8 ms·

What are we supposed to do about stuff this? Like I wrote a video game https://play.basketball-gm.com/ https://play.basketball-gm.com/ that lets you open multip

What are we supposed to do about stuff this? Like I wrote a video game https://play.basketball-gm.com/ https://play.basketball-gm.com/ that lets you open multiple tabs for viewing multiple screens even while simulation is occurring in another tab. But Chrome recently stopped running the simulation if it's in a background tab. Putting my simulation code in a Shared Worker would be nice, except Safari and IE will never support it and it seems likely to be deprecated soon. Service Workers kill anything that takes over 30 seconds, so no long running processing allowed. What do I do? Go back to writing desktop apps that nobody will install?

drinkjuice 10y ago
As a workaround, in the meantime, have you tried using several windows, not just tabs? Of course, none of them can be minimized, but they can be covered by other windows and should still run.
EvanAnderson 10y ago
It would be dodgy hack, but another HN comment made reference to a statement that tabs playing audio are always considered "foregrounded": https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink-dev/-dmrNAFHd-4/discussion https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink...
- dumbmatter 10y ago
  I think I might actually try this lol
- NTripleOne 10y ago
  ...that would explain why flash files with no sound seem to 'pause' (or at least, run very, very slowly) when in a different tab.
- TheRealDunkirk 10y ago
  Their own Google Play would be impacted otherwise. Good to hear, since the only thing I use Chrome for is Google Play (and any other, one-off, old-fashioned sites which require Flash). Why in the world does Google still require Flash for... anything?
- jlgaddis 10y ago
  Great, so we can now expect more and more sites to start playing "null" audio as a "workaround".
xigency 10y ago
What are you supposed to do? Implement it as a single page application.
- dumbmatter 10y ago
  It is. But then you open it in multiple tabs, because that's how people use websites. Unless I'm supposed to re-implement tabs within my single page application and then force it to only let one tab run, which I guess is possible but horrible :)
  - xigency 10y ago
    If it opens in multiple tabs, then it isn't a pure SPA. (Relying on the browser tabs instead of tabs in your application.) If you have several tabbed views, then you would include tabs in your application.
    - dumbmatter 10y ago
      It is a pure SPA, you just have the option of opening multiple instances at the same time. Like I can open gmail in two tabs, but it's still an SPA. And yeah tabs in JS are possible and I might go down that route, it'll just be a lot of extra work to replicate a UI that already exists fine.
      - xigency 10y ago
        Here's an example: http://orteil.dashnet.org/cookieclicker/ http://orteil.dashnet.org/cookieclicker/ Opening another tab creates a new bakery, not a view into the same bakery. (This only works if you haven't played before or clear your cookies.) Edit: If you really want to keep the same functionality then you would need to bring server communication into the mix. It's possible to either run the simulation server-side, or at least communicate the state between tabs using a server. If you send an email in one Gmail window and it shows up in the other window, then I would guess it receives a message from the server to update.
dchuk 10y ago
Yes? I mean, you have to admit what you built is the epitome of edge case when it comes to how a browser is typically used, and is actually exactly the type of thing they want to optimize because basically if you aren't looking at the tab, it's not being used (generally). Maybe use electron or something?
- dumbmatter 10y ago
  I don't think that replacing a traditional desktop app with a web app is an edge case. That's one of the main points of HTML5.
  - kbenson 10y ago
    I think what was meant by edge case is how you've architected this. Going by a statement in another comment of yours: > It is a pure SPA, you just have the option of opening multiple instances at the same time. Like I can open gmail in two tabs, but it's still an SPA. Gmail just runs the UI in the browser though, the actual work of processing, receiving and sending mail is not done in a tab. The tabs are just views into the system. It sounds like you are having one tab as both the client and the server, and separate tabs as clients to that other tab, which is pretty edge case. As someone else suggested, you could move the processing to the server, but I imagine that's not feasible because then you are centralizing the processing and you're paying for processing, not the people visiting. The more appropriate way to architect this (to my eyes, so take it for whatever you think it's worth) would be to use JS to manage tabs within the application (which you mentioned elsewhere already). The really simple way to implement this might be to have the JS tabs just contain an iframe to the prior implementation's real separate tab URL (since it already works that way, there's not likely to be any security issues you have to deal with).
  - euyyn 10y ago
    The way you architected it is uncommon, though. For example, with GMail, that you mentioned as achieving a similar effect, server communication is involved.
Cthulhu_ 10y ago
Make it a single page thing and spread the image out over multiple desktops. Make it a real desktop app instead. I do think Chrome / Google is (if they go through with this) actively going to fight against using the browser as an application platform though. At the very least they should give notifications to webapps that they are about to go to low-power mode, act differently when on a power cable, and check whether the tab is visible or not.
Nycto 10y ago
This isn't a full solution, but perhaps inter-tab communication would work? Use whichever tab is focused as the master, then other tabs send messages to the primary as they need work done. It wouldn't work when none of your tabs are focused, but perhaps that's an acceptable constraint.
- dumbmatter 10y ago
  That might work, but it's much more complicated and given the issues I'm already facing, I wouldn't want to rely on that communication actually happening (maybe background tab won't be able to send a signal to the foreground tab, since JS is apparently not running in the background tab).
benologist 10y ago
Iframe them onto one page and make the browser window huge. Something like: <iframe src="the url" width="50%" height="50%"> <iframe src="the url" width="50%" height="50%"> <iframe src="the url" width="50%" height="50%"> <iframe src="the url" width="50%" height="50%"> There's also the <frameset> and <frame> tags to divide pages between URLs.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
disiplus 10y ago
chrome regulary breaks something, so we run tested versions of chrome for our internal webapp and block chrome updates. but chrome does not like that and is always nagging and trying to trick you into installing the latest versions. i looks like we will have to package it as electron app.
ben_jones 10y ago
Could you create a tabbed interface that is just a dumb view of a server state communicated over websockets? Then the user could just open the page in n windows (each on its own tab) and have the same state represented in each?
- dumbmatter 10y ago
  Problem is, there is no server. All client side. So the tab on which you click "run simulation" is effectively the "server", except it stops running when the user switches tabs.
  - skykooler 10y ago
    Put two of them in two iframes on the same page? No code changes should be needed
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
  - xigency 10y ago
    The fact that you don't have a backend is the limiting factor here.
    - dumbmatter 10y ago
      In some ways it's limiting, but overall it's a good thing. Less complexity, less network transfer, works offline, etc. It's just more challenging to do in JS/HTML than in your choice of traditional desktop app dev tools.
      - euyyn 10y ago
        GMail and Google Docs work offline too. Surely with things like Firebase it's less complex than inter-tab communication?
onion2k 10y ago
As a developer you need to decide whether or not to support a browser, and if that browser doesn't provide the APIs you need then you should drop support for that feature in that browser. In this case, if Chrome is making a change that you can't or won't change your game for then the solution is to detect Chrome and display a "This game only works in a single tab in Chrome. Try Firefox!" message if a user opens it in a second tab.
- PetahNZ 10y ago
  It's your customers that generally dictate what browser you support.
  - rhizome 10y ago
    If you don't support a browser, how do you learn whether its users are your customers?
  - xiaoma 10y ago
    Not if you have content or apps they really want. I prefer Firefox, but since Google broke Google Voice (now Hangouts) plugin for FF users, I've been grudgingly opening a Chrome browser each time I want to make a phone call to US number.
  - onion2k 10y ago
    Some people are in the fortunate position where they can choose to ignore large sections of their potential customer base. Someone who writes a game as (presumably) a side project is in exactly that position.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
nialv7 10y ago
What about split the simulation into small, < 30 seconds chunks?
fixermark 10y ago
Nowadays, one writes ad-supported mobile games that nobody will pay for. ;) Would it be possible to just declare "Best played in Firefox?" It's a bit gauche, but if a browser's engine has a behavior that isn't really compatible with what you intend to do, that's the browser's fault.

