><script>...</script>
><script>...</script>
><script>...</script>
><script>...</script>
><script>...</script>
><script>...</script>
>...
And shitty filtering

>>1142
>>1143
Void has a thread for user feedback. It got buried after a few more people joined this sekrit club.
Maybe you could suggest something. I wish I could help but I know jack shit about making websites.

>>266

>>1142
>>1143
>>1144
Yeah anon please leave your suggestions to improve the website. We got tons of good ideas from anons before
Also I just created the https://umigalaxy.com/explore/meta board

>>1146
Good call, it was getting pretty crowded.

>>1146
Cool, but whatever you're doing is insanely slow.
Scrolling in the Information -> About Us page lags as I get to the bottom of the page.
Have you considered using the ancient practice of sending actual HTML?

>>1149
I think I'm gonna look for a more robust way to measure performance. I pretty much only use the website on my desktop with fiber connection so I need to cover my blind spots
>Scrolling in the Information -> About Us page lags as I get to the bottom of the page.
>Have you considered using the ancient practice of sending actual HTML?
This https://umigalaxy.com/about page should have been one of the fastest, maybe it's the bg-black/40 backdrop-blur-md, I'm gonna have to investigate this

>>1151
Vid so you can see what I mean. Catalogue scrolling is at least as bad as that.

>>1153
What web browser is that? I can't seem to replicate this in Chrome or Brave.
It could be a rendering problem on your browser.

>>1153
Damn that's crazy, it's a million times worse than I thought.
I downloaded Zen Browser and I'm not seeing the issue, there must be some obscure bug causing this.
Thanks a lot for taking your time to make a video, I really had no idea.
@webpgoy have you experienced anything like this?

>>1154
Lol I pinged you the exact same moment you posted

This is why people hate web development

>>1155
Nah, nothing. I'm on an i5-6500 desktop PC with only an intel HD 530 iGPU.

>>1156
np

>>1157
I recommend buying a used windows laptop that's around 10 years old, base model i3 CPU but no dedicated GPU. Might act as a useful optimization test device.
I know modern web browsers web browsers try to offload most rendering tasks to the GPU but on really old computers they might be forced to fallback on software rendering.

>>1155
>>1157
Firefox has a built-in performance analyzer under Shift+F5 -> Performance which might help.
This is on my laptop, so it's not beefy at all. Loading time is one thing, but scrolling is not an issue even on any of the big slop sites.

>>1158
I also tested on an i7 laptop from 2013, I think my dad has an ever older laptop so I might test there next time I drop by
>>1159
I'm gonna do some research, this shouldn't be happening at all

>>1157
I GOT IT: disable hardware acceleration on your web browser. I was able to replicate >>1153 that way.
Best case scenario Firefox is still a bad web browser, worst case scenario anon's CPU might be falling back to software rendering
Maybe the latter could be fixed if you auto-detect that the user doesn't have hardware acceleration? If so you could turn off smooth scrolling/animations/flares for them...

>>1159
>Firefox
I gave up on that thing years ago man, it would crash on some websites but not on Chrome, check your RAM usage you might have a memory leak because of Firefox.
So yeah it could be improper hardware acceleration support. Maybe try Chromium if you hate chrome and brave.

>>1161
>I GOT IT: disable hardware acceleration on your web browser. I was able to replicate >>1153 that way.
Damn, good job man lol
I think years ago I used to disable hardware acceleration as well for some reason I can't remember

>>1162
Anon I created a Lite Mode toggle in the footer, please see if it fixes your problem

>>1167
Yes, thank you, it runs well now.
I didn't realize how many blurs you had going on until I hit the toggle.