

Jmpress.js - a jQuery version of impress.js - instakill
http://shama.github.com/jmpress.js/

======
clemesha
It will be a shame if this port garners comparable attention to the original
impress.js. Looking at both source codes, the meat of the original project is
in the smart css3 transformations and related js.

We all know what that powerful 'jQuery' keyword does for a JavaScript project.
Maybe I'm being cynical.

~~~
krigath
"We all know what that powerful 'jQuery' keyword does for a JavaScript
project."

Could you please elaborate on this?

~~~
bmelton
jQuery is, not so arguably, the most popular general Javascript prototyping
framework.

A 'regular' Javascript library would likely not get as much attention as its
jQuery equivalent due to all the momentum behind jQuery itself.

~~~
richbradshaw
I think this comes from the idea that it will be easier to integrate/extend
understand, as much of the complex functionality moves out of the project and
into jQuery. That means that often the project becomes smaller and easier to
digest.

------
ashamedlion
What's up with all of these Prezi-style Javascript presentations recently? I
realize this is a jQ version of something that was posted the other day, but
all of this flashy Javascript is really promoting a second coming of Flash
Internet of the 90s™.

As a new presentation style, this doesn't impress me any more than a
PowerPoint does. It makes me sick flipping and turning through a website, and
though I realize it has some potentially cool uses, stuff like this will, for
the most part, be abused.

~~~
monatron
something that promotes the ability for one to be creative should not be
suppressed solely for its potential abuse. the impress.js/prezi style of
presentations are clever and provide a little something extra to the normally
mundane world of slide decks. everyone could just throw things in lists and it
would have roughly the same _informative_ impact -- but presentations are more
than that. the best presentations should invoke an emotional reaction -- which
these style of presentations _might_ make more possible.

~~~
ashamedlion
Yes, I realize that, but there is still something to be said about the
direction animation-heavy websites are going. Because of the novelty of
presentation styles like this, I would argue that they're a weaker form of
presenting information. It certainly draws the audience away from what's
actually on the slides.

For instance, the first time I went through this site, I read the first slide,
then flicked through the pages and only upon a second visit to the site did I
actually read what it had to say. This obviously isn't the case for everyone,
I know.

------
goblin89
I wonder what's with all the negative response… OK, Jmpress.js depends on
jQuery and has narrower browser support than Impress.js. Yet it makes little
sense to compare a JavaScript presentation framework to ‘a jQuery plugin to
build a website on the infinite canvas’. These are different things.

Perhaps the whole issue is with the naming and the fact that one was based on
another's code.

~~~
red545
I completely agree with you. I tried it yesterday it is completely simple to
use.

I definitely think that it is the right way to name it Jmpress.js, so he
doesn't take any credit from the inventor.

------
ryeguy
This is completely broken in firefox. The slides all load on one page and
nothing else happens. It works in chrome though.

~~~
colinm
Yep, same in IE. Chrome only I'm guessing. So useless for the real world.

------
michaelleland
Does anybody have any experience in creating a 3D interface for a business
application? It seems that what video games do really well has never
transferred over into the "real work" category of software.

Secondly, are impress & jmpress going to cause more 3D interface innovation?

------
fridek
You should've written it in Dart or CoffeScript. That would be even more
trendy and pointless.

Please, don't repeat good projects without making any improvements. And do
NEVER use jQuery only to say that you use it.

~~~
PetrolMan
Would a decrease in overall size count as an improvement? If you are already
loading jQuery sometimes it's nice to use jQuery "native" libraries because
there is less replicated code and consequently smaller files.

Just a thought.

~~~
dhbanes
That was my first thought too. But after looking into it further, the jQuery
implementation weighs in at 11.549 kb [1] vs 9.67 kb [2] for the original.

Am I missing something? Seems pretty pointless to me as well.

[1]
[https://github.com/shama/jmpress.js/blob/master/js/jmpress.j...](https://github.com/shama/jmpress.js/blob/master/js/jmpress.js)

[2]
[https://github.com/bartaz/impress.js/blob/master/js/impress....](https://github.com/bartaz/impress.js/blob/master/js/impress.js)

------
encoderer
This literally locked-up my newish MBP and forced me to do a hard reboot.
Running Chrome and 10.6. Craziness.

~~~
tptacek
Something is wrong with your MBP. Maybe you have a bad RAM stick in it.

~~~
rmc
To test for bad ram, run Memtest. It'll run overnight and look at all the
parts of your ram.

------
marknutter
nauseous.js

------
jenius
Back button doesn't work. Fatality.

~~~
xutopia
Back button worked for me. What browser are you using?

~~~
sjs382
It seems to me that the back button doesnt work (Chrome on Mac OS X) if you
click the links in the top left navigation. It _does_ work if you use the
arrow keys, though.

------
drudru11
very cool. nice intro

------
hybrid11
Very cool and simple!

