Flash upload progress - actionscript

I'm making a bandwidth test in flash, and I want to display a progress bar and the current calculated speed. For the download part this is pretty straightforward, but for the upload part it gets a bit trickier.
As I've understood the only way to track upload progress is by using FileReference. But as I'm uploading a dynamically generated ByteArray, it seems FileReference isn't usable either.
So one idea I had, was just uploading a ByteArray of say 100-200 kB, and calculate the speed of that upload, then fake a progress bar based on that speed, when uploading a larger ByteArray. But then again it would probably be way off under some circumstances, and calculating the current speed would be difficult.
So I need some ideas on how to solve this :)

Best way is to look at code that already does this. Go here to see an example. View source is enabled so right-click and look at what they're doing.

Related

Sprite Animation file sizes in SpriteKit

I looked into inverse kinematics as a way of using animation, but overall thought I might want to proceed with using sprite texture atlases to create animation instead. The only thing is i'm concerned about size..
I wanted to ask for some help in the "overall global solution":
I will have 100 monsters. Each has 25 frames of animation for an attack, idle, and spawning animation. Thus 75 frames in total per monster.
I'd imagine I want to do 3x, 2x and 1x animations so that means even more frames (75 x 3 images per monster). Unless I do pdf vectors then it's just one size.
Is this approach just too much in terms of size? 25 frames of animation alone was 4MB on the hard disk, but i'm not sure what happens in terms of compression when you load that into the Xcode and texture atlas.
Does anyone know if this approach i'm embarking on will take up a lot of space and potentially be a poor decision long term if I want even more monsters (right now I only have a few monsters and other images and i'm already up to ~150MB when I go to the app on the phone and look at it's storage - so it's hard to tell what would happen in the long term with way more monsters but I feel like it would be prohibitively large like 4GB+).
To me, this sounds like the wrong approach, and yet everywhere I read, they encourage using sprites and atlases accordingly. What am I doing wrong? too many frames of animation? too many monsters?
Thanks!
So, you are correct that you will run into a problem. In general, the tutorials you find online simply ignore this issue of download side and memory use on device. When building a real game you will need to consider total download size and the amount of memory on the actual device when rendering multiple animations at the same time on screen. There are 3 approaches, just store everything as PNG, make use of an animation format that compresses better than PNG, or third you can encode things as H264. Each of these approaches has issues. If you would like to take a look at my solution to the memory use issue at runtime, have a peek at SpriteKitFireAnimation link at this question. If you want to roll your own approach with H264, you can get lots of compression but you will have issues with alpha channel support. The lazy thing to do is use PNGs, it will work and support alpha channel, but PNGs will bloat your app and runtime memory use is heavy.

Which is a better option for displaying irregular shapes in Swift?

let me start off by showing that I have this UIImageView set up in my ViewController:
Each one of the lines contains a UIButton for a body part. If I select a particular button, it will segue me appropriately.
What'd I like to do is, when the user taps (but doesn't release) the button, I'd like the appropriate body part to show like this:
I can achieve this using 2 options:
UIBuzierPath class to draw, but would take a lot of trial and error and many overlapping shapes per body part to get fitting nicely as similiar in a previous question: Create clickable body diagram with Swift (iOS)
Crop out the highlighted body parts from the original image and position it over the UIImageView depending on which UIButton selected. However there would only be one image per body part, but still less cumbersome then option 1.
Now, my question is not HOW to do it, but which would be a BETTER option for achieving this in terms of cpu processing and memory allocation?
In other words, I'm just concerned about my app lagging as well as taking up app size storage. I'm not concerned about how much time it takes to do it, I want to just make sure my app doesn't stutter when it tries to draw all the shapes.
Thanks.
It is very very very unlikely that either of those approaches would have any significant impact on CPU or memory. Particularly if in option 2, you just use the alpha channels of the cutout images and make them semitransparent tinted overlays. CPU/GPU-wise, neither of the approaches would drop you below the max screen refresh rate of 60fps (which is how users would notice a performance problem). Memory-wise, loading a dozen bezier paths or single-channel images into RAM should be a drop in the bucket compared to what you have available, particularly on any iOS device released in the last 5 years unless it's the Apple Watch.
Keep in mind that "premature optimization is the root of all evil". Unless you have seen performance issues or have good reason to believe they would exist, your time is probably better spent on other concerns like making the code more readable, concise, reusable, etc. See this brief section in Wikipedia on "When to Optimize": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Program_optimization#When_to_optimize
Xcode have tests functionality built in(and performance tests too), so the best way is to try both methods for one body part and compare the results.
You may find the second method to be a bit slower, but not enough to be noticed by the user and at the same time a lot more easier to implement.
For quick start on tests here.
Performance tests here.

