|
Ola posted:How much RAM do you have? I have had one single out of memory situation across two laptops with 8 gig and it was due to a Java app I had written myself. Pretty sure I'm working with 16 gigs, and FF has never eaten it all AFAIK.
|
# ? Feb 6, 2020 19:38 |
|
|
# ? May 15, 2024 03:58 |
|
Nth Doctor posted:Has anyone noticed an uptick in out of memory errors since ~72.0.0? I leave a tab open on my home PC that refreshes every few minutes via location.reload() via an add-on and I start seeing it crash after ~5 hours. It's really annoying. I've very rarely had out of memory errors, before or after 72. And when I have it's been directly because some site has javascript coded by a monkey that is immediately causing the problem (local news sites linked in gbs threads have been the most frequent culprit). Which extension are you using, it seems pretty obvious that it is leaking memory when doing reloading. edit: or the page is doing the leaking, if it has elements like scripts that create zombie compartments during the reload Klyith fucked around with this message at 19:55 on Feb 6, 2020 |
# ? Feb 6, 2020 19:39 |
|
Is it literally an "out of memory" error from the OS and a crashed browser or is it "something something memory" from the browser and a crashed tab? I'm guessing it's the latter and the root cause is, as indicated, buggy javascript.
|
# ? Feb 6, 2020 20:29 |
|
Klyith posted:I've very rarely had out of memory errors, before or after 72. And when I have it's been directly because some site has javascript coded by a monkey that is immediately causing the problem (local news sites linked in gbs threads have been the most frequent culprit). So the site is the facebook pokes page, and the extension is one I wrote myself that only runs on that page. I didn't make any changes for months before 72 came out, and only noticed problems after the big security update we got recently. My extension doesn't do a whole lot: code:
Sometimes the ajax to grab fresh data from FB would die, so I baked in a refresh of the page itself. The only thing I do that is outside of the scope of the AutoPoke object is the setTimeout() calls, the injection of the form element, and console.log()
|
# ? Feb 6, 2020 21:20 |
|
https://twitter.com/WindowsLatest/status/1226184938552098817
|
# ? Feb 10, 2020 12:12 |
|
It's just a reminder to turn off start menu suggestions/ads
|
# ? Feb 10, 2020 12:16 |
orcane posted:It's just a reminder to turn off start menu suggestions/ads Why would anyone leave that enabled. That's the advertisement tiles setting. Turn it off and remove all tiles, you won't get any new added. I turned this off when I first installed Windows 10, several years ago. It has never been flipped back on me, and I have never seen any tiles I didn't add myself in the Start menu.
|
|
# ? Feb 10, 2020 17:43 |
|
nielsm posted:Why would anyone leave that enabled. It’s on by default so reinstalling windows causes it to come back, something I’ve had/wanted to do with some regularity. The problem, too, is that saving PDFs I open from an email after viewing them in Edge causes it to crash. So now I’m out a lightweight PDF viewer. I can’t believe it but I want preview.app for PC now.
|
# ? Feb 11, 2020 07:24 |
|
jokes posted:It’s on by default so reinstalling windows causes it to come back, something I’ve had/wanted to do with some regularity. I wonder if they'll bring back the win8 pdf reader app. Guessing not.
|
# ? Feb 11, 2020 07:42 |
|
jokes posted:It’s on by default so reinstalling windows causes it to come back, something I’ve had/wanted to do with some regularity. check out Sumatra
|
# ? Feb 11, 2020 14:47 |
|
Klyith posted:check out Sumatra Sumatra is the only reader I've found that does EPUB ebooks well. Edge used to be the loving gold standard of PDF / EPUB rendering, but Microsoft removed all that support when switching to Chromium.
|
# ? Feb 11, 2020 19:31 |
|
Nalin posted:Sumatra is the only reader I've found that does EPUB ebooks well. Edge used to be the loving gold standard of PDF / EPUB rendering, but Microsoft removed all that support when switching to Chromium. Sumatra isn't very good IMHO, you can't change font on the fly and it has frequent formatting fuckups (run into several books where all text is centered). Firefox used to be my main ebook reader with the epubreader addon, but the new version is just not as good compared to the pre-57 classic extension. One of the two extensions I was most unhappy about losing. Switched to edge for a while but then that got taken away too. Now I swap between Firefox w/ epubreader and Calibre depending on the book. Firefox has nicer text rendering, Calibre has better formatting overrides and bookmarks.
|
# ? Feb 11, 2020 22:28 |
|
Foxit for PDFs?
