- From: Michael Kozakewich <mkozakewich@icosidodecahedron.com>
- Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 06:17:11 -0500
From: "Ian Hickson" <ian@hixie.ch> Sent: Thursday, July 30, 2009 7:26 PM > On Mon, 20 Jul 2009, David Wilson wrote: >> It's easy to see how some naively implemented JS audio widget could >> fetch 200mb over an expensive 3G connection, simply by navigating to >> some site in a background tab (say, by creating an array of elements to >> represent their playlist - something I'd have thought was perfectly >> valid behaviour). > > A mobile phone would not autobuffer in a background tab. 3G is becoming more common for computers or laptops, as well as natively in some netbooks. 200MB would cost me a couple dollars, when I expect most sites to be almost free. (I've actually had this problem when friends post The Daily Show's embedded player, which autobuffers -- unlike YouTube videos.) 3G is easier to carry around, and I see it becoming far more common in the future (especially after 4G comes), which would suggest keeping large transfers as opt-in as possible.
Received on Friday, 31 July 2009 04:17:11 UTC