Technology
This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.
Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.
Rules:
1: All Lemmy rules apply
2: Do not post low effort posts
3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff
4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.
5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)
6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist
7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed
view the rest of the comments
I did. The author talks about both and associates one with the other. It really only talks about 2 factors: web page size and CPU utilization. And that CPU speed hasn't out paced web page bloat. And then uses the data table to try and prove the point.
I'm not denying that low end devices can have trouble browsing the web. I have issue with the claim that CPU performance hasn't scaled with web page bloat because there are far more factors than just CPU performance and web page bloat in the tests, such as: everything else running on the device (OS, other apps, etc) RAM speed and size, storage speed and size (hopefully doesn't come into play but you never know), network connectivity strength, etc.
It's not even close to an "all else equal" type of testing.
Those so-called low-end devices are still technically fairly powerful computing devices that aren't even used used to do anything that ought to be very taxing. They're displaying what ought to basically be a text medium.
In my eyes the problem is squarely with the way the sites are designed (and their 967 partners that are interested in whatever you're clicking on).