Hi there, On 30 Apr 2003 at 14:29:16 +0200, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> > > At work (fastest possible connection, I work for an > > > internet provider), 75% of the time (2 to 2.5 seconds) > > > is used to load and display the icons in the pager. > > > Is there a big penalty for loading 20 small files? > > > > What do you mean by penalty in this context? > > Performance penalty. Slowing down the load time. Maybe I am a bit slow today but I don't see any coherence between a couple of small image files and a performance penalty (if there is such a thing). > I can hardly believe that rendering 20 tiny images takes > more than 1.5 seconds. Okay, mozilla is slow, but not > *this* slow(?) Have you checked the render times by using a local version of the web page? You may save the web page with mozilla and load it again afterwards. > The page is initially displayed with the "window" using all the > available page width. When the pager frame is loaded, the window > shrinks to make room for the pager. I don't see it with mozilla > 1.2.1 here (fast connection), but with 1.0 on my ISDN line. I think this can be hardly avoided with gecko. Netscape4.x starts render the table if it got all image and text information this avoids the layout change you described but displays nothing until all contents have been loaded. Gecko starts rendering even it has not all information. Regards, Uwe -- ,_, Uwe Pross (O,O) mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ( ) http://www.tu-chemnitz.de/~uwp =-"-"-================================ -- Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>. To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
