The mobile web sucks...because of you


  • area_can

    Someone at The Verge put out a piece called The mobile web sucks:

    ... And yes, most commercial web pages are overstuffed with extremely complex ad tech, but it's a two-sided argument: we should expect browser vendors to look at the state of the web and push their browsers to perform better, just as we should expect web developers to look at browser performance and trim the fat. But right now, the conversation appears to be going in just one direction. ...

    Nevermind the fact that their page took 15 seconds to fully load on my phone and that it takes 170 requests and one and a half megs of cruft for the page to load coupled with who knows how many tracking and marketing scripts running on the page, it must be the browsers that are slowing everything down...



  • This is like someone complaining that eating every meal at McDonalds isn't making them thin and then blaming the people who transport the food to the McDonalds.



  • I'm not sure whose side the writer is on:

    The Verge is ultra-complicated, we have huge images, and we serve ads from our own direct sales and a variety of programmatic networks.

    Oh yeah, big images and text. That's so complex.

    Our video player is annoying. (I swear a better one is coming, for real this time.)

    And their own video player, which even they recognize is shit (As an aside, I thought browsers handle displaying video already? I don't do web development, but I thought that was kind of a solved issue).

    But the problem is with the phones and browsers, because apparently the miraculous device that fits in your pocket and connects you to the world is the problem, not your thrown together shitty website.



  • @bb36e said:

    it must be the browsers that are slowing everything down

    It's not browsers. It's browser owners with ideological objections to Adblock Plus.



  • @Kian said:

    Oh yeah, big images and text. That's so complex.

    Somehow, browsers were able to display big images and text before JavaScript even existed! It must have been black magic!

    @Kian said:

    As an aside, I thought browsers handle displaying video already? I don't do web development, but I thought that was kind of a solved issue.

    I dunno, it's pretty hard to type <video src="some url">. I mean, that's a whole 2 characters more than an image takes.


  • area_can

    To be fair, backwards compatibility is a nice thing to have. And then there's the fact that codec support isn't standard.


  • area_can

    @ben_lubar said:

    Somehow, browsers were able to display big images and text before JavaScript even existed! It must have been black magic!

    I think there's a silver light library for this



  • Almost everything supports MP4/h264 or WebM/vp8. Anything that doesn't probably won't support anything sane. I mean, you can put flash in as an alternative, but you don't need to have the browser do any extra work if you just put it inside a <video> element.




  • area_deu

    The author only complained about Safari and Chrome.

    He should clearly switch to Firefox.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    Like that he'll have something more substantial to complain about?



  • ... the phone's paltry 1GB of memory ...

    wat? That ls literally 4 times what you could expect on Windows XP.



  • @Kian said:

    As an aside, I thought browsers handle displaying video already? I don't do web development, but I thought that was kind of a solved issue

    @ben_lubar said:

    I dunno, it's pretty hard to type <video src="some url">. I mean, that's a whole 2 characters more than an image takes.

    Until you start introducing DRM and then it all becomes a clusterfuck.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Eldelshell said:

    Until you start introducing DRM and then it all becomes a clusterfuck.

    That's DRM for you. Doing it by any other mechanism in HTML (and JS and Flash and whatever) won't change that.



  • Yeah... I know :sleepy:

    But then, you have to look at one of the contracts channels sign with producers so they can put content on their websites.



  • Yeah, because that's so simple and just works...

    [img]http://i.imgur.com/RkAgJlT.png[/img]

    Side note, what incantation must I perform to get this stupid piece of shit to upload an image? It always goes to 100% and sits there spinning until I click Cancel. I used to be able to get it to work somehow (I think pasting raw image data worked) but now nothing seems to work: pasting raw image data, pasting an image file, or using the Upload button to upload the file all do the same upload-then-get-stuck-at-100% trick. FF on Windows 7, if it matters. Is there an open bug for this or should I try to report it somewhere?


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @anotherusername said:

    Is there an open bug for this or should I try to report it somewhere?

    Here's a nickel, kid. Get a better browser.


  • sockdevs

    @anotherusername said:

    FF

    Well thars yer problem!



  • Try this one:

    I would have posted this:

    <video preload autoplay loop poster="http://cdn.dota2.com/apps/dota2/videos/newbloom2015/day3_ww.jpg">
    <source src="http://cdn.dota2.com/apps/dota2/videos/newbloom2015/day3_ww.webm" type="video/webm">
    <source src="http://cdn.dota2.com/apps/dota2/videos/newbloom2015/day3_ww.mp4" type="video/mp4">
    <img src="http://cdn.dota2.com/apps/dota2/videos/newbloom2015/day3_ww.jpg">
    </video>
    

    but Discourse strips out explicit video tags not added by oneboxing.

    Also, the editor is reloading the video on every keypress.



  • @FrostCat said:

    Here's a nickel, kid. Get a better browser.

    @accalia said:

    FF... Well thars yer problem!

    Imgur doesn't seem to have this problem, so I'm gonna go ahead and blame Discourse.



  • Wait, firefox doesn't support WebM vp8? :wtf:?



  • @ben_lubar said:

    Try this one:

    @ben_lubar said:

    Wait, firefox doesn't support WebM vp8? ?

    Wait, nevermind... cdn.dota2.com is blocked: Games category. That's why the video won't load. The stupid "this page is blocked" page returns an HTTP 200 status so I guess that's why Firefox says it's an invalid video format.



  • @anotherusername said:

    The stupid "this page is blocked" page returns an HTTP 200 status
    TRWTF is every bit of software designed to "protect" a user doing things this terrible.



  • @ben_lubar said:

    Almost everything supports MP4/h264 or WebM/vp8.

    But, will all browsers support a video tag where the first 30 seconds of the video are unskippable? That's what many of them really want.



  • @ben_lubar said:

    Also, the editor is reloading the video on every keypress.

    Are you even a little surprised?



  • YouTube manages to do it with only HTML5 and JavaScript.



  • Not really, no.



  • @hungrier said:

    @ben_lubar said:
    Also, the editor is reloading the video on every keypress.

    Are you even a little surprised?

    Wait, CDCK already fixed that — but only for YouTube? I guess. How do you even do that?



  • This post is deleted!


  • @swayde said:

    I believe the one boxer for YouTube is:
    A: special
    B: separate from the video one boxer.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @swayde said:

    I believe the one boxer for YouTube is:
    A: special
    B: separate from the video one boxer.
    So presumably he didn't fix all oneboxers/previews, but only the YouTube one.

    Is that because it is using the site one-boxer (i.e., it asks the site for how to one-box it; there's a protocol for this sort of thing) or because there's a special thing done for youtube? I could believe either.



  • @dkf said:

    Is that because it is using the site one-boxer (i.e., it asks the site for how to one-box it; there's a protocol for this sort of thing) or because there's a special thing done for youtube?

    It's most likely answer c. Because Discourse is Special.


  • area_deu

    Images uploaded with Firefox work just fine with Discourse.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Luhmann said:

    It's most likely answer c. Because Discourse is Special.

    That option intermixes freely with all the others. ( :giggity: )



  • @dkf said:

    there's a special thing done for youtube?

    I think YouTube has quite a bit of extra data, and information. The embed requires API key etc. LazyYT was initially a Plugin.



  • Found it



  • Not for me they don't. They just sit there spinning at 100%.

    Chrome works fine, though.


  • mod

    I get that in Chrome with images uploads from time to time. Often associated with server cooties.


  • mod


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.