4 ms·
There probably is not much of a difference for a website if user is low in power than if it is low in memory. There should be then just one flag/event really: l
by hawski 10y ago
There probably is not much of a difference for a website if user is low in power than if it is low in memory. There should be then just one flag/event really: low resources (catch-all for: battery, memory, CPU time, storage etc.). But browser could just emit please-save event and give a second or so to complete. Then decrease timer intervals significantly.
Alternative (only for power) could be the levels of concern in power usage: low concern (desktop or mobile that is charging), concern (mobile), high concern (mobile on low battery). Then we could streamline it more, because websites know when you are on mobile already and give single flag: low power. But approach from first paragraph is probably more sensible.
- jasonkostempski 10y agoHow about websites just don't use more resources than they have to? If I'm 100% charged, it doesn't mean I'm willing to give 85% of it to some site that wants to show some useless flair.
- hawski 10y agoThey will take whatever you give them. There are sensible and useful web-sites/applications out there, but they are 1:100 (or Sturgeon's law's 10:90). You can limit everything for everyone and maybe give option to enable softer limits for certain sites. I just hope that it would not hurt legitimate sites.
- cptskippy 10y agoI like this approach, a nonspecific flag that simply indicates that all polling or interval based APIs will function at prolonged delays. GPS only updates every minute or so, timeouts are extended, etc...
- endemic 10y agoGreat idea. The API itself does have legitimate use, and removing the fine level of detail would hopefully assuage privacy concerns.
- crisnoble 10y agoWhat is an example of a site actually using it for this potentially legitimate use case?