|
# ? Feb 11, 2020 23:39 |
|
There’s the xodo pdf reader on the windows App Store that works real well.
|
# ? Feb 12, 2020 00:21 |
|
Klyith posted:Sumatra isn't very good IMHO, you can't change font on the fly and it has frequent formatting fuckups (run into several books where all text is centered). Sumatra is the only one I've tried that lets you zoom in and pan on artwork in an EPUB. Reading a fantasy book and come across a map with small text? You're hosed.
|
# ? Feb 12, 2020 00:56 |
|
FireFox 73 has added global page zoom. loving finally. It's absence has been my biggest irritation.
|
# ? Feb 16, 2020 14:36 |
|
Does that do something beyond what ctrl-up does?
|
# ? Feb 16, 2020 15:16 |
|
Megillah Gorilla posted:Does that do something beyond what ctrl-up does? I'm not sure what you're referring to. Control + page up changes tabs and control + arrow up just scrolls the screen.
|
# ? Feb 16, 2020 17:24 |
|
OhFunny posted:I'm not sure what you're referring to. Control + page up changes tabs and control + arrow up just scrolls the screen. He probably meant Ctrl+Plus, which has zoomed in since forever.
|
# ? Feb 16, 2020 17:59 |
|
Maybe it zooms while retaining all ratios instead of simply increasing element/font sizes? On some pages, if you zoom in to make a picture bigger, it's actually the margins that get bigger and the image smaller. Example: https://www.finn.no/car/used/ad.html?finnkode=170545470 Click on a picture to open the image carousel, then zoom with ctrl +.
|
# ? Feb 16, 2020 18:11 |
|
I think the new part is that you can apply a default zoom level for all sites? Existing zoom levels are stored on a per-site basis so if you first visit them they always start at 100%.
orcane fucked around with this message at 18:41 on Feb 16, 2020 |
# ? Feb 16, 2020 18:39 |
|
Ah, global like that. Not a very useful feature. Zoom does all kinds of different things to sites and sites obviously come in all sorts of sizes.
|
# ? Feb 16, 2020 19:09 |
Ola posted:Ah, global like that. Not a very useful feature. Zoom does all kinds of different things to sites and sites obviously come in all sorts of sizes. EDIT: The latter even has a name, it's called 10-foot user interface.
|
|
# ? Feb 16, 2020 19:18 |
|
D. Ebdrup posted:You have no idea how frustrating it is to have poor vision and know that despite all websites having different font and design sizes, they're still not made for either people who can't see very well, or being viewed while sitting at 3 meters distance instead of 40-60cm (ie. viewing websites on a TV connected to a HTPC). I fall into both categories, depending on what I'm doing. No I don't. I wish all web sites conformed to the best accessibility standards and everyone on the web had the same ease of use. If a global zoom level helps, that's good. But bad design and poor accessibility isn't just about size, and zoom often breaks the layout. I have more or less perfect vision, but I often find myself using reader view, because many web sites are such utter shitpiles.
|
# ? Feb 16, 2020 19:26 |
|
I don't think WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines) cares about the 10-foot user interface.
|
# ? Feb 16, 2020 19:36 |
Ola posted:No I don't. I wish all web sites conformed to the best accessibility standards and everyone on the web had the same ease of use. If a global zoom level helps, that's good. But bad design and poor accessibility isn't just about size, and zoom often breaks the layout. I have more or less perfect vision, but I often find myself using reader view, because many web sites are such utter shitpiles. The Merkinman posted:I don't think WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines) cares about the 10-foot user interface.
|
|
# ? Feb 16, 2020 19:57 |
|
Ola posted:Ah, global like that. Not a very useful feature. Zoom does all kinds of different things to sites and sites obviously come in all sorts of sizes. Really? I zoom pretty much any website I visit, never noticed any problems. Zoom doesn't break layouts (well, at least as long as you're not doing a 300% zoom). And that's not really surprising, considering today's environment of all kinds of different devices. Being able to set 125% or 150% as a default is very useful. There's a reason global zoom has been standard in pretty much all non-Firefox browsers for years. Lambert fucked around with this message at 20:35 on Feb 16, 2020 |
# ? Feb 16, 2020 20:32 |
|
Ola posted:No I don't. I wish all web sites conformed to the best accessibility standards and everyone on the web had the same ease of use. If a global zoom level helps, that's good. But bad design and poor accessibility isn't just about size, and zoom often breaks the layout. I have more or less perfect vision, but I often find myself using reader view, because many web sites are such utter shitpiles. And a site following accessibility standards won't do anything for "I just need it all bigger".
