View Single Post
Old 12-18-2008, 11:32 PM   #13
wallcraft
reader
wallcraft ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wallcraft ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wallcraft ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wallcraft ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wallcraft ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wallcraft ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wallcraft ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wallcraft ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wallcraft ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wallcraft ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.wallcraft ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
wallcraft's Avatar
 
Posts: 6,977
Karma: 5183568
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Mississippi, USA
Device: Kindle 3, Kobo Glo HD
Quote:
Originally Posted by bazmi View Post
for instance, each issue of scientific american takes about 10-15 secs to open the first page and then any zooming, panning etc takes same amount of time. i find that practically unusable.
If anyone wants to try this, SciAm has a sample issue, which is only part of the May 2004 magazine. Perhaps this isn't a good example, but it was not slow at all rendering on my relatively old Windows laptop. I was also surprised how well this works in Sony eLibrary on a Windows PC (emulates a PRS-700). This was again not slow at all, and the reflowing seemed to work and to be fast. Note that the fact that the reflow worked implies that this isn't a PDF of images.

The DR1000S approach is to zoom, rather than reflow, which means that it has to render the entire page again. The DR1000S has a slower processor than my PC, but not slower than, say, a Nokia Internet Tablet (which also has to render the entire page to zoom). So is this PDF intrinsically hard to display or is the DR1000S PDF implementation inefficient?
wallcraft is offline   Reply With Quote