Wayland wants to make every frame perfect. I wish web devs had the same goal. Instead, we’re stuck with this:
https://movq.de/v/112a927861/hiccupfx/
😂😭
@movq@www.uninformativ.de It’s fascinating how people always find ways to completely waste all gained resource improvements and speedups and beyond, so every new and more powerful computer actually feels like a big step backwards. :-( The web shit is particularly terrible.
@lyse@lyse.isobeef.org I guess it’s all about “absolute” performance. Everything is just fast enough for you to get stuff done – no matter the underlying machine. LibreOffice today on my modern machine takes the same time to start up as StarOffice (its ancestor) on my retro machine. And working with it feels the same, everything is just as fast (or slow).
Browsing the web today feels similar to 25 years ago. Even all this wobbling that my link above demonstrates already existed back then (in a way), but it was caused by images loading so slowly. Then, for a brief moment, some browser (I don’t remember which one) had this brilliant feature of trying to keep the current scrolling position stable while the page was still loading. That was great. 😃 This feature then got lost again, probably because it’s too hard to do with JavaScript changing the DOM all the time. So now we’re back to the way it was before.
Corporations should give devs the slowest and oldest machines that they have. 😏 Not only would this be more sustainable, it would also force them to optimize better.
@movq@www.uninformativ.de My issue is, now that we have the chance of getting something fast, people artificially slow it down again. Wether they think it’s cool that they added some slow animation or just lack of knowledge or whatever. The absolute performance does not translate to the relative performance that I observe. Completely wasted potential. :-(
In today’s economy, nobody optimizes something if it can be just called good enough with the next generation hardware. That’s especially the mindset of big coorporations.
Anyway, getting sidetracked from the original post. :-)
@lyse@lyse.isobeef.org But stuff is still “mostly usable”, isn’t it? It’s not like it became impossible to write a letter because everything has gotten so slow.
That’s what I meant by “absolute” performance: A human being tolerates a system boot up time of 0.5-2 minutes, for example, so there’s an absolute/fixed duration that any task is allowed to take. Boot: 0.5-2 minutes. Opening Word: 1-10 seconds. Saving an image file: 1-10 seconds. Time until the next song starts to play when you click “next track”: 0-5 seconds. Stuff like that. As long as we don’t exceed those durations, people will be more or less happy.
Wasted potential? Ab-so-fucken-lutely.
(Maybe I’m repeating myself. I’m tired. Sorry. 😅)
@movq@www.uninformativ.de There’s a big difference between being usable somehow and having fun using it. My tolerable limits are lower, but yeah. Up to five seconds for the “next track”? What music player are you using? :-D This must happen in way under a second, and luckily, this works here. :-) (But I’m also not streaming my music, it’s all on the local disk.)
@lyse@lyse.isobeef.org Yeah, that has nothing to do with fun. 😅
I was thinking back to CD players. Switching tracks took a moment, although I don’t know anymore how long exactly. IIRC, playing CDs on a computer was a bit slower than in a dedicated player.
Don’t worry, switching to the next OGG file on my disk is basically instant. 😅
@movq@www.uninformativ.de Ah, I did not have a portable diskman. Just a stationary radio with an integrated CD player. Or my parent’s stereo. But it’s sooo long ago, I can’t remember how long switching tracks took. Yeah, on second thought, maybe a second. Well, that actually improved then. Finally. Nice. :-) Loading the CD took several seconds, that’s for sure. And some devices were certainly slower than others.