Discourse is slow on Android. Why?
-
So basically, to godwin the thread, your point is "I don't hate Jews, but I go around calling myself a Nazi, and people assume I hate Jews! I just want to reform German politics!"
-
So basically, to godwin's Shoulder Alien the thread, your point is "I don't hate Jews, but I go around calling myself a Nazi, and people assume I hate Jews! I just want to reform German politics!"
FTFY
-
No, see, there is a small group of people calling GamerGate the devil. Quite obviously far smaller than the movement itself. They push and push that narrative. It isn't succeeding. It is also patently false. I'm against anyone who continues trying to say it.
GamerGate has had, on the whole, positive results. Yes, you have one or two people who now blame some of the death threats they were already getting on GamerGate, but the Fine Young Capitalists were able to finish their goal, and a large amount of money is successfully going to charities of various sorts.
There is great toxicity on both sides. But GamerGate is not a misogynist movement just because you say so. All the members do not spew scum. The opposition spouts plenty of their own.
-
I just tried to run the performance test on Lumia 920, but the page doesn't work (it's blank in landscape mode, and only displays title in portrait mode).
-
Yeah, I'm done talking to you now. You're minimizing the actual harm done and chasing some golden apple that's already been lost.
-
The only one minimizing harm is the one who says only one side has caused any.
-
@Yamikuronue and @Magus: GG is a classical case of "Clowns on the Left of me and Jokers on the Right". There is a valid underlying point, as you both have stated; however, the label has become firmly glued to the ass of the mudslingers who overshadowed said valid point with their back-and-forth mudslinging, rendering it worthless as a tool of serious discourse. There is no useful meaning one can get from saying someone is 'pro-GG' or 'anti-GG', and your back-and-forth is a sign of that.
-
GG is a classical case of "Clowns on the Left of me and Jokers on the Right".
Absolutely! Both of their hands are absolutely covered in shit and are pointing fingers at the other and crying foul. There was no winner, there was no loser. Neither side is more right than the other and taking a side, to me, shows that you have an agenda to push and have mentally whitewashed the side you have allied yourself with.
The entire story was a non-story to me. Why the fuck was anyone talking about it?
-
I would agree with you if the numbers did. All of the anti- tags have been dying very quickly, and GG is still going strong. A small few are still trying unsuccessfully to deface it, but are failing. Major corporations are pulling ads, and a few news sites have updated their terms. People are trying to say that it has reached the level you describe, but it really hasn't.
Total Biscuit joined because the transition to a movement focused on ethics in general was complete. That alone has helped.
-
They probably want to ruin http://www.gamersgate.com/ by making google autocorrect its name...
-
@Intercourse said:
The entire story was a non-story to me. Why the fuck was anyone talking about it?
I don't even really know what GamerGate is.
Skimming posts here, I'm not sure I really care enough to find out.
-
It's a movement against corruption in games journalism. It has been assisted at times by 4chan, which is where a lot of the hatred seems to have come from, since it gives a good justification for pinning harassment on it.
-
Skimming posts here, I'm not sure I really care enough to find out.
You don't. You will just feel dirty after finding out. It is the goatse of internet drama.
-
As an added note, I'd have more respect for the opposition if it wasn't almost entirely 'but they harassed so-and-so' - no one thinks harassment is okay. But apparently there are some who think it's one-sided.
-
It's a movement against corruption in games journalism.
Considering journalism seems fairly corrupt anyway, I'm not sure why I'd expect games journalism to be any different.@Intercourse said:
You don't. You will just feel dirty after finding out. It is the goatse of internet drama.
Cool - cheers for helping me avoid that then.
-
Considering journalism seems fairly corrupt anyway,
At least they have ombudsmen. We'd kind of like games journalism to get some good ones. Or any at all.
-
Does games journalism not, considering it's a subset of journalism?No. Nevermind. Don't want to get roped in.
-
Correct. It's fairly messed up.
-
Don't want to get roped in.
It's often amusing to peek in on some kerfluffle in a sub-culture to which you don't belong. Most people would have no clue WTF any of this was about. Probably never heard the term. But it's nuclear fucking war to a lot of people.
It looks to me like some stupid behavior was committed (and exposed) and then outside forces took it all as an opportunity to troll everyone else.
-
That sums it up fairly well. Some people don't like being trolled on the internet apparently.
-
-
It looks to me like some stupid behavior was committed (and exposed) and then outside forces took it all as an opportunity to troll everyone else.
Which seems like a normal day for the media. Doesn't seem like news to me.
-
Well, if it had stopped at that, yes. It wouldn't have exploded the way it did if 13 articles weren't posted across two days stating 'Gamers are Dead' - that was the point where people really got mad. It's not exactly good business to demean everyone who it's your job is to please.
There was similar outrage when some things were revealed a few years ago, but it died off fast because this didn't happen.
