Hacker News Reader

Comment by syrrim | Hacker News Reader

You forget that webpages are allowed to do what ever the hell they want, and so each is probably running a script or two in the background. We put up with a lot in webapps that would never stand in a desktop app.

View on HN

I don't forget, I just don't forgive. It's unacceptable either way. Someone has to take responsibility---might as well start with the browser. Then we can push it down from there; maybe if browsers were held accountable for pages' resource usage they'd implement resource controls. Like they currently do with limiting setTimeout on inactive pages, but more comprehensively. And maybe they'd implement better inspection tools for resource usage (chrome was ahead of the game; I'm looking at you, Firefox )

> Like they currently do with limiting setTimeout on inactive pages, but more comprehensively.

Firefox is working on this. Doing it without breaking things like music streaming sites is ... delicate.

This is a huge problem. Javascript has become a blight on the web, and browsers really need to make it easier to manage stopping scripts on background tabs and such.

Maybe tabs not currently being viewed should have their JS throttled? Is this an option in FF yet?

I use Suspend Tab.

Earlier this year I realized a major offender was Google search and search results pages which would spin up a core more than once a minute.

This explained to me at least why it was still hogging cpu even with ad blocker.

Not yet, but they're working on it:

https://billmccloskey.wordpress.com/2016/10/27/mozillas-quan...

and a preliminary version is in Chrome 56:

https://www.chromestatus.com/features/5701844080787456

Use requestAnimationFrame instead of setTimeout to get a throttled heartbeat.

I never used to start 100+ normal apps. It would have dragged my old computers to a crawl.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com