Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Chrome 57 Limits Background Tabs Usage To 1% Per CPU Core (bleepingcomputer.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the limited-resources dept.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from BleepingComputer: Starting with Chrome 57, released last week, Google has put a muzzle on the amount of resources background tabs can use. According to Google engineers, Chrome 57 will temporarily delay a background tab's JavaScript timers if that tab is using more than 1% of a CPU core. Further, all background timers are suspended automatically after five minutes on mobile devices. The delay/suspension will halt resource consumption and cut down on battery usage, something that laptop, tablet, and smartphone owners can all relate. Google hinted in late January that it would limit JavaScript timers in background tabs, but nobody expected it to happen as soon as last week's Chrome release. By 2020, Google hopes to pause JavaScript operations in all background pages.

19 of 154 comments (clear)

  1. Blame yourselves.... by bobbied · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Web developers who write javascript that just keeps chewing up resources are why we have to resort to this.... You have no one to blame but yourselves for abusing the privilege of having active content that just sucks resources to get more add revenue....

    I know some of you developers actually think about such stuff and care about the end user's experience, but there are a few of you out there that are messing stuff up for all of us, so now the browser has to throttle you.. Thank You for nothing (from the rest of us).

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    1. Re:Blame yourselves.... by Luthair · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Its not really site developers for the most part - its f*cking ad networks, content networks, user tracking, etc.

    2. Re:Blame yourselves.... by CrashNBrn · · Score: 4, Informative

      It's both. Javascript image transforms are still grossly inefficient compared to any native image tool. Javascript keyboard and mouse hooks can make the whole browser sluggish. Then add in adverts that do all of that on top of possibly inline DOM manipulation. It's a freaking disaster.

    3. Re:Blame yourselves.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      "more add revenue"

      Surely at least one of those words is redundant. Add means addition or additional, so "more additional" is a strange thing to say. just "more revenue" or "additional revenue" would be sufficient.

      Or maybe you should just fucking learn that the abbreviation for "ADvertisement" is "ad" with one fucking d, dipshit.

  2. Good uses for background by phantomfive · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I used to wish browsers would do this. But now I know that there are good uses for background processes, even though limiting them to 1% seems fine to me.

    For example, slack changes the tab title and icon when an event happens, like a new message. Gmail updates the title to show how many messages you have. These are reasonable use cases.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re:Good uses for background by ohnocitizen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This feature should allow whitelisting domains to keep javascript fully active. I want my email client to keep running javascript. I don't want some random news page I left open to decide it's time to launch a video ad.

    2. Re:Good uses for background by jfisherwa · · Score: 4, Informative

      Added a comment above .. but don't want you to miss it .. The Great Suspender extension for Chrome:

      https://chrome.google.com/webs...

    3. Re:Good uses for background by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Informative

      How much of your quad core 3GHz CPU does the email client need? 1% is still 4x30MHz cores. People used to read email on single core CPUs running under 10MHz, and those cores didn't have advanced features like cache or single cycle multipliers or branch prediction or out-of-order execution.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  3. What happens to notifications? by lucasnate1 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm using facebook and google hangouts to communicate with people. Since I don't want to install applications, I use them as browser tabs. Does this mean I will no longer get noticed when someone messages me?

    --
    Avantgarde Hebrew science fiction
    1. Re:What happens to notifications? by strikethree · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Does this mean I will no longer get noticed when someone messages me?

      If the notifications take more than 1% of a modern processor, then yes, you will not receive timely notifications. It should be noted at this time that fully memory-protected, graphical interface, mostly modernish operating systems used to run with less CPU than even .1% of a modern CPU (Amiga, m68k). I would commit suicide in despair if a notification takes more CPU power than a full operating system. (Why yes, I am preparing the nitrogen bag and morphine now.)

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
  4. Re:Javascript 2017? by tepples · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Because making a web app in JavaScript is cheaper than making five native apps, one each for Windows, macOS, GNU/Linux, iOS, and Android.

  5. If this saves battery power... by viperidaenz · · Score: 4, Funny

    Is Microsoft going to stop spamming me with notifications to use Edge on my laptop because my battery will last 30% longer when ever I open Chrome?

  6. Audio and WebSockets defeat this by tepples · · Score: 5, Informative

    sometimes I'll listen to a podcast/music in a another tab

    Then this does not affect you. From the featured article:

    The good news is that background tabs playing audio or maintaining real-time connections like WebSockets or WebRTC won’t be affected by the 1% CPU usage limit.

  7. Re:Javascript 2017? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    making a web app in JavaScript

    But nobody does that. They make ordinary webpages that use 500KB of javascript code to make something that looks (and feels) like a cheap 40KB HTML page based on iframes from back in 1996. Big static posters with HD stock images, 3 lines of text, and a download/email button. Why do these pages need javascript at all? What is javascript for?!

  8. I Like This Change by TranquilVoid · · Score: 5, Funny

    A step in the right direction. Next they'll be limiting chome.exe processes to only 80% of installed RAM!

  9. Re: Javascript 2017? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ads and trackers

  10. Re:I just block all of it by tepples · · Score: 3, Informative

    Now I just want this feature for firefox

    It's not quite the same, but opening about:config and setting privacy.trackingprotection.enabled to true will blacklist a lot of abusive adtech.

  11. Re:Javascript 2017? by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 3, Insightful

    the whole internet runs on javascript, just saying

    The web isn't the internet, just saying.

  12. Hooray, now how about memory? by sabbede · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Do background tabs really need to eat a quarter-gig?