drinkjuice 10y ago

As a workaround, in the meantime, have you tried using several windows, not just tabs? Of course, none of them can be minimized, but they can be covered by other windows and should still run.

EvanAnderson 10y ago

It would be dodgy hack, but another HN comment made reference to a statement that tabs playing audio are always considered "foregrounded": https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink-dev/-dmrNAFHd-4/discussion https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/forum/#!topic/blink...

dumbmatter 10y ago
I think I might actually try this lol
NTripleOne 10y ago
...that would explain why flash files with no sound seem to 'pause' (or at least, run very, very slowly) when in a different tab.
TheRealDunkirk 10y ago
Their own Google Play would be impacted otherwise. Good to hear, since the only thing I use Chrome for is Google Play (and any other, one-off, old-fashioned sites which require Flash). Why in the world does Google still require Flash for... anything?
jlgaddis 10y ago
Great, so we can now expect more and more sites to start playing "null" audio as a "workaround".

xigency 10y ago

What are you supposed to do? Implement it as a single page application.

dumbmatter 10y ago
It is. But then you open it in multiple tabs, because that's how people use websites. Unless I'm supposed to re-implement tabs within my single page application and then force it to only let one tab run, which I guess is possible but horrible :)
- xigency 10y ago
  If it opens in multiple tabs, then it isn't a pure SPA. (Relying on the browser tabs instead of tabs in your application.) If you have several tabbed views, then you would include tabs in your application.
  - dumbmatter 10y ago
    It is a pure SPA, you just have the option of opening multiple instances at the same time. Like I can open gmail in two tabs, but it's still an SPA. And yeah tabs in JS are possible and I might go down that route, it'll just be a lot of extra work to replicate a UI that already exists fine.
    - xigency 10y ago
      Here's an example: http://orteil.dashnet.org/cookieclicker/ http://orteil.dashnet.org/cookieclicker/ Opening another tab creates a new bakery, not a view into the same bakery. (This only works if you haven't played before or clear your cookies.) Edit: If you really want to keep the same functionality then you would need to bring server communication into the mix. It's possible to either run the simulation server-side, or at least communicate the state between tabs using a server. If you send an email in one Gmail window and it shows up in the other window, then I would guess it receives a message from the server to update.

