How many is too many? Is anyone else having these problems?

[Make_a__Scene]

I have the problem on my iPad and phone sometimes, but no problems at all on my MacBook.
Could it also be the browser itself?

[benny5678]

my just slowed down and my computer is 1 year old appoximantly sorry for spelling but this would be useful caus eit slowed mine down to and that was alot of moving signatures on that page lol XD

[Tess]

That page slows down my computer too, it takes so long to load the gifs. I'd love to be able to just block them automatically but we apparently can't automate a blocker that requires measuring filesizes of .gifs (and the small .gifs aren't really a problem so we don't really want to just block them all).

I think if we make an official rule against it, people will quickly forget the rule exists within a week or 2, so it won't be super effective. Not to mention a lot of people don't know how to check the file size of images they've just found on the web so they'd probably be unwittingly breaking it even if they read the rule.

They'll probably just have to be removed on a case-by-case basis (i.e. if it slows down your computer excessively then report it, if it slows down my computer too then I'll remove it and let them know why they can't use it)

[hyaci]

Tess- why not have an option to block them all? No one would be forced to do it, but we could choose to.

[Schuyler]

I've never had any problems with gifs and I could view that page just fine. My computer is about a year or so old too. But if you go to your account settings, click on "board preferences", and then click on "edit display options", you can choose not to display signatures, avatars, flash animations, etc. Maybe that would help you.

[Shian]

That page is now drastically different from when the problem was first reported, so no you would not have a problem because the problem gifs have been removed. I also addressed your second point in the very second post in this thread.

[Tess]

Tess- why not have an option to block them all? No one would be forced to do it, but we could choose to.

If we had a thing to automatically block or hide gifs on command, it would hide a LOT of non-problematic images, since not all gifs are animated and not all animated gifs cause loading problems.

It would be about as effective as turning off signatures completely - there would be hardly anything left in signatures and you'd be hiding a lot of stuff that didn't need to be hidden. A lot of artwork is saved in gif format, animated or not, it's just a useful compression format for images. Most animated gifs (particularly stuff like pixel artwork) don't cause any major loading issues for anyone because they only contain a few colors, which keeps the file size down and makes them speedier to load. The only real problems for most people are caused by gifs which are like a video file turned into an image - e.g. clips of people's fav celebrities from scenes in movies. These typically have huge file sizes since the gif compression format isn't really designed for handling photos or videos, there are way too many colors involved in real life.

[Schuyler]

That page is now drastically different from when the problem was first reported, so no you would not have a problem because the problem gifs have been removed. I also addressed your second point in the very second post in this thread.

Alright, no need to be snippy. -_- I was just trying to help. It could be that that's the only way you would be able to solve the problem, so you may want to consider it anyway if the problem is really getting annoying, or you might have to just leave things the way they are and endure it if you really want to be able to see everyone's signatures and creativity. It's up to you, which is more important?

[Shian]

Considering I can have both, I choose both. I can just report the signatures that give my computer problems and adblock the rest. Thanks Tess.

[Nick]

I didn't notice any increased CPU usage on that page using Chrome, maybe Firefox just sucks at rendering animated GIFs?