UCyborg Posted August 12, 2023 Share Posted August 12, 2023 I love animations, but what's even moving there? Needless to say, up-to-date Firefox and Chromium don't break a sweat without any CSS changes. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VistaLover Posted August 12, 2023 Share Posted August 12, 2023 9 hours ago, UCyborg said: but what's even moving there? If you indeed load (in a UXP-based browser): https://old.reddit.com/r/skyrim/comments/15ogxfp/marker_stuck_on_void_teleportation_room/?rdt=47005 and pay closer attention to the page's dark background, you'll hopefully be able to see that a huge (1780x1000) background (PNG) image, https://b.thumbs.redditmedia.com/EPTJlCSEAevLWzc46Lz6YNxuxSrNXzQMuoquXYgKgsI.png is slowly moving from right to left ... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mina7601 Posted August 13, 2023 Share Posted August 13, 2023 1 hour ago, VistaLover said: If you indeed load (in a UXP-based browser): https://old.reddit.com/r/skyrim/comments/15ogxfp/marker_stuck_on_void_teleportation_room/?rdt=47005 and pay closer attention to the page's dark background, you'll hopefully be able to see that a huge (1780x1000) background (PNG) image, https://b.thumbs.redditmedia.com/EPTJlCSEAevLWzc46Lz6YNxuxSrNXzQMuoquXYgKgsI.png is slowly moving from right to left ... Good find, I had the same observations in St52 and St55. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathwiz Posted August 13, 2023 Share Posted August 13, 2023 I see it. It's sort of like clouds or smoke or the like slowly drifting left over a grey background. (But if you scroll down the page too far, it goes away.) Serpent uses 37-38% of my CPU (an old 2-core AMD A4) when I switch to the tab with that page. That seems like an awful lot for a purely cosmetic effect. 10 hours ago, UCyborg said: Needless to say, up-to-date Firefox and Chromium don't break a sweat without any CSS changes. I'm guessing the more modern browsers use the computer's GPU vs. its CPU for this effect. While that's a drawback of our browsers, the page is fully functional without the animation, so I'd say just kill it as @Ben Markson suggested. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotHereToPlayGames Posted August 13, 2023 Share Posted August 13, 2023 Just now, Mathwiz said: I'm guessing the more modern browsers use the computer's GPU vs. its CPU for this effect. I'm pretty sure that for XP it is done by the CPU no matter what, there is no offloading to GPU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotHereToPlayGames Posted August 13, 2023 Share Posted August 13, 2023 On my Win7 quad-core at the moment and you can see the CPU drop as soon as I turned off that STUPID animation. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathwiz Posted August 13, 2023 Share Posted August 13, 2023 You're probably right, but Serpent gobbles CPU on that page even under Win 7. I should say that I don't know enough about GPU programming to know what it would take to bring down the CPU usage on an XP- (or even a Vista-) compatible browser. Even if it's possible, though, it's probably not worth doing since it's so easy to just kill these animations. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotHereToPlayGames Posted August 13, 2023 Share Posted August 13, 2023 Agreed. Even enabling HA (I prefer disabled by default) for 360Chrome in Win7 had no effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mathwiz Posted August 13, 2023 Share Posted August 13, 2023 Maybe this has been going on for a while, but I just now noticed the links: On 8/11/2023 at 5:50 PM, roytam1 said: Official UXP changes picked since my last build: - Issue #2282 - - Properly implement Performance Timeline Level 2 w3c spec. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1539006 Do not throw from PerformanceObserver.observe when none of the entryTypes are known. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1403027 Implement PerformanceObserver::takeRecords(). https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1436692 "server" is not a valid PerformanceEntry type. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1463065 Fix a null ptr crash in PerformanceObserver::Observe. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1631346 (dd4c0a44b6) - Issue #2026 - Follow-up: Support Big(U)Int64Array in crypto.getRandomValues. https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1718932 (6464b061c3) - Issue #2285 - Ensure we don't try to treat non-DOM-Node event targets as such, https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1440809 Is MCP using BugZilla to track UXP bugs now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roytam1 Posted August 13, 2023 Author Share Posted August 13, 2023 11 minutes ago, Mathwiz said: Maybe this has been going on for a while, but I just now noticed the links: Is MCP using BugZilla to track UXP bugs now? no, they use gitea's issue tracker. dbsoft is referencing mozilla's bugzilla entries. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VistaLover Posted August 13, 2023 Share Posted August 13, 2023 1 hour ago, Mathwiz said: Is MCP using BugZilla to track UXP bugs now? To add to Roy's reply, Mozilla's "BugZilla" doesn't only contain "bugs" in the sense most of us we'd use that term for ; "bugzilla.mozilla.com" has many entries for purely "new features" (these days, mostly backported from Chromium) or new "executive decisions" implementation; e.g. Mozilla dropping support for NT < 6.1 was "bug" () #1130266: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1130266 When a Bugzilla "entry" is being cited in the UXP repo/changelog, this means that relevant code from that "entry" was used (as a starting point, at least) to implement a similar feature/fix a similar "bug"/etc. in UXP itself; after all, Mozilla is UXP's "upstream"... I hope this clears things fully now ... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UCyborg Posted August 13, 2023 Share Posted August 13, 2023 (edited) 11 hours ago, VistaLover said: and pay closer attention to the page's dark background, you'll hopefully be able to see that a huge (1780x1000) background (PNG) image, https://b.thumbs.redditmedia.com/EPTJlCSEAevLWzc46Lz6YNxuxSrNXzQMuoquXYgKgsI.png is slowly moving from right to left ... Maybe I was actually looking for it on the new page, I do see it now on the old one...I noticed before that CSS tweak brings down CPU usage by 10% on front-pages of subreddits (/r/skyrim...) on the www version where nothing seems to be moving and one core is loaded maximally. Technically, I don't have truly up-to-date Edge and Firefox (versions 94 and 110 respectively) and looking at that Skyrim comments page, comparing what I have, it may be slightly more efficiently done on Edge/Firefox vs. UXP, GPU goes up-to 50% on Pale Moon vs. 35% on the other two. CPU looks about 3% higher on Pale Moon (base usage being 15% on a quad-core). Edit: tried on St52 on XP and even though light load is put on GPU, CPU usage is still very high when that image is moving, one core almost fully loaded. Edited August 13, 2023 by UCyborg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotHereToPlayGames Posted August 13, 2023 Share Posted August 13, 2023 Definitely bad web design. But it's not like we can blame "modern web" for that design. https://caniuse.com/?search=css animation 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milkinis Posted August 13, 2023 Share Posted August 13, 2023 12 hours ago, NotHereToPlayGames said: Even enabling HA (I prefer disabled by default) for 360Chrome in Win7 had no effect. maybe there are other hidden parameters (flags) that need to be turned on/off along with HA option ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roytam1 Posted August 13, 2023 Author Share Posted August 13, 2023 (edited) BTW which emoji you prefer? (vote "Like" for current, "Up Vote" for another) Current(Twemoji-v14.1.2): (the rendering issue of those redesigned emoji is reported here: https://github.com/jdecked/twemoji/commit/dbb2a105307932399402c5333001e82ba67af016#commitcomment-124376242 ) Another(msemoji flat version, based on Fluent Emoji): if you want to test each one yourself, you can download them here: http://o.rthost.win/boc-uxp/TwemojiMozilla-14.1.2.ttf http://o.rthost.win/boc-uxp/TwemojiMozilla-msemoji.ttf Edited August 13, 2023 by roytam1 6 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts