Loading a web page
-
The problem is that each page uses half a dozen frameworks, which depend underlying stuff etc., so each page not only takes a long time to download but also takes a long time to render. These complex frameworks may make things simpler (?) for the developer, but they are a failure at the User Experience level. Even worse - every developer has their own idea of control positioning, shapes, etc. What happened to the CUA that was supposed to make it easier to use new programs?
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
Daniel Pfeffer wrote:
every developer has their own idea of control positioning, shapes, etc.
Then that developer has never read the Ux Guidelines for WinForms. It has some pretty well-argumented advice, with little room for "creativity". Controls are supposed to behave in a certain predictable way. Can't remember a WinForm app where I had to scroll through a combobox filled with years simply to give a date. Lots of scrolling, and if the mouse is of a bit, the entire screen scrolls.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
Since the complexity of web pages increases with time, with different types of dynamical content, web pages take more and more time to load. I find it very disturbing that design elements are jumping around while the page is being loaded. This came recently to such an extent that by loading some pages, you have to wait 3 seconds until everything is stable enough that you can simply click on a link without it having jumped around three times and you end up clicking on something else. And do not tell me to buy faster internet, I do have fast internet already - Plus I think the browsers need to proceed with the rendering anyway. Ain't nobody interested in improving user experience on web pages anymore ? Add this to the cookie/newsletter/subscription/notofications bullshit coming up every time you load a page... Browsing the internet is painful. :(
-
Rage wrote:
Add this to the cookie/newsletter/subscription/notofications bullshit coming up every time you load a page
Forced on them by the EU.
-
-
-
Since the complexity of web pages increases with time, with different types of dynamical content, web pages take more and more time to load. I find it very disturbing that design elements are jumping around while the page is being loaded. This came recently to such an extent that by loading some pages, you have to wait 3 seconds until everything is stable enough that you can simply click on a link without it having jumped around three times and you end up clicking on something else. And do not tell me to buy faster internet, I do have fast internet already - Plus I think the browsers need to proceed with the rendering anyway. Ain't nobody interested in improving user experience on web pages anymore ? Add this to the cookie/newsletter/subscription/notofications bullshit coming up every time you load a page... Browsing the internet is painful. :(
Buy faster internet.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
-
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Do I need cookies to use this site?
No, but the website might use them.
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Does the text-control "require" cookies?
That has nothing to do with the issue.
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
No, but the website might use them.
That's their own choice, innit? :)
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
That has nothing to do with the issue.
It does; cookies aren't required.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Do I need cookies to use this site?
CP's [privacy policy](https://www.codeproject.com/info/privacy.aspx) states:
We use cookies, a piece of text stored on a user’s computer by their web browser, to store your viewing preferences on the Site and, at your choosing, to store your login information so that once you have logged in you do not need to repeat the login process. We also use a session cookie, meaning it expires soon after you leave the registration process and is not placed on your hard drive, to store your session information during your visit to the Site. Read our Cookie Policy for more information.
Having the site remember that you logged in is convenient, which for many people trumps privacy. (CP has also earned our trust by not allowing the user list to be used for marketing purposes)
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
-
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
No, but the website might use them.
That's their own choice, innit? :)
Richard MacCutchan wrote:
That has nothing to do with the issue.
It does; cookies aren't required.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
Buy faster internet.
Best, Sander sanderrossel.com Migrating Applications to the Cloud with Azure arrgh.js - Bringing LINQ to JavaScript Object-Oriented Programming in C# Succinctly
:rolleyes: Thank you, Sander. I expected it even a bit earlier.
