sabreW4K3@lazysoci.al to Firefox@lemmy.mlEnglish · 8 days agoDesigning Firefox for the futureblog.mozilla.orgexternal-linkmessage-square60linkfedilinkarrow-up184arrow-down13file-text
arrow-up181arrow-down1external-linkDesigning Firefox for the futureblog.mozilla.orgsabreW4K3@lazysoci.al to Firefox@lemmy.mlEnglish · 8 days agomessage-square60linkfedilinkfile-text
minus-squaretb_@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up2·6 days agoIf that were the entire truth, neither brave nor opera would be as popular as they are.
minus-squareSapphironZA@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up1·6 days agoIn my assessment, all browsers suck badly at performance and resource usage at the moment. How does a 25mb website content result in 350mb of ram usage for that tab? And why would it not render basically instantly. I am old enough to remember in the early 2000s, when page loads were near instant. Even for large e-commerce and social media websites.
minus-squareBigTechMustBurn@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up1·5 days agoBecause in the 2000s websites were primarily HTML and CSS and not the Javascript abominations we have today.
minus-squareSapphironZA@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up1·5 days agoIts not so much the JavaScript, its the layers and layers of JavaScript libraries that are never optimized or trimmed for purpose.
If that were the entire truth, neither brave nor opera would be as popular as they are.
In my assessment, all browsers suck badly at performance and resource usage at the moment.
How does a 25mb website content result in 350mb of ram usage for that tab? And why would it not render basically instantly.
I am old enough to remember in the early 2000s, when page loads were near instant. Even for large e-commerce and social media websites.
Because in the 2000s websites were primarily HTML and CSS and not the Javascript abominations we have today.
Its not so much the JavaScript, its the layers and layers of JavaScript libraries that are never optimized or trimmed for purpose.