dchuk 10y ago

Yes? I mean, you have to admit what you built is the epitome of edge case when it comes to how a browser is typically used, and is actually exactly the type of thing they want to optimize because basically if you aren't looking at the tab, it's not being used (generally). Maybe use electron or something?

dumbmatter 10y ago
I don't think that replacing a traditional desktop app with a web app is an edge case. That's one of the main points of HTML5.
- kbenson 10y ago
  I think what was meant by edge case is how you've architected this. Going by a statement in another comment of yours: > It is a pure SPA, you just have the option of opening multiple instances at the same time. Like I can open gmail in two tabs, but it's still an SPA. Gmail just runs the UI in the browser though, the actual work of processing, receiving and sending mail is not done in a tab. The tabs are just views into the system. It sounds like you are having one tab as both the client and the server, and separate tabs as clients to that other tab, which is pretty edge case. As someone else suggested, you could move the processing to the server, but I imagine that's not feasible because then you are centralizing the processing and you're paying for processing, not the people visiting. The more appropriate way to architect this (to my eyes, so take it for whatever you think it's worth) would be to use JS to manage tabs within the application (which you mentioned elsewhere already). The really simple way to implement this might be to have the JS tabs just contain an iframe to the prior implementation's real separate tab URL (since it already works that way, there's not likely to be any security issues you have to deal with).
- euyyn 10y ago
  The way you architected it is uncommon, though. For example, with GMail, that you mentioned as achieving a similar effect, server communication is involved.

Cthulhu_ 10y ago

Make it a single page thing and spread the image out over multiple desktops. Make it a real desktop app instead. I do think Chrome / Google is (if they go through with this) actively going to fight against using the browser as an application platform though. At the very least they should give notifications to webapps that they are about to go to low-power mode, act differently when on a power cable, and check whether the tab is visible or not.

Nycto 10y ago

This isn't a full solution, but perhaps inter-tab communication would work? Use whichever tab is focused as the master, then other tabs send messages to the primary as they need work done. It wouldn't work when none of your tabs are focused, but perhaps that's an acceptable constraint.

dumbmatter 10y ago
That might work, but it's much more complicated and given the issues I'm already facing, I wouldn't want to rely on that communication actually happening (maybe background tab won't be able to send a signal to the foreground tab, since JS is apparently not running in the background tab).

benologist 10y ago

Iframe them onto one page and make the browser window huge. Something like: <iframe src="the url" width="50%" height="50%"> <iframe src="the url" width="50%" height="50%"> <iframe src="the url" width="50%" height="50%"> <iframe src="the url" width="50%" height="50%"> There's also the <frameset> and <frame> tags to divide pages between URLs.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

disiplus 10y ago

chrome regulary breaks something, so we run tested versions of chrome for our internal webapp and block chrome updates. but chrome does not like that and is always nagging and trying to trick you into installing the latest versions. i looks like we will have to package it as electron app.

ben_jones 10y ago

Could you create a tabbed interface that is just a dumb view of a server state communicated over websockets? Then the user could just open the page in n windows (each on its own tab) and have the same state represented in each?

dumbmatter 10y ago
Problem is, there is no server. All client side. So the tab on which you click "run simulation" is effectively the "server", except it stops running when the user switches tabs.
- skykooler 10y ago
  Put two of them in two iframes on the same page? No code changes should be needed
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- xigency 10y ago
  The fact that you don't have a backend is the limiting factor here.
  - dumbmatter 10y ago
    In some ways it's limiting, but overall it's a good thing. Less complexity, less network transfer, works offline, etc. It's just more challenging to do in JS/HTML than in your choice of traditional desktop app dev tools.
    - euyyn 10y ago
      GMail and Google Docs work offline too. Surely with things like Firebase it's less complex than inter-tab communication?

onion2k 10y ago

As a developer you need to decide whether or not to support a browser, and if that browser doesn't provide the APIs you need then you should drop support for that feature in that browser. In this case, if Chrome is making a change that you can't or won't change your game for then the solution is to detect Chrome and display a "This game only works in a single tab in Chrome. Try Firefox!" message if a user opens it in a second tab.

PetahNZ 10y ago
It's your customers that generally dictate what browser you support.
- rhizome 10y ago
  If you don't support a browser, how do you learn whether its users are your customers?
- xiaoma 10y ago
  Not if you have content or apps they really want. I prefer Firefox, but since Google broke Google Voice (now Hangouts) plugin for FF users, I've been grudgingly opening a Chrome browser each time I want to make a phone call to US number.
- onion2k 10y ago
  Some people are in the fortunate position where they can choose to ignore large sections of their potential customer base. Someone who writes a game as (presumably) a side project is in exactly that position.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

nialv7 10y ago

What about split the simulation into small, < 30 seconds chunks?

fixermark 10y ago

Nowadays, one writes ad-supported mobile games that nobody will pay for. ;) Would it be possible to just declare "Best played in Firefox?" It's a bit gauche, but if a browser's engine has a behavior that isn't really compatible with what you intend to do, that's the browser's fault.