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

Just Scroll

www2.nissan.co.jp

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 109 posts

Re: Just Scroll

#61

Post by shrikant »

graue wrote: post #26

I might just ditch Firefox because of this webpage. A fresh session of Ffx15 goes up to 1.5 GB memory usage, pushes everything into swap and brings my whole OS to a grinding halt until I kill it. In other words this link is basically a very effective DoS. In Chromium it works fine. Am I the only one having this problem? (Edit: I have several Ffx addons running and no Chromium addons, so the comparison was unfair. May…

FF 16 (Aurora channel), Windows 7 here: no noticeable issues. Memory usage showed about 350 MB, and that's not remarkably far from regular usage numbers anyway.

Re: Just Scroll

#63

Post by mike-cardwell »

graue wrote: post #26

I might just ditch Firefox because of this webpage. A fresh session of Ffx15 goes up to 1.5 GB memory usage, pushes everything into swap and brings my whole OS to a grinding halt until I kill it. In other words this link is basically a very effective DoS. In Chromium it works fine. Am I the only one having this problem? (Edit: I have several Ffx addons running and no Chromium addons, so the comparison was unfair. May…

I use Firefox 15 on Ubuntu, with quite a lot of addons. I watched "top" whilst I opened the page, and I saw Firefox quickly consume 30% of my RAM (I have 8GB). Once the page finished loading, it dropped back down to 5%.

The page works fine for me, but I imagine it would suck if I had less RAM. I tried it in Chrome too and it never even got as high as 5% memory usage.

I'm willing to bet that the developers who made this page, and the managers who approved it, all have plenty of RAM in their machines.

Re: Just Scroll

#64

Post by aidos »

DigitalSea wrote: post #59

Wow, this is atrocious on so many levels. 30mb of jpg files? The inner web development nerd in me believes there is a better more efficient way to do this. The length of the page is ridiculously long to scroll and unless you have a Mac with a Magic Mouse and smooth scrolling and not a Windows machine (like I use) the scrolling is super jerky.

We fell into the scroll trap with our website last year. I spent a long time figuring out how to get scrolling working smoothly in all the browsers (hint, don't rely on anyones libraries but your own).

Most of it is not that interesting but if you scroll down to Snapper and Twilert (about half way down) you can see how we did the animations ourselves instead of using lots of big jpgs. (actually, cudos to jquery.rotate for making it possible)

http://www.codegent.com/apps

It works in IE7+ (though the js engine in IE7+8 is slooooow).

With a lot of work you can get something that looks pretty but at the expense of a lot of other things (like usability).

Re: Just Scroll

#65

Post by lmm »

bruceboughton wrote: post #60
001sky wrote: post #19

Amazing visuals. I have no idea if the idea scales. Technically might be a bit PITA. The sensation of time. Passing. Wait, what? The modular decomposition. Birdseye flight sequnece. Functional redundancy. An innovation communication language? Dunno. Pity about the ad-part =D Edit: pls, though. not in the wrong hands.

>> The modular decomposition. >> Functional redundancy. What?

I'm assuming the grandparent post has been machine-translated from Japanese

Re: Just Scroll

#66

Post by icebraining »

DigitalSea wrote: post #59

Wow, this is atrocious on so many levels. 30mb of jpg files? The inner web development nerd in me believes there is a better more efficient way to do this. The length of the page is ridiculously long to scroll and unless you have a Mac with a Magic Mouse and smooth scrolling and not a Windows machine (like I use) the scrolling is super jerky.

The inner web development nerd in me believes there is a better more efficient way to do this.

Sure there is, it's called a video.

Re: Just Scroll

#67

Post by archangel_one »

graue wrote: post #26

I might just ditch Firefox because of this webpage. A fresh session of Ffx15 goes up to 1.5 GB memory usage, pushes everything into swap and brings my whole OS to a grinding halt until I kill it. In other words this link is basically a very effective DoS. In Chromium it works fine. Am I the only one having this problem? (Edit: I have several Ffx addons running and no Chromium addons, so the comparison was unfair. May…

Firefox 15 on Linux, I see 1.7-1.8G of memory use and the page is (unsurprisingly) significantly slower to load than in Chrome. It doesn't bring my OS to a halt because this machine has plenty of RAM, but clearly it's not good.

While that's not a great result for Firefox, I do think the people at Nissan who did that could have shown a little more restraint.

Re: Just Scroll

#68

Post by human_error »

ralfd wrote: post #50
se85 wrote: post #46

Interesting design concept - but a horrible implementation of it. You can't just go and load a thousand divs and not expect a wide variety of performance issues across all the different platforms. You need to have a tile manager or something behind the scenes the same way that Google maps does, especially when targetting smaller consumer devices with limited hardware specs like tablets and phones. * iOS5 - with an ip…

I presume Safari was the same as Chrome?

Safari 5.1 here. I viewed the site without any problems.

Re: Just Scroll

#69

Post by sundarurfriend »

graue wrote: post #26

I might just ditch Firefox because of this webpage. A fresh session of Ffx15 goes up to 1.5 GB memory usage, pushes everything into swap and brings my whole OS to a grinding halt until I kill it. In other words this link is basically a very effective DoS. In Chromium it works fine. Am I the only one having this problem? (Edit: I have several Ffx addons running and no Chromium addons, so the comparison was unfair. May…

My Fx (15, on Vista) was using 700 MB with 20 tabs open, went up to 1GB with this page open, but there's no noticeable performance hit; the page scrolled smooth and snappy. It's probably your addons as you mention, most of us would benefit from periodic checking and removal of addons we no longer need.
Post reply on HN