• Vilx- (unregistered)

    Mmm, large favicons. I think I once made that. The webpage was an intranet (thank god) frontend for the flagship desktop erp application. So naturally I just grabbed the .ico file from the desktop application and promptly forgot about it. Until a few years down the road while doing some actual optimization I realized that it weighed over 400kb. Oops. :P

  • JustSomeDudette (unregistered)

    My Grandma and your Grandma sitting by the server, my Grandma said to your Grandma "I'm going to set your bandwidth on fire". Talk-in' 'bout, Hey now ! Hey now ! Ico, Ico fav-icon. Just gonna grab a fresh copy every time, grab a fresh copy now.

  • Medinoc (unregistered)

    I've checked out my own 256256 icons: Even with ten icon versions in (1616, 3232, 4848, times 4-bit, 8-bit, 32-bit plus the 25625632 PNG) their size tops at 70KB.

    Which probably means in their icon, the 25625632 version was stored as a raw bitmap instead of PNG.

  • Medinoc (unregistered) in reply to Medinoc

    Whoops, forgot asterisks are special in this site's comments. Oh well, still understandable.

  • dpm (unregistered)

    $ cp /dev/null /virtual/mydomainname/webpages/favicon.ico

    Works a treat.

  • slavdude (nodebb)

    Hiring by buzzword is a pretty common practice.

    So is eliminating qualified candidates.

  • Carl Witthoft (google)

    So don't leave us hanging in suspense: what was the next fire?

  • jmm (unregistered) in reply to Carl Witthoft

    Ohhh no, no way. One Hanzo series was enough.

  • Mike (unregistered)

    Is cold fusion now a thing (again) ?

  • Scarlet_Manuka (nodebb)

    Wouldn't it have been better, rather than making a PNG version and a stripped down ICO version and deciding which to serve to whom, to modify the caching policy so that favicon.ico could be served from cache?

  • Steve_The_Cynic (nodebb) in reply to Scarlet_Manuka

    Probably, but of course they once had an issue with one customer on a weird temporary build of a strange browser, and rather than telling him to go fornicate with himself (politely), they screwed up everything for everyone.

  • Valhar2000 (unregistered) in reply to Scarlet_Manuka

    If they did that, the old caching-related bug would likely come back. They'd need to investigate and solve that bug first, but their "only put out fires" policy would forbid it.

  • Zenith (unregistered)

    The solution was to properly compress the ICO (less at the lower end, more at the upper end) and set it to be cacheable.

    The constant firefighting reminds me of a bad job that I had for a few months. To continue the fire metaphor, there was never time to actually put the fire out, so it was left to smolder until it could restart later. There were a few lead "developers" who just kept churning out bug after bug for everybody else to deal with the consequences of and they were supremely butthurt if anything they did was ever challenged. Afterall, never-ending "triage" was somebody else's problem. And this is why I immediately turn down any and all work from the insurance industry; no time for primadonnas like that.

  • dr memals (unregistered)

    the bots are on fire. Why not have button to flag them?

  • Reelix (unregistered)

    Sheesh - That's quite some spam....

  • cr0sh (unregistered)

    This is an employer which, if you have any marketable skills at all, you don't walk - you RUN - away from and seek better pastures.

Leave a comment on “Icon on Fire”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article