 dlewis23
join:2005-04-18 Boca Raton, FL | Improve the Browser First!
There really isn't anything that wrong with the way the internet works at the moment, if you really want to "speed things up" you have to improve the browser and get people to update from IE6. |
|
  wifi4milez Big Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07 New York, NY
·Verizon FIOS
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
·BroadVoice
| said by dlewis23 :There really isn't anything that wrong with the way the internet works at the moment, if you really want to "speed things up" you have to improve the browser and get people to update from IE6. Google does have their own browser (called Chrome), and they claim its much faster than IE. |
|
  Matt Take me down to the paradise city Premium join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| said by wifi4milez :said by dlewis23 :There really isn't anything that wrong with the way the internet works at the moment, if you really want to "speed things up" you have to improve the browser and get people to update from IE6. Google does have their own browser (called Chrome), and they claim its much faster than IE. It is for certain things, but the barrier to speed right now is that Javascript can't take advantage of multiple CPU cores, which is a killer. So if you have an AJAX (the J is for Javascript) application running in a browser, it's limited to a single CPU core. AJAX heavy apps will frequently max out a single core of my Q9300 (2.5GHz) quad-core and cause everything else the app is trying to do to have to wait. So the network isn't the bottleneck quite yet.
The move to multiple, but lower clocked, CPU cores is a hinderance to AJAX performance as for ideal AJAX performance, you want as high a clock speed as possible. |
|
  BBBanditRuR
join:2009-06-02 Parachute, CO | You hit the nail on the head. With x64 + Dual Cores + a (logically) infinite capacity for processing power in the future, we're seeing programming falling behind the architecture. Javascript is definitely showing it's age. |
|
  djrobx
join:2000-05-31 Valencia, CA
·PHONE POWER
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T CallVantage
·Time Warner VOIP
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to Matt AJAX heavy apps will frequently max out a single core of my Q9300 (2.5GHz) quad-core and cause everything else the app is trying to do to have to wait. True, although at the moment I like that "feature". On my quad core PC, the last thing I want is a single browser window containing some poorly written, buggy advertising code hogging up the whole machine. -- AT&T U-Hearse Your funeral. Delivered.
|
|
  tschmidt Premium,MVM join:2000-11-12 Milford, NH
·Hollis Hosting
·Verizon Online DSL
·Fairpoint Communic..
| reply to dlewis23 said by dlewis23 :There really isn't anything that wrong with the way the internet works at the moment, if you really want to "speed things up" you have to improve the browser These are two separate issues.
As Matt posted improving browser performance will improve performance of compute intensive applications but it does nothing to improve the ability of the network to deliver the bits.
Improving delivery speed opens the door to new Internet applications that are not possible at slower speed.
/tom
|
|
  Matt Take me down to the paradise city Premium join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to djrobx said by djrobx :AJAX heavy apps will frequently max out a single core of my Q9300 (2.5GHz) quad-core and cause everything else the app is trying to do to have to wait. True, although at the moment I like that "feature". On my quad core PC, the last thing I want is a single browser window containing some poorly written, buggy advertising code hogging up the whole machine. There is that unintentional side benefit, but I don't think that should hold back Javascript from being able to take advantage of multiple cores. There are other ways to fix buggy adverts.
You know, this is a case where I think someone should grab Javascript, standards be damned, fork it, make it multi-core aware and then submit the spec back to the standards body. As it stands right now, there is SPECULATION that Javascript 3 will be able to take advantage of multi-cores, but Javascript 2 hasn't even been widly adopted yet. So who knows how far out on the horizon an efficient, powerful multi-core Javascript version actually is. |
|
  avd706 insert annoying animated gif here Premium join:2003-02-06 Union, NJ | this is why chrome runs each tab as a thread -- Team JON. |
|
  wifi4milez Big Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07 New York, NY
·Verizon FIOS
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
·BroadVoice
| reply to djrobx said by djrobx :AJAX heavy apps will frequently max out a single core of my Q9300 (2.5GHz) quad-core and cause everything else the app is trying to do to have to wait. True, although at the moment I like that "feature". On my quad core PC, the last thing I want is a single browser window containing some poorly written, buggy advertising code hogging up the whole machine. I disable Javascript for this very reason (well, that and the security issue). If I come to a site that requires Javascript for some functionality, I enable it just for that. Its amazing how much faster my computer "works" implementing this minor tweak. -- "You're Welcome" -The United States of America and our Armed Forces- Keeping the world safe since 1776
|
|
  Matt Take me down to the paradise city Premium join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| reply to avd706 said by avd706 :this is why chrome runs each tab as a thread Yes, but that still can't speed up an individual AJAX app. That only helps if you're running multiple AJAX applications. |
|
  avd706 insert annoying animated gif here Premium join:2003-02-06 Union, NJ
| said by Matt :said by avd706 :this is why chrome runs each tab as a thread Yes, but that still can't speed up an individual AJAX app. That only helps if you're running multiple AJAX applications. agreed.... -- Team JON. |
|
 dlewis23
join:2005-04-18 Boca Raton, FL
| reply to tschmidt said by tschmidt :Improving delivery speed opens the door to new Internet applications that are not possible at slower speed. /tom But for the most part now servers are connected at 100 Mbps minimum. And when with people now having 10 Mbps + at home the speed is there. The browser can't render it fast enough to take full advantage of what the connection can give the browser.