The positive effects only happened because of this explosion, which only happened because of bad handling by the sites involved.
-
Considering journalism seems fairly corrupt anyway, I'm not sure why I'd expect games journalism to be any different.
+1e6
-
Some people don't like being trolled on the internet apparently.
They had best not come here then, or we will all have bounties against us.
-
We probably will anyway
onceif TCoCDCK ever make any real money from Dicsourse.
-
Actually, they have in the past. Every so often, a feminist would show up objecting to perceived sexism in a front-page article or the comments. The result was always merciless trolling.
-
That is what I want.
Also, while I do lean toward GG, I'm mostly purposely arguing on its side right now. The one who dragged me in was a friend of mine, but mostly I've been observing from the sidelines. The concerns I mentioned way up there ^ are really the only ones I have in this mess. I have a tendency to start arguing on a side when someone says that side is only ever pure evil.
@Intercourse said:
They had best not come here then, or we will all have bounties against us.
Better be careful not to let any unsafe comments touch this board, then, like 'I hate Depression Quest' which will cause the harassment police to swoop down and tear our hearts out, like they did to wizardchan.
-
We probably will anyway once if TCoCDCK ever make any real money from Dicsourse.
Touché.
Better be careful not to let any unsafe comments touch this board, then, like 'I hate Depression Quest' which will cause the harassment police to swoop down and tear our hearts out, like they did to wizardchan.
Too late on that one. I would link to the post, but Discosearch is a random number generator I do believe.
-
Here's your link:
http://what.thedailywtf.com/t/unsexy-zoe-quinn-drollness-prepare-the-lawyers/2624/18
-
Thank you.
-
The people on wizardchan said worse things, because they were actually depressed, on a board where a suicide helpline is at the top, and considered the 'game' to be totally unlike real depression. The attacks against them are when people first started paying attention to all this.
-
IMO you need some compromise in the meantime.
Our next release has focus on extensibility and performance, I already applies some patterns to the front page which I will be extending. In real numbers I got front page initial load down from 800ms to 500ms, which is a reasonable improvement.
We are not going to just sit back and let everyone fix our issues. That said there is a fundamental issue on the android platform that needs addressing and I totally agree with @codinghorror about applying as much pressure as we can here.
-
Even if google finds the problem and fixes is, how long will it be before it is in the hand of majority of users? One year? Two years?
Nah, it is just one release of Chrome away. And Chrome is on version, what, 94 already?
-
LET'S DO EVERYTHING IN JAVASCRIPT BECAUSE IT'S THE LANGUAGE OF THE FUTURE FUCK IF SERVER SIDE CODE RUNS ELEVENTY BILLIONS TIMES FASTER LET'S FORCE THE CONSUMER'S DEVICE TO DETERMINE THEIR EXPERIENCE
Filed under: fuck this field, I'm going to become a farmer
-
Nah, it is just one release of Chrome away. And Chrome is on version, what, 94 already?
I could have sworn it was version infinity.
-
Nah, it is just one release of Chrome away. And Chrome is on version, what, 94 already?
Firefox on Android: 2859ms (767ms std dev)
As far as I know, firefox brings its own engine Gecko, it doesn't use integrated browser widget like Dolphin and other cheapo browsers.
Since in pure performance benchmarks Android is on par with iOS, javascript performance issues probably have something to do with the OS itself. And that won't be fixed by a seamless Chrome browser update.
-
Try the Ember benchmark (linked many times above) on Firefox vs. Chrome and see. Last time I checked on N7 FF was quite a bit worse.
FF is worse performance wise on desktop, too, though the numbers are so fast most of the time it does not matter. But on my Bay Trail Atom.. 2.2 sec IE, 1.6 sec FF, 1.2 sec Chrome.
-
Chrome:
2283ms, 1214ms deviationAnd, as posted above, "naked browser":
2390 ms, 490ms deviationNaked browser is like Dolphin, it uses built-in browser widget and draws its own interface around it.
So, that's 3 different engines: native widget (which is probably outdated v8), v8 and gecko. Similar results on all.
My point is, chrome version update won't fix this. The problem is either the layer below (some common lib? java?) or above (ember.js itself).
The best case scenario is that google engineers tell ember devs "hey look, here's where you're screwing up", and a quick patch later you get order of magnitude speed increase. But I wouldn't bet on it.
-
Try the Ember benchmark (linked many times above) on Firefox vs. Chrome and see. Last time I checked on N7 FF was quite a bit worse.
The browser on my Jolla is apparently based on Gecko. I posted the results a few posts back.Any idea why the benchmark page doesn't work on IE on Windows Phone?