-
Since the complexity of web pages increases with time, with different types of dynamical content, web pages take more and more time to load. I find it very disturbing that design elements are jumping around while the page is being loaded. This came recently to such an extent that by loading some pages, you have to wait 3 seconds until everything is stable enough that you can simply click on a link without it having jumped around three times and you end up clicking on something else. And do not tell me to buy faster internet, I do have fast internet already - Plus I think the browsers need to proceed with the rendering anyway. Ain't nobody interested in improving user experience on web pages anymore ? Add this to the cookie/newsletter/subscription/notofications bullshit coming up every time you load a page... Browsing the internet is painful. :(
From my perspective this is driven by Google. There is huge pressure to have your sites load fast. Not fast on a desktop, but fast on a mobile device with dodgy 3G connectivity. That's how w're all being judged in Google's Page Rank algorithm (plus the content, of course). Google's gone as far as to say that slow sites will get highlighted as being slow in search results. So if you have a site that requires customisation for each user then you can' just make a static site. You either invest in massive hardware, rewrite everything in the fastest framework you can, a spend huge on hosting providers, or you create sites that are basically static content with JavaScript that loads and fills in the blanks post load. Your Time-To-First-Byte, Time-To-First-Meaningful-Paint and all the other metrics then look really good to Google. You can still then customise the page where needed. The losers are then the developers who have to go through these hoops and the users dealing with the Frankensites. We're having exactly this debate at CodeProject right now. Hosting is not cheap. Hardware is not cheap. Developer time is silly stupid expensive. Yet you have to do what it takes to work around Google's arbitrary rules. It's particularly frustrating that we, a developer site predominantly used (and most useful) as a desktop site for devs currently at their desktop with their IDEs open, are judged on how fast we load on a $100 Android device in rural Saskatchewan.
cheers Chris Maunder
-
Since the complexity of web pages increases with time, with different types of dynamical content, web pages take more and more time to load. I find it very disturbing that design elements are jumping around while the page is being loaded. This came recently to such an extent that by loading some pages, you have to wait 3 seconds until everything is stable enough that you can simply click on a link without it having jumped around three times and you end up clicking on something else. And do not tell me to buy faster internet, I do have fast internet already - Plus I think the browsers need to proceed with the rendering anyway. Ain't nobody interested in improving user experience on web pages anymore ? Add this to the cookie/newsletter/subscription/notofications bullshit coming up every time you load a page... Browsing the internet is painful. :(
IMHO, it's the 'outside' resources (mostly ads with pics/vids) that cause slow loading. There is no way I would give a customer the kind of experience I get when viewing some of the Insider linked content. I'd like to read the article, but am required to wait 10-20 secs until the scroll works. I'm not running an adblocker yet but have been considering it for awhile now. That said, CP has done it right...the unobtrusive ads here don't bother me and don't seem to slow down load time on any device. :) As for the cookie bit, I don't have notifications on any of the dozens of websites I'm responsible for. If I'm breaking a law, I don't care.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
-
Eddy Vluggen wrote:
Do I need cookies to use this site?
CP's [privacy policy](https://www.codeproject.com/info/privacy.aspx) states:
We use cookies, a piece of text stored on a user’s computer by their web browser, to store your viewing preferences on the Site and, at your choosing, to store your login information so that once you have logged in you do not need to repeat the login process. We also use a session cookie, meaning it expires soon after you leave the registration process and is not placed on your hard drive, to store your session information during your visit to the Site. Read our Cookie Policy for more information.
Having the site remember that you logged in is convenient, which for many people trumps privacy. (CP has also earned our trust by not allowing the user list to be used for marketing purposes)
Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows. -- 6079 Smith W.
Daniel Pfeffer wrote:
Having the site remember that you logged in is convenient, which for many people trumps privacy.
It is; even though the browser allows for autologin, I prefer CP's cookies.
Daniel Pfeffer wrote:
(CP has also earned our trust by not allowing the user list to be used for marketing purposes)
Also never heard of passwords being stolen from this site.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
-
It has nothing to do with whether they are required or not. If a site uses cookies anywhere then they are legally bound to post the warning and invite the user to accept or decline.
-
From my perspective this is driven by Google. There is huge pressure to have your sites load fast. Not fast on a desktop, but fast on a mobile device with dodgy 3G connectivity. That's how w're all being judged in Google's Page Rank algorithm (plus the content, of course). Google's gone as far as to say that slow sites will get highlighted as being slow in search results. So if you have a site that requires customisation for each user then you can' just make a static site. You either invest in massive hardware, rewrite everything in the fastest framework you can, a spend huge on hosting providers, or you create sites that are basically static content with JavaScript that loads and fills in the blanks post load. Your Time-To-First-Byte, Time-To-First-Meaningful-Paint and all the other metrics then look really good to Google. You can still then customise the page where needed. The losers are then the developers who have to go through these hoops and the users dealing with the Frankensites. We're having exactly this debate at CodeProject right now. Hosting is not cheap. Hardware is not cheap. Developer time is silly stupid expensive. Yet you have to do what it takes to work around Google's arbitrary rules. It's particularly frustrating that we, a developer site predominantly used (and most useful) as a desktop site for devs currently at their desktop with their IDEs open, are judged on how fast we load on a $100 Android device in rural Saskatchewan.
cheers Chris Maunder
Very interesting, I was not aware of this. Though, I am wondering if Google is not missing the point there : what they want is happy users by having fast-loading sites - in the end, is is not what they get, but for different reasons. Is there also a Time-To-Last-Byte ?
