Jump to content

Recommended Posts


Posted

As time went on, especially with the advent of Web 2.0 (although the roots go back into the late 90s) things became "cookie cutter" in terms of design. Especially with the web, where webmasters no longer will host large portions of functionality on their own servers, and will thus rely on the speeds of other websites to load the scripts needed to show theirs. This was never recommended but you'd be hard pressed to find a website that doesn't do this. And then websites will use pre-made packages for things, which contain way more bloat than needed. I have javascript disabled by default on most of my browsers for general web use... do you know that there are websites that will not show any text or pictures if javascript is disabled?

The pre-made packages is also a problem with web development. As pointed out in the article, a simple program may also include a driver for an Xbox 360 controller. A developer may find one thing and just stick it into their program, even if they only need 1% of the entire package. It wouldn't be an issue if this bloat was not being noticed. It is noticed because programs are behaving badly. And the general run-of-the-mill machine has not maintained the rapid climb of memory and cpu speeds. The low-end devices make up the majority of any given retail market, yet the programs are made to run best on high-end systems. Manufacturers are also making mistakes. Notebooks shipping with 5400RPM HDDs... and I can tell you that standards of BIOS/UEFI are not being followed by the companies responsible for that.

Its all bad and has been an issue for quite a while now, and often it seems like I am just old man yells at cloud.

Posted
On 10/7/2019 at 3:53 PM, Tripredacus said:

I have javascript disabled by default on most of my browsers for general web use... do you know that there are websites that will not show any text or pictures if javascript is disabled?

Sure, I've been using NoScript extension for several years. The place I work at develops time attendance and access control software. 99% of interactions with it are done via web interface, which is completely and utterly useless with JavaScript disabled. It doesn't even work with stock browser on Android 4.x due to missing JavaScript functionality. Can't login, can't view anything, can't set anything; you just get a broken site without a warning that JavaScript is required, so in practice, the experience is the same as with those sites that just show whiteness if JavaScript is disabled.

Posted

Last night I was looking at Steam to see if there were any 2000/XP-compatible games I would want. I found isometric 2D games and noticed they wanted Windows 7 (DX11/12) or worse! I wonder what DX11/12 would even bring to them.

Though web browsing is still mostly enjoyable on my T60, there are outliers. And those are Google services.

I swear that a Core Duo T2400 can do 480p perfectly (and maybe 720p), but 480p is incredibly choppy on YouTube. I also had to use Google Docs for some group thing (would never touch that junk for something I, and only I would work on) and that was incredibly slow compared to anything else. Not only that, I couldn't even paste stuff in using the right-click menu; I'd get a message telling me to use keyboard shortcuts! So not only do they bloat stuff to the max; it is left incomplete!

  • 4 years later...
Posted

Along these lines, my Ungoogled Chromium v114 scores 262 while Ungoogled Chromium v120 is nearly cut in half all the way down to an abysmal 145!

And YES, that is an EXTREMELY noticeable difference here at the office!

 

image.thumb.png.05c131682630ec91a5888e26d11073a5.png

 

image.thumb.png.1db045f157fead85ac1299921ef512c2.png

Posted (edited)

Sometimes I wonder if the host file entries help; somewhat.

127.0.0.1 localhost
127.0.0.1 localhost.localdomain
127.0.0.1 local
255.255.255.255 broadcasthost
::1 localhost
::1 ip6-localhost
::1 ip6-loopback
fe80::1%lo0 localhost
ff00::0 ip6-localnet
ff00::0 ip6-mcastprefix
ff02::1 ip6-allnodes
ff02::2 ip6-allrouters
ff02::3 ip6-allhosts
0.0.0.0 0.0.0.0

Edited by XPerceniol
Posted
9 hours ago, UCyborg said:

I don't think I ever used a computer that would even get 80 points there.

Should've said 100, my laptop at work actually gets 90 with Edge 114.

Did I mention that I had to use Teams recently at work and it just decided to update mid-call (so it threw me out)?

Posted (edited)

The highest I've ever scored was 330 - on a retired laptop from work that they let me keep for home use.  That would have been Ungoogled Chromium v94, v96, v97, I don't recall exactly which one.

Scores kept DROPPING with each new Ungoogled Chromium release - until v114 and that's when it became my default.  We're now back in the development cycle where scores are DROPPING.

v120 is the gaudawful SLOWEST Ungoogled Chromium I've yet to ever encounter!  If this is the result of "webp mitigation", than I can do WITHOUT!

I've been monitoring Supermium development from a distance, I wish the project huge success.  It's not yet quite where my needs kind of need it to be so I have not done any performance testing.

Home-use performance isn't as big of a deal as office-use performance.  There really is a GIGANTIC difference between a browser that scores below 100 (ie, *all* of the Roytam releases) and a browser that scores over 200.

That said, I am a fan of Serpent 52 - but I run a version that is six months old and (inline with this very thread topic) will likely be stuck with it as "newer isn't always better".

