On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 7:28 PM, Martti Kühne wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 10:08:43PM +, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
>>
>> I was already thinking "Google" before you added this.
>>
>
>
> Zombie thread is making gurgling noises... :D
Shoot it in the head.
Twice!
--
__
Rapha
On Sat, Nov 17, 2012 at 10:08:43PM +, Ethan Grammatikidis wrote:
>
> I was already thinking "Google" before you added this.
>
Zombie thread is making gurgling noises... :D
pgpDydHnfmdne.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, 30 Sep 2012 00:25:16 +0200
Marc Weber wrote:
> resources * expected_users => waste of energy
>
> Thus you should also take into account how often a site is actually
> viewed by users.
>
> Best would be making browsers show a "this page is going to drawn your
> battery soon" hints ..
>
Dnia 2012-09-30, o godz. 16:54:32
Bjartur Thorlacius napisał(a):
> hiro wrote:
> > that hall of shame is called google. we should all get back to using
> > gopher or telnet.
> >
> Yes. Because Gopher and Telnet are superior to HTTP and SSH.
>
> /s
>
Gopher is superior to HTTP/[X]HTML[5]/CSS/JS
hiro wrote:
that hall of shame is called google. we should all get back to using
gopher or telnet.
Yes. Because Gopher and Telnet are superior to HTTP and SSH.
/s
that hall of shame is called google. we should all get back to using
gopher or telnet.
On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 11:18 PM, Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
> Greetings comrades.
>
> What would you think about some kind of hall of shame for websites that
> waste most resources? An easy measu
> Best would be making browsers show a "this page is going to drawn your
> battery soon" hints ..
That's what your CPU fan is for. Mine only spins up when I forgot to disable js.
On 29 September 2012 23:18, Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
> What would you think about some kind of hall of shame for websites that
> waste most resources? An easy measurement would be running surf and all
There are more important things to do.
I think we all agree that today's web s
a, did safari crash again?
On 29/09/2012, Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
> What would you think about some kind of hall of shame for websites that
> waste most resources?
"meh"
resources * expected_users => waste of energy
Thus you should also take into account how often a site is actually
viewed by users.
Best would be making browsers show a "this page is going to drawn your
battery soon" hints ..
Marc Weber
On 09-29 23:18, Christoph Lohmann wrote:
What would you think about some kind of hall of shame for websites
that waste most resources?
Indexing the parts of the web that don't suck is less work.
--
ilf
Über 80 Millionen Deutsche benutzen keine Konsole. Klick dich nicht weg!
--
mrpantou...@upyum.com wrote:
What do you mean by « all the plug-ing » ? Only Flash or would you like to
include Silverlight, VLC… ?
All the plugins the page requests, presumably.
> waste most resources? An easy measurement would be running surf and all
> the plugins in its own group and then measure that memory, cpu, wakup
> and power usage vs. plain surf. Maybe adding some javascript to do some
> »average usage« would be nice too.
What do you mean by « all the plug-i
Greetings comrades.
What would you think about some kind of hall of shame for websites that
waste most resources? An easy measurement would be running surf and all
the plugins in its own group and then measure that memory, cpu, wakup
and power usage vs. plain surf. Maybe adding some javascrip
15 matches
Mail list logo
