Earlier quoted context omitted.
This sounds like the reason widening roads doesn't usually ease congestion. Which, really, can be summed up by my favorite Yogi Berra-ism "No one goes there nowadays, it’s too crowded."
all the cars on this new lane are not on another road adding to the traffic tho. Maybe it eases the traffic elsewhere There is a finite amount of cars after all
The web sucks if you have a slow connection
401–410 of 622 posts
Re: The web sucks if you have a slow connection
#402>When I was at Google, someone told me a story about a time that “they” completed a big optimization push only to find that measured page load times increased. When they dug into the data, they found that the reason load times had increased was that they got a lot more traffic from Africa after doing the optimizations. The team’s product went from being unusable for people with slow connections to usable, which cause…
I've tried using Google products from Africa (Ethiopia ... last time this January), and generally, it is right out unusable. JS-heavy apps like GMail will never load properly at all. This while the connection in itself is not THAT bad. I use to use a 3G/4G mobile connection and it generally works excellent, with pretty quick load times, for everything else than javascript-heavy web apps. I have a hard time understand…
Gmail worked surprisingly well from Antarctica
Re: The web sucks if you have a slow connection
#403Earlier quoted context omitted.
You needed about a 100mhz CPU to playback mp3s without skipping. Seemed to hold both on my PPC mac and pentium windows machine.
I used a Pentium at 133 MHz at the time, and it struggled to play MP3. The tracks would stutter.
Wait a sec guys.. are you sure you had the turbo button on your machine active?
Re: The web sucks if you have a slow connection
#404> The main table in this post is almost 50kB of HTML Just for fun, I just took a screenshot of that table and made a PNG with indexed colors: 21243 bytes.
And converted to using single-character class names and reducing the CSS needed, it can be down to about 3KB, sans-compression.
(I manually minified the whole source; the original is 53313 bytes, 12438 gzipped, while my minified source is 25628, 10124 gzipped. Most of the bloat in the tables compresses really well, as is common with such things.)
Re: The web sucks if you have a slow connection
#405Earlier quoted context omitted.
Version B could probably be optimized here by not loading two very similar fonts. You can also try loading the font locally first, to avoid the download if it's installed on the user's system. Finally, unicode-range lets you avoid the download completely if that character isn't included on the page. Not a likely outcome on an English page, but a good practice regardless. Webfonts are tough to optimize, but not imposs…
It could avoid loading the font entirely. Why does every webpage assume I want to use their fonts?
about:config -> browser.display.use_document_fonts = 0
I don't load fonts. I either don't notice a difference, or the fancy pants fonts are hard to read.
Re: The web sucks if you have a slow connection
#406Most of the web really sucks on fast internet connections too. Thanks to so many web developers thinking every dang thing needs to be a single page app using a heavy JavaScript framework. Add animation, badly optimized images and of course ads and it becomes really unbearable. We keep repeating our same mistakes but just in a different way.
I saw a sarcastic comment a while back saying that webdevs should be forced to work on a Pentium II machine and they would cut their bullshit, I laughed, and moved on.
But after seeing many examples where sites were built on huge iMacs with no care for users running off a battery, slower network connection or with an average 1366x768 display I somewhat agree with the sentiment.
Re: The web sucks if you have a slow connection
#407Wasnt this "backwards" compatability the reason blizzard was always so succesfull? Using old but sturdy tech, that would work on the slowest of machines. Actually one could make a whole slowMo WebStandard from this. No Pictures, just svgs, no constant elaborate javascript chatter, no advertising. No videos, no music, no gifs, just animated svgs. Actually, that would be something lovely. Necessity begets ingenubeauty.
I've been very tempted to start publishing content on the gopher protocol, its immune to the cancers of the modern web.
Re: The web sucks if you have a slow connection
#408Earlier quoted context omitted.
It could avoid loading the font entirely. Why does every webpage assume I want to use their fonts?
about:config -> browser.display.use_document_fonts = 0 I don't load fonts. I either don't notice a difference, or the fancy pants fonts are hard to read.
Ever run into trouble on sites that use font's for icons, like bootstrap ones?
Re: The web sucks if you have a slow connection
#409> A pure HTML minifier can’t change the class names because it doesn’t know that some external CSS or JS doesn’t depend on the class name.
After everything has been parsed, it would know (the browser knows).
Couldn't a proxy service produce super lightweight, compiled web pages? I seem to remember Opera used to offer something along those lines, but I may be wrong.
Would there be commercial value in building such a tool?
Re: The web sucks if you have a slow connection
#410Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hmm, either your experience, or memory, of the nineties / dial-up, is different than mine and all of my (quickly polled friends). We all built a library of painfully-obtained 320x200 horrible overcompressed video... ahh, the memories of RealPlayer. Some video was down to 180p... heck, I still have videos that were one or two megabytes in size in my archives - that I darn tootin' well waited hours to download :)
Can confirm, I remember downloading anime clips at 6 or so hours apiece! Not even full episodes, clips! And it was amazing! And before there was YouTube there was flash videos/animations on Newgrounds. The people I hung with back then were into animutations.
We drink ritalin!