-
For completeness sake, here are desktop results:
Chrome Complex List 40 194.13ms 198.92ms 47.2ms 349ms IE11 Complex List 40 496.349ms 498.97ms 51.38ms 599ms Safari Complex List 40 168.91ms 169.6ms 15.65ms 223ms Firefox Complex List 40 194.13ms 198.92ms 47.2ms 349msSo while ember does seem to have a slight hardon for Safari, these are not order of magnitude differences like on Android.
-
The best case scenario is that google engineers tell ember devs "hey look, here's where you're screwing up", and a quick patch later you get order of magnitude speed increase. But I wouldn't bet on it.
This is perfectly valid JS that works fine and performs reasonably on many platforms and browsers.. with the single exception of Android, where we see pathological 5x - 10x slowness. The official bug report really explains the problems; scroll to the bottom and read it for details.It's sort of like complaining that "this C code is really slow" because the compiler happens to be awful on that platform. The code doesn't need to be fixed; the compiler does. I mean, if we were talking about 10% or even 50% slower code, meh, who cares. But we're not. We're talking best case performance deltas of FOUR TIMES SLOWER. That's horrendous.
I wasn't really talking about desktop, I was talking about mobile -- try running the benchmark in Firefox on your Android device. See results someone posted here:
https://meta.discourse.org/t/why-is-discourse-so-slow-on-android/8823/81?u=codinghorror
Notice wildly different numbers per browser on Android. You're claiming they are all the same. The data doesn't agree.
(We did see this a year ago, but performance has diverged since then. It just hasn't gotten a hell of a lot better.)
-
I wasn't really talking about desktop, I was talking about mobile -- try running the benchmark in Firefox on your Android device.
That's what I did above.
http://what.thedailywtf.com/t/discourse-is-slow-on-android-why/4417/387?u=cartman82
This is perfectly valid JS that works fine and performs reasonably on many platforms and browsers.. with the single exception of Android, where we see pathological 5x - 10x slowness.
That's my point. The results on mobile Firefox are comparable with mobile Chrome. Which indicates the problem is not in v8, but with Android itself. Which means a quick Chrome update probably won't fix things.
-
The results on mobile Firefox are comparable with mobile Chrome
No. They are not.- Chrome Beta: 1589ms
- Chrome: 1750ms
- Firefox for Android too: 2446ms.
Since when is 2.4 seconds "comparable" to 1.6 seconds?
(I don't have the numbers in front of me, but I saw similar results on the Nexus 7. Firefox is substantially slower.)
-
My results:
Chrome: 2283ms
Firefox: 2859msBut whatever. The point is, you're getting like 10 times better results on iOS devices. Seems there's something in the platform itself.
Hey here's a quick test: did anyone try Chrome and Firefox on iOS?
EDIT: Or is that even possible? I don't remember, did Apple ban other browsers on iOS?
-
If you know anything about iOS you know that Apple hasn't allowed people to use the "native" JS engine. So it'll be 2x slower due to the slower JS engine.
For example on iPhone 5 it'll be 600ms instead of 300ms.
(There is some talk of this changing in iOS 8, and Apple allowing people to use the native JS engine, but current Chrome versions don't seem to as they are 2x slower... in iOS, "Chrome" is just a wrapper around Mobile Safari, using the slower JS engine, but with the shared login and cookies crap hooked up to Google auth instead.)
-
If you know anything about iOS you know that Apple hasn't allowed people to use the "native" JS engine. So it'll be 2x slower due to the slower JS engine.
Ok, I admitted I don't know. Sounds like there's no way to compare 1-1.
Although, Firefox is not 2x slower than Chrome on Android, which again (maybe) indicates some kind of platform overhead.
-
you're getting like 10 times better results on iOS devices. Seems there's something in the platform itself.
Not exactly. Even current flagships (Galaxy S5) do really badly on general web benchmarks. In Google Octane v2:
- Nexus 5 is almost 3x slower than the iPhone 6
- Samsung Galaxy S5 is almost 2x slower than the iPhone 6
Granted we are seeing 4x+ differences in Ember, etc, so there is some maginfication, but still. It's a shitty result for the platform -- slowness expressed in multiples, not percentages.
More 2x+ slower web benchmark results:
-
CPU performance difference.
http://www.ubergizmo.com/products/lang/en_us/devices/iphone-6-plus,nexus-5/
Seems iDevices are stronger single thread, Androids make up with multi-threading. Javascript user code is running single-threaded, although there could be additional threads for display rendering and such. I'm not sure.
But it's pretty indicative that's roughly the same difference as in your browser graphs.
Browsers: 392 vs 599
CPU: 1000 vs 1750Once again, indicating platform inferiority is the real cause, not chrome.
-
This is perfectly valid JS that works fine and performs reasonably on many platforms and browsers.. with the single exception of Android
Assuming I'm looking at the right stats:
Lumia 930, WP8.1, IE 11 (mobile) 2531ms.
It's no wonder the site is barely usable for me on my phone.
I know WP doesn't have a big market share, but Android is definitely not the only exception.
