Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I think I kind of hate lazy loading

shkspr.mobi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 182 posts

Re: I think I kind of hate lazy loading

#141

Post by marginalia_nu »

wruza wrote: post #138
djoletina wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I understand correctly your beef is with the fact that they don’t have an “Apply filters” button and not lazy loading? Also they’re probably not trying to save bandwidth but database servers.

I just don’t get it. There’s nothing that could beat an one-time json download per product category. Not even “apply filters”, which I see less and less often with years. Unless a store has thousands of products and vague categories, ofc (but not in my cases). If there is something beyond Hanlons Razor, I’d like to understand by which metric it works and how. E.g. how fetching 30 rows 10 times through different param…

A large reason why virtually all modern web stores suck as much as they do is the insane amount of bot bullshit they need to deal with.

Most storefronts are designed more or less as an obstacle course to make any sort of scraping or automated retrieval more obvious, this includes having beyond useless filters, having no working search function, having nebulous item names, paginating with 4 items at a time, etc.

Re: I think I kind of hate lazy loading

#143

Post by mikae1 »

edent wrote: post #100
mikae1 wrote: post #89

> There's no way to disable Lazy Loading on […] Android Firefox. about:config dom.image-lazy-loading.enabled

That doesn't work on the Android version of Firefox. It goes to a blank page with no settings. See https://connect.mozilla.org/t5/ideas/firefox-for-android-abo...

Sorry, I use (and recommend) the Iceraven fork for Android. Works there.

Re: I think I kind of hate lazy loading

#144

Post by wkat4242 »

wruza wrote: post #115

Not a subway rider, and I hate another form of lazy loading: webstore filters. You go to buypc.com, pc parts / ram, check 16GB box, it starts loading. Later you check 8GB (it starts loading), uncheck 16GB, it starts loading again, check “2x kits”. As you may have guessed already, it starts loading. You see the page and want to scroll it, but the second load finishes and the content changes. Then the third. If you wan…

Yup or sometimes even you click another filter while it's loading and the other filter click just gets turned off again after the reload.

Very bad UX

Re: I think I kind of hate lazy loading

#145

Post by wkat4242 »

marginalia_nu wrote: post #141
wruza wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just don’t get it. There’s nothing that could beat an one-time json download per product category. Not even “apply filters”, which I see less and less often with years. Unless a store has thousands of products and vague categories, ofc (but not in my cases). If there is something beyond Hanlons Razor, I’d like to understand by which metric it works and how. E.g. how fetching 30 rows 10 times through different param…

A large reason why virtually all modern web stores suck as much as they do is the insane amount of bot bullshit they need to deal with. Most storefronts are designed more or less as an obstacle course to make any sort of scraping or automated retrieval more obvious, this includes having beyond useless filters, having no working search function, having nebulous item names, paginating with 4 items at a time, etc.

Why stop bots though. Price comparison sites are amazingly useful.

Re: I think I kind of hate lazy loading

#146

Post by ponderings »

syndicatedjelly wrote: post #37
tekla wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is the web developers choice to decide whether or not to deal with bad/poor internet connections. Most do not. Lazy loading makes it impossible to do anything to manage a poor connection.

> Lazy loading makes it impossible to do anything to manage a poor connection. This was the exact problem lazy loading was supposed to solve

Makes me wonder what other great ideas we've implemented.

Re: I think I kind of hate lazy loading

#147

Post by marginalia_nu »

wkat4242 wrote: post #145
marginalia_nu wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A large reason why virtually all modern web stores suck as much as they do is the insane amount of bot bullshit they need to deal with. Most storefronts are designed more or less as an obstacle course to make any sort of scraping or automated retrieval more obvious, this includes having beyond useless filters, having no working search function, having nebulous item names, paginating with 4 items at a time, etc.

Why stop bots though. Price comparison sites are amazingly useful.

Competitors use them to ever so slightly undercut your prices, get a higher position on said comparison sites, and run you out of business.

Re: I think I kind of hate lazy loading

#148

Post by hahn-kev »

yathaid wrote: post #46
forgotmypw17 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For you, they are uncommon edge cases. For me, they are everyday usage.

The problems lazy loading solves is an everyday issue for me. So ... I guess the lack of user control here is the annoying part. Hopefully in the next round of standards updates this makes it in.

I mean it wouldn't be hard to run a simple user script to add or remove all lazy attributes, though this isn't a solution for everyone, but most people don't care either.

Re: I think I kind of hate lazy loading

#149

Post by madphilosopher »

Aerroon wrote: post #136
rightbyte wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Given how much link rot there is I would have wanted all my non-porn non-bank website visits to be saved to some encrypted folder, in some way. Especially since Google got so bad you can't refind webpages you know exist.

I wish browsers did this automatically so that the back button works properly instead of being just a guess on whether you pressed it or not.

I wish the back button would bring back the rendered view of a page from a cache so that it would be (a) instant, and (b) not make any network requests.

It seemed to me that older versions of the Opera browser did this, and the text-based "links" browser seems to do this today.

Re: I think I kind of hate lazy loading

#150

Post by dgb23 »

youngtaff wrote: post #118
dgb23 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The performance metrics in pagespeed/lighthouse etc. are not really assessing performance directly. You can have a slow, bloated website but great metrics, because you’re doing the “right” things. However lazy loading images that are not on screen is generally a good thing. Images are typically the heaviest part of a website and loading them only when needed is good. The article in question acknowledges that, but is…

These days JS is often the heaviest part of a website both in absolute bytes downloaded and the amount of main thread time it consumes

What you say about in terms of comparing download size: This very much depends on the site. It might be that you're right in terms of trends.

I haven't seen any statistical evidence, but from my personal experience a typical website with some images, some JS is often heavier on the image side. Fonts can be large too. PNG are heavy. Videos are the heaviest but rare.

However per byte impact on performance (which is a very vague quality) is very different. Often JS degrades performance more than images.

Post reply on HN