OT: Flash and Javascript (Was: Taunting)

[Jarrett Billingsley]

On Sun, May 24, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Nick Sabalausky <a at a.a> wrote:
>
> To add a little though, grauzone says "You know, Win 3.11 feels faster." My
> 486 Win 3.11 machine *was* faster (not in terms of raw operations per second
> of course, but in terms of responsiveness.) My machine has a clockspeed in
> the GHz range, RAM in the GB range, and basic text entry in my browser
> frequently lags by at least a second. WTF? My 486/Win3.11 machine never did
> that! Hell, my Apple IIc never did that.
>
> About 5-10 years ago, it was common, standard practice to design web pages
> so that they didn't take any more than about a couple seconds to load. But
> now, most of the pages on the web easily take about 5-10 seconds or more,
> and nobody seems to give a shit. In fact, I just timed how long it takes to
> load the main page of Tango's 0.9.9.8 API docs: it took a full 19 seconds. I
> timed it again with JS disabled: 2 seconds. I don't see how anyone can
> consider anything remotely that bad to be at all acceptable, particularly
> considering that the JS version does absolutely nothing that can't be
> reasonably done without JS (except for the folding/unfolding of the tree
> nodes, but you know, whoop-dee-f&^%ing-doo. I'm pretty sure I can live
> without that).

I'm starting to get the impression that you just have a _really slow
Javascript interpreter_ in your browser.  I have no idea what you're
talking about with text input lag.  I have never experienced that.
And the Tango API opens in about 2 seconds with JS enabled for me.

What browser are you *using*?