Messages

Ok, guess I'll summarize:

Don't use compressed or encoded JS files.

Longer clarification:

I'm referring to actual *.js files, not what's directly in a web page. Xepher is right, it conserves bandwidth... but at the cost of performance. At least that's been our recent discovery with jQuery and other larger javascript frameworks or API's. Thanks to the wonderful world of broadband making things dead cheap in the bandwidth category, there's not much need to optimize things as much as there used to be anyhow. What I'm referring to is more along the lines of javascript files that are compressed and need to initialize/decompress/etc... each and every time you load a new page.

The difference we saw was literally noticeable visually. As in we could immediately tell the speed differences.

See, rather than just downloading a slightly larger file, caching it, and then just using it on page loads, it was downloading a smaller, compressed file, caching that, and then each and every page load it'd need to decompress it first, then run it. Though it's more noticeable when you're pulling things via an Ajax API that runs after the page is finished loading.

But can it SSH?

Make sure that you're not only using the jQuery version of lytebox, but that the version you're using of jQuery and lytebox isn't an encoded js file.

The problem is, when you use encoded JS files granted they are much smaller in size for downloading by the browser initially, but then the browser has to decode the javascript (using javascript) every single time it runs. We recently ran into this issue on our primary system, was easily solved by just using the full non-compressed version.

This idea hasn't died yet. I'm currently working on getting a new server into a local data center so every other project is on hold at the moment while I'm preparing the server.

Yeah, beta. But IE8 is a hell of an improvement over it's predecessors. It's actually got REAL javascript debugging tools now!

If you design your CSS and page layout correctly, you shouldn't need alternate versions for different browsers.

Thing is, FireFox has a whole crap ton of addons that neither IE8 or Chrome have, which still makes it rather superior for a great many things.

It has other nice features too. Ever had those web pages that bring down your browser? Well Chrome actually runs each tab in its own process, so when one crashes the entire browser doesn't go with it. If you also notice, the search bar at the top actually, well searches as you type (using Google of course).

Man I remember back when Xepher.net had a hell of a lot more traffic. Think the recession shit has something to do with the drop of activity in here?

In other news... just use Google Chrome. 

Reminds me of this incident that happened a few years ago.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EqpxeWQ_XJw

The problem is getting the domain name. With anything web-based, domain name is kinda key. 

Ban thread necromancy! 

Ok I've also recruited another person who will most likely be helping on this project. I'm also using it as kind of a training session to work on some of the bigger contract stuff I do, that way he can get started working with some of that too some day.

Now an issue is... I need a name for the software. 

The idea isn't to make something that needs other things to work, it's to make something that has enough features to replace other solutions.