Edge is blocked on office computers (no clue "why" exactly), so I've never experimented with Edge.

Browser performance is very important to me.

Teams is the perfect example - I do not use the "desktop app", I strictly use the web site (and therefore have never been thrown out mid-call for an "automatic update" which I boycott on all software).

And Teams could also by the perfect example of why below-100 and above-200 makes such a GIGANTIC difference - I do not use "dark mode" under ANY circumstance (dark mode gives me migraines, literal migraines).

So my web site Teams is not only heavily Stylus'd to convert default "dark" to "normal light", but I also have style sheets that will convert the video being displayed for when the Teams "host" is using "dark mode" on his/her computer.

Edited by NotHereToPlayGames
Posted (edited)

@NotHereToPlayGames
You're probably one of the few who keep tabs on Speedometer.:buehehe:

On 12/29/2023 at 10:19 AM, NotHereToPlayGames said:

That said, I am a fan of Serpent 52 - but I run a version that is six months old and (inline with this very thread topic) will likely be stuck with it as "newer isn't always better".

IDK, I never felt the need to keep the old version of UXP based browser, but I strictly use Pale Moon and Pale Moon alone. Fortunately there's no difference in web compatibility between Pale Moon and Basilisk. The former's probably the leanest UXP browser in existence. I certainly have zero need for the code supporting legacy OS that's in roytam1's forks...that and he keeps other questionable code in Serpent, eg. useless Widevine code.

On 10/18/2019 at 4:39 AM, win32 said:

I found isometric 2D games and noticed they wanted Windows 7 (DX11/12) or worse! I wonder what DX11/12 would even bring to them.

No one in their right mind would develop an engine using deprecated APIs. Intel Arc GPUs don't even do D3D9 natively and many of us have run our old games through wrappers translating to D3D11 or 12 for compatibility and performance reasons plus various other quality-of-life improvements that modern systems can bring to the table.

One interesting example for instance, my old favorite Drakan: Order of the Flame from 1999, years ago I was modding the game to push for a higher drawing distance, this was all done with modding of game data files using original and very clunky tool designers used developing the game. Hats to down to them for being able to make the game as they did with those horrible tools at their disposal! So while the wrapper won't turn an ancient engine into a modern one, D3D11 drivers are so performant you can get noticeably higher frame rate than you would when running natively.

Similar can be observed with Mafia: The City of Lost Heaven when you start pushing the original engine past intended limits. This old relic also has a famous bug with shadows, they used some odd technique that wasn't recommended even in the old times on the hardware of the time and was probably a quick hack while leaving the behavior at the mercy of the driver. I forgot what was the D3D function they passed different parameter depending on the GPU vendor, but regardless of tweaked value, you would get awful z-fighting with the shadows, so crazy flickering. Somehow the issue just isn't there with dgVoodoo2 or at least much less prominent, I'd have to check, 'been a while since I played it. Even when the game was current, one of the utility programs intercepting D3D calls had a specific "Mafia Shadow Fix". I forgot what it was called and what it was for, I think it was for tweaking 3D output of games and this was one of the game specific fixes it had, but it wasn't a sure thing, I still remember the crazy flickering with the old Radeon 4890 GPU from 2009.

Years ago, I was also experimenting with WINE on Linux. Drakan always ran like crap on it until DXVK was developed. Since then, you can chain dgVoodoo2 and DXVK together, so it goes DirectDraw/Direct3D 6->Direct3D 11->Vulkan. Performance hit is very small when you compare it against Windows with just dgVoodoo2.

So the simple reason is not the feature set, but that D3D11/D3D12 are in line with what's supported on current GPUs the same way old APIs had 1st class support on GPUs of their time. That and the hardware simply works differently. Fixed-function pipeline is ancient history and AFAIK, wherever supported today for old stuff, it's emulated internally.

Also, creative and innovative people in the field won't waste their time with old stuff, they want to work on something new/better.

Late edit: Hm, might be misremembering, Mafia is a bit slower with dgVoodoo, but no z-fighting when it comes to shadows.

Edited by UCyborg
Posted

It's actually been on my To Do List to revisit Pale Moon.  It actually used to be my default but I was (as many here do, to each their own) holding myself back by "sticking to my guns" and staying on XP way longer than I should have.  I don't regret the XP Years, still a big fan, but the BEST decision I have made in recent months was to LET GO of using XP and moving on.  I'm on Win10 nowadays.  2016 LTSB.  So perhaps still a few years behind, lol.

The Speedometer bit, it's not my only quantifiable metric, but I simply do not condone "gut feelings" and when a new browser version is released, I seek PROOF that I "need" the upgrade before performing said upgrade.  As this topic clearly suggests, "newer is not always better".  :cool:

Technically, it was only the "sticking to my guns" and being on XP that ever pulled me away from Pale Moon in the first place.

But from that also stemmed the witnessing that Chromium Forks are "maybe" better suited for my needs.

Though as mentioned, I still do plan on revisiting Pale Moon one of these days.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...