Google maps is the perfect example the server can push it, the user can download it, but the browser can't render it fast enough to keep up with the connection. There getting better with Safari 4 and Chrome. But they still aren't fast enough. |
|
  IowaStudent Premium join:2008-08-21 Grinnell, IA
·Mediacom
·Iowa Telecom
| reply to dlewis23 Exactly, in addition to going to college full time, To pay the bills I do computer support/repair and, you would not believe how many IE6's I have come across. I switch them all to Firefox with all of the plug ins & ad block + (Actually anything is better then I.E...) |
|
  avd706 insert annoying animated gif here Premium join:2003-02-06 Union, NJ
| reply to dlewis23 said by dlewis23 :But for the most part now servers are connected at 100 Mbps minimum. And when with people now having 10 Mbps + at home the speed is there. The browser can't render it fast enough to take full advantage of what the connection can give the browser. Never heard of compression, overhead and latency. -- Team JON. |
|
  FastiBook
join:2003-01-08 Newtown, PA | reply to Matt Flash & java are huge cpu hogs, they need to be refined & not used as widely, especially in ads. Load a page, have computer act like it came from 1992 from cpu lag.
- A -- LETS GO METS! |
|
  Matt Take me down to the paradise city Premium join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| said by FastiBook :Flash & java are huge cpu hogs, they need to be refined & not used as widely, especially in ads. Load a page, have computer act like it came from 1992 from cpu lag. - A It's not the computer itself that is brought to it's knees, but rather the browser since most older browsers are ALSO not multi-core aware. |
|
  wifi4milez Big Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07 New York, NY
·Verizon FIOS
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
·BroadVoice
| said by Matt :said by FastiBook :Flash & java are huge cpu hogs, they need to be refined & not used as widely, especially in ads. Load a page, have computer act like it came from 1992 from cpu lag. - A It's not the computer itself that is brought to it's knees, but rather the browser since most older browsers are ALSO not multi-core aware. That is partially true. What happens is that the browser ends up using all the available memory, and thus the whole computer slows down. Check your task manager next time your computer is crawling along, I can almost guarantee its because IE or FF is using up 99% of your available resources.... -- "You're Welcome" -The United States of America and our Armed Forces- Keeping the world safe since 1776
|
|
  Matt Take me down to the paradise city Premium join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| said by wifi4milez :said by Matt :said by FastiBook :Flash & java are huge cpu hogs, they need to be refined & not used as widely, especially in ads. Load a page, have computer act like it came from 1992 from cpu lag. - A It's not the computer itself that is brought to it's knees, but rather the browser since most older browsers are ALSO not multi-core aware. That is partially true. What happens is that the browser ends up using all the available memory, and thus the whole computer slows down. Check your task manager next time your computer is crawling along, I can almost guarantee its because IE or FF is using up 99% of your available resources.... That is an old memory leak that has been fixed since FF 2.x at least. It was definitely a problem in the past, but not anymore. Just open a ridiculous flash heavy MySpace profile and look at your resources. You'll see memory usage around 100-200MB and a single core maxed. You can still use your OS, but your browser will respond slowly.
We have a very heavy AJAX based application so I have to test this stuff all the time. The browser really is doing a ton more than it was designed to do. |
|
  wifi4milez Big Russ, 1918 to 2008. Rest in Peace
join:2004-08-07 New York, NY
·Verizon FIOS
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·RoadRunner Cable
·BroadVoice
| said by Matt :That is an old memory leak that has been fixed since FF 2.x at least. It was definitely a problem in the past, but not anymore. Just open a ridiculous flash heavy MySpace profile and look at your resources. You'll see memory usage around 100-200MB and a single core maxed. You can still use your OS, but your browser will respond slowly. We have a very heavy AJAX based application so I have to test this stuff all the time. The browser really is doing a ton more than it was designed to do. While the memory leak in FF was (supposedly) fixed, the problem is certainly not only with FF. I am running IE right now, and I am currently at over 400MB with just two windows open. While the most recent version of FF is much better than it used to be, I still easily run in the 300MB plus range even when doing mundane browsing (until I disabled flash/java that is). For people who have netbooks, or even 'regular' computers that are a few years old, using that much memory makes everything else on your computer hang. You cant switch applications (using alt/tab) without getting the dreaded 'white screen of death', you cant even view the desktop without everything freezing up. Heck, even going to task manager is troublesome once you use up a certain amount of memory, with the task manager box ghosting across the screen. -- "You're Welcome" -The United States of America and our Armed Forces- Keeping the world safe since 1776
|
|
  Matt Take me down to the paradise city Premium join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC
·North State Commun..
| I experience none of those problems (with IE nor FF) and we have an AJAX app that holds all sorts of financial position information. The most we've see a browser use is 200MB or so with thousands of ticker symbols.
I happen to have a few AJAX and flash (Hulu) tabs open right now and FF is using a paltry 64MB of RAM. ::shrug:: |
|