Google must have gone "nuts"...

[Hermite15]

If it can't handle that, it's probably outdated really for anything else as well...

hey, can you stop posting negative stuff everywhere you can...I think that's enough, you're doing that everywhere on every topic and every forum you post...just spreading your negative impressions about everything...there are cures...pills...therapies etc...nobody here is concerned with your own personal depression alright? 

to display >>> no need to worry, people with recent systems, including myself, posted in the Google thread about the issue...

[RejZoR]

I'm suppose to be depressed and negative and you guys are complaining over a webpage animation that won't be there tomorrow. Just a thought...

[Hard_ROCKER]

More like reporting a bug...

I am seeing around 20-30 percent cpu usage with IE8 and it appears normal on Chrome(latest stable).

[Hermite15]

I'm suppose to be depressed and negative and you guys are complaining over a webpage animation that won't be there tomorrow. Just a thought...

a thought >>> keep thinking I like it

[RejZoR]

Around 9%... it's not like i'm gonna stick around main page for long. In fact i never really see the Google page since i'm typing everything in the URL bar. "g buckyballs" and i search in Google for term "buckyballs".

[polonus]

Dear Forum Friends,

I do not have the Buckyball nuisance at all because I have NoScript and RequestPolicy installed. I have to allow with NoScript first before it is shown to roll, another few extra points for the universal protection of NoScript in the browser, even watches over my CPU wherever I go...

polonus

[RejZoR]

It's 60% CPU utilization on Atom N270 1,6GHz. And i can't see any downside of it. Everything is responsive as usual. And we all know Atoms are total crap compared even to full fledged single cores. And hardly anyone uses one today where dual cores are something casual.

[FreewheelinFrank]

Maybe it's time to upgrade systems, don't you think? I've seen it on my animation and haven't realy noticed it's causing problems to my system...

No, I don't.

This is a humongous javascript animation of 60 dots and a large number of connecting lines* in 3D space. If a computer can run this, it can run any web page out there. This is in the browser after all, and not utilising the graphics card, as far as I know.

* Any mathematicians out there? 60 points forming 12 pentagons and 20 hexagons- how many links and therefore connecting lines in 3D space to animate does that make?

It's interesting to note how different browsers handle this task: on my system, Opera and Chrome both faired a lot better than Firefox.

[Jahn]

The page is definitely heavy on my XP 32 2.0GB RAM 512MB VRAM system. I would hate to have Google as my home page right now.

[polonus]

Hi Jahn,

With NoScript in the Mozilla browser (e.g. Fx or Flock) you would not even notice you missed it,
until you actually allowed it to run, you still see Go gle,
the missing o would give it away something should be there,
at least for me, but there's so much I do not have to worry about because running NoScript,

polonus

All of the Fullereen code attached here as a txt file...

[disPlay]

If it can't handle that, it's probably outdated really for anything else as well...

CPU
   Intel Pentium E2180  @ 2.00GHz   44 °C
RAM
   2.0GB Single-Channel DDR2 @ 399MHz (5-5-5-15)
Motherboard
   ASUSTeK Computer INC. P5KPL-VM (Socket 775)
Graphics
   1024MB GeForce GTS 250 (CardExpert Technology)   47 °C


If with this setup the machine is how it was I don't want to see it with a P4 CPU or something before that.

[polonus]

Hi folks,

NoScript block this, but I cannot make it go with NukeAnything advanced, hxtp://www.google.nl/search?q=Fullereen&ct=buckyball10-hp&oi=ddle

polonus

[Alan Baxter]

With NoScript in the Mozilla browser (e.g. Fx or Flock) you would not even notice you missed it,

Well, actually most NoScript users would still see it.  NoScript's default configuration allows google.com.  Many of us leave it enabled so we can use our other Google services such as gmail and greader.

I don't want to see it with a P4 CPU or something before that.

I agree.  Unfortunately, I'm running XP Pro on a 600MHz PIII, so the animation uses 100% of a CPU.  Fortunately, XP Pro multitasks pretty efficiently and I hardly notice the slowdown.  (It also helps that I have a dual CPU sytem; there's a whole CPU left over that bucky baby doesn't get to touch.)  That said, I use all my spare CPU for running World Community Grid in the background.  I don't like seeing Google gratuitously grabbing so much CPU that would otherwise be used for processing medical research data.

[polonus]

Hi Alan Baxter,

I use the NS extension for what it should be used for, namely also to block 100% CPU consuming code. A pity when it is on google.com, hard for the developer of the "gimmick", but NS gives me the opportunity to block that also. To work NS in combination with RP (RequestPolicy) even makes that I can fine tune what to allow or disallow into my Mozilla browser flaw. Without these add-ons I would feel very, very uncomfortable. But again you must take some time to know how to work these extensions. It is not such a hard thing to do to come up with a lame excuse "It is over my head, so I refrain from using it or the few extra clicks will take the fun out of browsing for me (and let insecurity in - i.m.h.o.), but I do not want to go into a discussion thread like this one again: http://forum.avast.com/index.php?topic=61140.0

polonus

[Hermite15]

guys, again don't bother with NS as blocking google.com JS of course works, but that's a problem when you visit other google sites...gmail etc...you're better off just switching google.com to ssl, it takes just a sec and you're done until they remove that crap.