From 7a7b2a807ad68d299abcdf7f85869048d952516f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Raymond Hill Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 08:07:24 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] =?UTF-8?q?Updated=20Does=20=C2=B5Block=20block=20ads=20or?= =?UTF-8?q?=20just=20hide=20them=3F=20(markdown)?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit --- Does-µBlock-block-ads-or-just-hide-them?.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/Does-µBlock-block-ads-or-just-hide-them?.md b/Does-µBlock-block-ads-or-just-hide-them?.md index b12dd1f..2785481 100644 --- a/Does-µBlock-block-ads-or-just-hide-them?.md +++ b/Does-µBlock-block-ads-or-just-hide-them?.md @@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ When a network request is filtered, **both** uBlock and ABP will collapse the DO In **both** uBlock and ABP, this occurs **after** the DOM is loaded, so in both cases, users **may** be able to visually notice the placeholder collapsing after the page loads. -Yet, uBlock is at an advantage in such case, because since uBlock does not inject thousands of CSS rules in a page (and frames within that page), this means it makes itself available sooner to handle the task of collapsing the DOM counterpart of network requests. This can be clearly appreciated in the following [test page](http://raymondhill.net/ublock/tiles1.html): +Yet, uBlock is at an advantage in such case: since it does not inject thousands of CSS rules in a page (and frames within that page), this means it makes itself available sooner to handle the task of collapsing the DOM counterpart of network requests. This can be clearly appreciated in the following [test page](http://raymondhill.net/ublock/tiles1.html): - Chromium + uBlock: minimal flickering (sometimes none) - Chromium + ABP: noticeable flickering