-
Daniel Pfeffer wrote:
Having the site remember that you logged in is convenient, which for many people trumps privacy.
It is; even though the browser allows for autologin, I prefer CP's cookies.
Daniel Pfeffer wrote:
(CP has also earned our trust by not allowing the user list to be used for marketing purposes)
Also never heard of passwords being stolen from this site.
Bastard Programmer from Hell :suss: If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^] "If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
Is it not true though that GDPR doesn't apply to cookie tokens unless they're used for tracking/behavioural analysis? Remember-me's, Csrf tokens, and session tokens that are required only for the purpose of enabling a website to operate don't require any special permission.
-
Since the complexity of web pages increases with time, with different types of dynamical content, web pages take more and more time to load. I find it very disturbing that design elements are jumping around while the page is being loaded. This came recently to such an extent that by loading some pages, you have to wait 3 seconds until everything is stable enough that you can simply click on a link without it having jumped around three times and you end up clicking on something else. And do not tell me to buy faster internet, I do have fast internet already - Plus I think the browsers need to proceed with the rendering anyway. Ain't nobody interested in improving user experience on web pages anymore ? Add this to the cookie/newsletter/subscription/notofications bullshit coming up every time you load a page... Browsing the internet is painful. :(
The is a rendering engine problem, and is caused by the "fluid" nature of layout.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
From my perspective this is driven by Google. There is huge pressure to have your sites load fast. Not fast on a desktop, but fast on a mobile device with dodgy 3G connectivity. That's how w're all being judged in Google's Page Rank algorithm (plus the content, of course). Google's gone as far as to say that slow sites will get highlighted as being slow in search results. So if you have a site that requires customisation for each user then you can' just make a static site. You either invest in massive hardware, rewrite everything in the fastest framework you can, a spend huge on hosting providers, or you create sites that are basically static content with JavaScript that loads and fills in the blanks post load. Your Time-To-First-Byte, Time-To-First-Meaningful-Paint and all the other metrics then look really good to Google. You can still then customise the page where needed. The losers are then the developers who have to go through these hoops and the users dealing with the Frankensites. We're having exactly this debate at CodeProject right now. Hosting is not cheap. Hardware is not cheap. Developer time is silly stupid expensive. Yet you have to do what it takes to work around Google's arbitrary rules. It's particularly frustrating that we, a developer site predominantly used (and most useful) as a desktop site for devs currently at their desktop with their IDEs open, are judged on how fast we load on a $100 Android device in rural Saskatchewan.
cheers Chris Maunder
We have huge data requirements - we have one table that's got 500k records with over 600 columns. And yes, that's the way it's stored. It's obscene, and that's just one table.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013 -
Since the complexity of web pages increases with time, with different types of dynamical content, web pages take more and more time to load. I find it very disturbing that design elements are jumping around while the page is being loaded. This came recently to such an extent that by loading some pages, you have to wait 3 seconds until everything is stable enough that you can simply click on a link without it having jumped around three times and you end up clicking on something else. And do not tell me to buy faster internet, I do have fast internet already - Plus I think the browsers need to proceed with the rendering anyway. Ain't nobody interested in improving user experience on web pages anymore ? Add this to the cookie/newsletter/subscription/notofications bullshit coming up every time you load a page... Browsing the internet is painful. :(
Rage wrote:
do not tell me to buy faster internet
I'll suggest you think about using a content blocker, instead... I have [Ghostery](https://www.ghostery.com/) installed on most of the browsers I use & for [a sample website](https://www.theverge.com/), it cuts down the amount of stuff downloaded from 15MB to 3MB and the page load time from around 15 seconds to 4 - although the page keeps downloading new ads after the initial 15 seconds...
Java, Basic, who cares - it's all a bunch of tree-hugging hippy cr*p