|
# ? Feb 16, 2020 20:45 |
|
Dylan16807 posted:Zoom should do the same thing as having a different screen resolution. If that breaks anything, it's probably a bug in the browser. As I mentioned, look at this car ad. https://www.finn.no/car/used/ad.html?finnkode=170545470 Click the pic to open the image carousel. Then Ctrl + to make the image of the car bigger. Does it get bigger?
|
# ? Feb 16, 2020 21:07 |
|
Ola posted:As I mentioned, look at this car ad. https://www.finn.no/car/used/ad.html?finnkode=170545470 Click the pic to open the image carousel. Then Ctrl + to make the image of the car bigger. Does it get bigger? 1. Holy poo poo that car is expensive. 2. Yes, it doesn't work for certain pages. I do not personally know wtf is wrong with those pages, but yeah, some web developers go out of their way to screw browsers. It does work on most websites though.
|
# ? Feb 17, 2020 00:08 |
|
Ola posted:As I mentioned, look at this car ad. https://www.finn.no/car/used/ad.html?finnkode=170545470 Click the pic to open the image carousel. Then Ctrl + to make the image of the car bigger. Does it get bigger? Zoom increases the size of the elements around the picture, and the picture itself is scaled to the window size. Everything works as expected. Zoom is page zoom, not a magnifier. Lambert fucked around with this message at 00:14 on Feb 17, 2020 |
# ? Feb 17, 2020 00:11 |
|
So many users frustrated they could never quite tell what that man was doing to his rear end in a top hat can finally zoom in.
|
# ? Feb 17, 2020 02:47 |
|
Saukkis posted:He probably meant Ctrl+Plus, which has zoomed in since forever. I meant 'up' with the mousewheel which does the same. My bad for the confusion.
|
# ? Feb 17, 2020 06:14 |
|
Lambert posted:Zoom increases the size of the elements around the picture, and the picture itself is scaled to the window size. Everything works as expected. Zoom is page zoom, not a magnifier. Yeah. If I set my screen/window to 720p, versus if I set my screen/window to 1440p and zoom to 200%, that page looks exactly the same. That's what zoom is supposed to do. The CSS pixels get bigger, but the window is now fewer CSS pixels wide. If you want to have a virtual window size that's bigger than your actual window, that would also be a possible feature, but it would have weird issues like double scroll bars on some pages.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2020 21:00 |
|
Having a weird issue with Firefox lately, where randomly left clicks will start acting like right clicks (ie. open the right click menu). It only happens in Firefox and restarting the browser seems to (temporarily) fix it. Can't find anything about it online. Very weird. Any thoughts?
|
# ? Feb 21, 2020 00:57 |
|
I got a notification for updating uBlock the other day, asking for new permissions. From the add-on page: quote:Release notes for 1.25.0 I haven't installed the update yet, because I wanted to ask if it was still secure. The release notes make it sound like it should be fine, but I wanted to double-check.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2020 03:54 |
|
Max Wilco posted:I got a notification for updating uBlock the other day, asking for new permissions. This is a really cool feature and definitely worth granting permissions for.
|
# ? Feb 28, 2020 03:59 |
|
ghacks explains it to folks, like me, who don't know what it is: https://www.ghacks.net/2020/02/26/if-you-run-ublock-origin-use-the-firefox-version-as-it-offers-better-protection/
|
# ? Feb 28, 2020 04:30 |
|
It's insanely annoying if you use uBlock in "3rd-party scripts blocked unless whitelisted" mode, because now even resources that used to count as first-party are now revealed to be on some CDN edge network and thus blocked. I use ublock for adblocking first, page loading speed and resource use second, and privacy a distant third. So just personally it way exceeds how much I might care about stealth tracker scripts spying on me vs hassle to make the internet work. edit: also the other potential pitfall that I've seen is where adspamcdn.com (which I don't have whitelisted) is actually CNAME'd to normal AWS or Akami or Cloudflare (which I do have whitelisted because the internet runs on those). I haven't experimented to see exactly what happens there, I think adspamcdn's scripts are still blocked unless both are whitelisted. But it definitely makes things harder to disentangle when you just want to make a website work. Klyith fucked around with this message at 05:10 on Feb 28, 2020 |
# ? Feb 28, 2020 05:00 |
|
|
# ? May 15, 2024 03:58 |
|
Ola posted:look at this .. ad. No!
|
# ? Feb 28, 2020 07:43 |