Hacker News Reader

Comment by jlarocco | Hacker News Reader

Almost all of their problems are due to them expecting mobile phones to behave exactly like desktop computers. And then they're unwilling to change anything on their side when they run into problems.

For example: "It's typically a problem on the newsfeed and on Timeline which use infinite scrolling (content is prefetched as the user scrolls down the app and appended) and end up containing large amounts of content (both text AND images). "

Well then don't use infinite scrolling when sending data to a phone and have a "next page" link. Problem solved. It's an easy solution with negligible end user consequences.

And there's a lot of whining about running out of memory because of "too much content". Then send less content. It's impossible for a person to see very much content at once on a phone, anyway, because the screen is less than 3x5 inches. You don't need to send a person's entire "timeline" just so they can see 3 entries at once.

View on HN

>"Almost all of their problems are due to them expecting mobile phones to behave exactly like desktop computers. And then they're unwilling to change anything on their side when they run into problems."

Do you have any* evidence for this wild claim? It seems like your second paragraph is an attempt to infer some evidence for a much narrower claim, that FB has unrealistic expectations of browsers, but even that doesn't pan out.

Infinite scroll in a web page, mobile or otherwise, is a valid UI choice, and if the browser can't support that, then it's the browser's fault.

Your last paragraph also doesn't make any sense. Nowhere did the OP claim to be sending the entire timeline to show 3 entries. This is, at best, an exageration, and at worst a fabrication designed to harm. But your use of the word "whining" implies more of the latter, and therefore that your hatred of FB is actively affecting your judgement.

Because you're post is information-free and shows evidence of a strong negative bias, I'm down-voting it.

> if the browser can't support that, then it's the browser's fault

If you're creating a subpar user experience, then it's your fault. You can blame the webview all you want, but your users are going to blame you.

Right. They know that, even if they haven't done much about it. They want to be able to make their page slick, and a good user experience. This post documents their problems and provides a path forward.

Kudos Facebook.

Exactly, which is why FB is putting pressure on their dependancies (browser vendors) to give them the tools and features to make mobile web apps that delight people.

What do you mean? IMO, the article is the evidence. Nobody else is complaining about this stuff because everybody else realizes that phones are different than desktops. Apparently only FB didn't get the memo.

The phone manufacturers aren't deliberately making infinite scroll perform poorly just to piss off Facebook. The devices, at this time, are not powerful enough to support infinite scroll when using HTML and Javascript. FB could get over it and use something else, but they've decided to whine about it instead.

Also, "native apps can do it, therefore HTML should be able to do it" is almost hilarious. Native apps are faster than HTML/Javascript. That's not news - that's the way it's always been and probably always will be. Everybody else adjusts their designs to deal with it; Facebook is just whining about it.

After vast amounts of effort spent on fancy JITs and fast layout engines, browsers should be able to do this stuff - or at the very least, it would be cool if they could, and it's probably achievable. Editorialized submission title aside, this post is the starting point for an attempt to improve browsers in the future, and in the meantime Facebook has launched their native app to provide the desired experience a different way. Where exactly is the whining?

Why should the browser be required to deal with this? They used javascript to build up a giant page, why don't they use the same facilities to cull the parts of the page that have already scrolled off the top of the screen?

Everyone wants rich apps in the browser, but no one wants to pay the price of it.

Read all the issues listed in the post - it's not just about removing stuff, there are a whole bunch of obstacles to pages trying to take control of scrolling in general or even modifying the DOM without causing stuttering.

It works well for the native app. So it is not a "mobile phone" problem?

Good point. However, it's pretty crappy on my 3GS.

I would think it's the caes that a "next page" link reduces engagement (some users will bounce before hitting next page). This implies less ad impressions. Facebook is not optimizing for the same things you are.

It's an easy solution with negligible end user consequences.

Do you have an evidence that getting rid of infinite scrolling will have very little impact on user engagement? It might have a lot.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com