visible at any given time, although its bitmapMode can be turned off to restore interactivity in the DisplayObject whenever you want. When scrolling very large images or text blocks, BlitMask can greatly improve performance, especially on mobile devices that have weaker processorst
In CSS Sprites you will often find padding between each image. I believe the idea is so that if the page is resized then one image won't bleed into another.
I think this depends on the different types of browser zoom (best explained by Jeff).
However, I haven't been able to see this behaviour in my tests. Is this only a problem with older browsers? (I havent been able to test with IE6 at the current time so I'm counting that as 'old').
Should I still worry about leaving space? Its kind of a pain.
For instance :
A CSS Sprite I found for AOL has
padding between each image : VIEW
but The Daily Show decided not to
bother : VIEW
It shouldn't need to be padded, but when zoomed, especially in IE8 (betas more than the RC), there is image bleeding if there is no padding.
Best example is to go to Google.com -> Search, and zoom... you'll start to see "underlines" at the bottom right of the image as the zooming rounds up/down.
In theory, a 1px padding on all sides of a sprite should be fine.
Here's the sprite from Google (images)...
But when zoomed, the +,-,x icons bleed into the main Google logo.
Basically the answer is yes. Two years to the day after I asked this question will see the release of IE9. IE9 has this problem just as much - if not more than any other browser...
It's pretty infuriating because it's such a simple thing to fix.
With iPads increasing in marketshare - its's pretty essential to at least have a half decent experience with zooming un-uniform amounts.
I am going to have to put a single pixel border around every image to match the background color of the adjacent element (potentially different on each side). Fortunately I auto-generate all my csssprites based on an .xml file - so I can do this programatically without too much hastle. It's still a huge pain though...
Simon - My experience is that this is certainly still a problem.
In response to your second question, why not use transparent padding? (Perhaps you are still supporting ie6 and this is non-trivial, in which case, I'm really sorry).
Speaking of the older browsers (those using text zoom), you don't always need padding.
The main difference between your two examples is that the Daily Show sprite already includes the menu item's text in the image itself.
When using text zoom, the AOL menu items could stretch out vertically due to the larger font size, and the menu text might even wrap to two lines. To accommodate for such eventualities, those icons need a little padding to ensure they don't bleed. Typically, you'd just try to make sure it doesn't bleed on any of IE6's five text sizes.
Since The Daily Show's menu doesn't contain any (visible) HTML text its size won't be affected by text zoom (though you might need a line-height: 0; or so to be sure), so it doesn't need any padding.
As scunliffe already showed, browsers using page zoom may need sprites to have a little padding due to rounding errors.