Saving UIImages to files without using NSData

I want to store a bunch of images that are taken while the user uses the app, while making sure that I can view them with decently high resolution later on. And by "store", for now I don't need to store them past the closure of the app. Simply having them available after some point while the app is still alive is all I need.
I first tried simply storing the UIImages in their original size on the app, but then the app would crash after 7 or 8 pics were taken because of memory usage.
I then tried shrinking them (since my app has a grid display wherein I can see all the pictures, but shrunk to fit on a 3x3 grid of images) , and my app stopped crashing. But when I wanted the pictures to be viewed individually on full screen, the quality was terrible because I was enlarging a shrunk photo.
So I figured why not find a way to store the original image through another object in a way that wouldn't eat up too much memory. Searching online lead me to decide to store them in a file, by converting the images into NSData and then writing this into a file. BUT, when I would then load the NSData back into a UIImage, the orientation of my photos taken through the camera were all sideways! And after hours of looking (and failing) through how to transform it back into the proper orientation, I've decided to give up on trying to fix this orientation bug.
Instead, I just want to know if there is any other way for me to store large/high-res UIImages (without hogging up memory) besides using NSData. What ideas do you guys have?
And pardon me for having to write so much for a one-liner question. I just didn't want to get suggestions on doing something I've already tried.
Save it as a jpeg instead of a PNG, that way the image will be rotated for you. See https://stackoverflow.com/a/4868914/96683

How does picture-sharing iOS apps handle memory when scrolling down in thumbnails?

I'm currently working on a picture-sharing app on iOS, and my developer is struggling mightily with managing memory. I would really appreciate some help.
Take this "user feeds" module, my developer can't design a scroller that maintains a smooth scroll unless much of the thumbnails are preloaded before scrolling starts. This expectedly makes the initial loading experience much longer than desired. He used server-side compression which further compresses IPhone images (originals were around 2mb) that were already compressed to 200kb on the iOS side down to around 20kb. The end result is a highly blurry low-quality thumbnail, especially displayed at the size seen in the video.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/76154448/Scrolling%20Down%20Only%20Works%20With%20Highly%20Compressed%20Thumbnails%20and%20Needs%20Pre-loading%20to%20Ensure%20Smooth%20Scrolling.mp4
He originally just used a cropped version of the underlying image as the "thumbnail," but with each picture being 200kb, 10 "thumbnails" loaded is already 2MB of memory used. Another 2MB is being used on thumbnails of user avatars, since those were not yet compressed by the server. We designed the feed, like many other picture apps, so that more images can be loaded by scrolling down.
My questions are this:
What is a good technique to do server side compression of thumbnails without quality loss? How does an app like Streamzoo do this?
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/76154448/Smooth%20Scrolling%20with%20Streamzoo.mp4
What is a good technique for managing the increase in live bytes? How do picture apps like Pic Collage manage to show up to 200 thumbnails while seemingly keeping every image cached without crashing?
Any responses are greatly appreciated!
He's probably creating all UIImageViews once the server responds. He could use UICollectionView to lazy load views, so only a few of them would be on memory on the same time.
I wrote an article about performance tips and tricks, and this one is covered there.

What is the best practice for letting users take photos and using them also in a table view?

When developing a mobile app, and letting the user take photos (That later will be shown in full size also) but are also viewed in the table views (mid size) and even in the Google maps pin title view, Should I create a thumbnail/s for every image the user take for the smaller ones? or should I just use the regular image?
I am asking because From the tutorials i saw, and as a web developer, all I could figure out is that when using a web service to get groups of small images you usually get the thumbnails first and only when needed get the Full size image.
But this is an embedded (I know it is not embedded, but i don't have a better way to describe this) app, that all the data sits on the device, So there is no upload performance issues, just memory and processor time issues (loading to view the big HD photos that the cameras take today is very heavy I think.
Any way, What is best practice for this?
Thank you,
Erez
It's all about memory usage balanced with performance. If you don't create thumbnails for each photo, there are only so many photo you can hold in memory before you receive memory warnings or have your app terminated by the system (maybe only 6-8 full size UIImages). To avoid that, you might write the photos out to the file system and keep a reference to their location. But then your tableview scrolling will suffer as it attempts to read photos from the file system for display.
So the solution is to create thumbnails for each photo so that you can store a lot of them in memory without any troubles. Your tableview will perform well as the photos are quickly accessible from memory. You'll also want to write the full size photos to the file system (and keep a reference to their location) to avoid having to store them in memory. When it's time to display the full size image, retrieve it from the file system and store it in memory. When it's no longer needed, release it.
I'm assuming that you're in iOS4, and you are saving the photos in the Asset library, there is already a method for you.
http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#documentation/AssetsLibrary/Reference/ALAsset_Class/Reference/Reference.html
You're looking for the "thumbnail" method.
So, save the large image, and compute the thumbnail when required, I believe, is the way to go.

Resources