3 ms·

Too many to name, really. <link rel=preload> is one that immediately comes to mind.

by Touche 9y ago

db48x 9y ago
Use <link rel=prefetch> instead. This has existed for the entire lifetime of Firefox, all the way back to the first release when it was called Phoenix.
- Touche 9y ago
  Prefetch is a different thing, and it doesn't give priority to fetch the resource. Preloading, for example, a script is exactly equivalent to adding the script tag minus the execution part.
cpeterso 9y ago
A Firefox patch to implement <link rel=preload> is being reviewed right now: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1222633 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1222633
bzbarsky 9y ago
You mean the thing that is not actually supported in any browser other than Chrome, because Google just came up with it a few months ago to replace <link rel="prefetch">, which worked in most brosers? (Yes, I know Safari technical preview has support, but shipping Safari does not. We'll see whether Firefox ends up shipping support before Safari or not; the patches to implement <link rel="preload"> in Firefox got posted to https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1222633 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1222633 earlier today.)
acdha 9y ago
As people have pointed out, that's Chrome-only at the moment but that's also a big moving of the goal-posts. Your original comment was “far behind in a variety of features that are useful to a much bigger % of the web” — precisely how much user-visible benefit do you think comes from a feature which may accelerate the first load slightly? If that was that critical, it'd be easy to point to e.g. webpagetest.org traces showing Chrome loading a site significantly faster. And, yes, you can find differences in microbenchmarks but it's pretty rare to find something where rel=preload is a game-changer.
- fixermark 9y ago
  How much user-visible benefit? Do a quick text search of this Hacker News thread for people talking about Firefox "feeling" slower than Chrome. Preload is a big underlying "why" of that experience.
  - acdha 9y ago
    Again, do you have any firm data supporting the assertion that this form of network prefetching is so critical? I've read many comments where people mention performance in ways suggesting they have issues with UI performance, launch time, extensions, etc. Optimizing cold-cache performance the first time someone visits a site won't help with that at all.
- eridius 9y ago
  Safari Technology Preview is adding support for <link rel=preload> as well. I'm not sure what the current state is, but the last 2 releases both had changes that were related to this.
- Touche 9y ago
  Moving goal post? Preloading is useful on every single web page that, for example, loads a script. Not just 3D games, but any web page with scripting.
  - acdha 9y ago
    Keep reading the entire comment: the point wasn't that rel=preload isn't useful but rather questioning the assertion that it's this huge game-changing feature which is causing ordinary people to switch browsers. If you actually run benchmarks, it's nice but hardly a game-changer, especially in the post-HTTP/2 world. If you're concerned about cold page load times most sites will see significantly greater benefit from using fewer blocking resources.
    - Touche 9y ago
      I don't recall saying that it was "game-changing", I said that it was useful for a large number of web pages, unlike webassembly which is useful for a very small number of specialized needs. Same for modules, or Intersection Observer or many other features that FF is not shipping. Stop trying to prove me wrong and understand my point. Firefox is slow on stuff that makes regular old web developers lives easier, because they're chasing 3d games.
urda 9y ago
... a chrome only feature, pushed by Google, that isn't considered a standard? This type of thinking and behavior is going to make Chrome today what Internet Explorer was in the 90's: a toxic, dangerous platform that ignores standards.
- Touche 9y ago
  Sorry, it's not Chrome-only. I don't particular care whose idea it originally was. It's a good feature and other browsers are implementing it.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]

Too many to name, really. <link rel=preload> is one that immediately comes to mind.

by Touche 9y ago

Too many to name, really. <link rel=preload> is one that immediately comes to mind.

Use <link rel=prefetch> instead. This has existed for the entire lifetime of Firefox, all the way back to the first release when it was called Phoenix.

Touche 9y ago
Prefetch is a different thing, and it doesn't give priority to fetch the resource. Preloading, for example, a script is exactly equivalent to adding the script tag minus the execution part.

cpeterso 9y ago

A Firefox patch to implement <link rel=preload> is being reviewed right now: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1222633 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1222633

bzbarsky 9y ago

You mean the thing that is not actually supported in any browser other than Chrome, because Google just came up with it a few months ago to replace <link rel="prefetch">, which worked in most brosers? (Yes, I know Safari technical preview has support, but shipping Safari does not. We'll see whether Firefox ends up shipping support before Safari or not; the patches to implement <link rel="preload"> in Firefox got posted to https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1222633 https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1222633 earlier today.)

acdha 9y ago

As people have pointed out, that's Chrome-only at the moment but that's also a big moving of the goal-posts. Your original comment was “far behind in a variety of features that are useful to a much bigger % of the web” — precisely how much user-visible benefit do you think comes from a feature which may accelerate the first load slightly? If that was that critical, it'd be easy to point to e.g. webpagetest.org traces showing Chrome loading a site significantly faster. And, yes, you can find differences in microbenchmarks but it's pretty rare to find something where rel=preload is a game-changer.

fixermark 9y ago
How much user-visible benefit? Do a quick text search of this Hacker News thread for people talking about Firefox "feeling" slower than Chrome. Preload is a big underlying "why" of that experience.
- acdha 9y ago
  Again, do you have any firm data supporting the assertion that this form of network prefetching is so critical? I've read many comments where people mention performance in ways suggesting they have issues with UI performance, launch time, extensions, etc. Optimizing cold-cache performance the first time someone visits a site won't help with that at all.
eridius 9y ago
Safari Technology Preview is adding support for <link rel=preload> as well. I'm not sure what the current state is, but the last 2 releases both had changes that were related to this.
Touche 9y ago
Moving goal post? Preloading is useful on every single web page that, for example, loads a script. Not just 3D games, but any web page with scripting.
- acdha 9y ago
  Keep reading the entire comment: the point wasn't that rel=preload isn't useful but rather questioning the assertion that it's this huge game-changing feature which is causing ordinary people to switch browsers. If you actually run benchmarks, it's nice but hardly a game-changer, especially in the post-HTTP/2 world. If you're concerned about cold page load times most sites will see significantly greater benefit from using fewer blocking resources.
  - Touche 9y ago
    I don't recall saying that it was "game-changing", I said that it was useful for a large number of web pages, unlike webassembly which is useful for a very small number of specialized needs. Same for modules, or Intersection Observer or many other features that FF is not shipping. Stop trying to prove me wrong and understand my point. Firefox is slow on stuff that makes regular old web developers lives easier, because they're chasing 3d games.

urda 9y ago

... a chrome only feature, pushed by Google, that isn't considered a standard? This type of thinking and behavior is going to make Chrome today what Internet Explorer was in the 90's: a toxic, dangerous platform that ignores standards.

Touche 9y ago
Sorry, it's not Chrome-only. I don't particular care whose idea it originally was. It's a good feature and other browsers are implementing it.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]