Thought certainly an interesting anecdote, I don't understand how a video streaming site like YouTube would be useful in a market where a 100K download takes 2+ minutes. You'd have to open a page, walk away for an hour, and hope everything was OK when you got back.
Page Weight Matters (2012)
11–20 of 171 posts
Re: Page Weight Matters (2012)
#12If you have an engineering mind and care about such things - you care about complexity. Even if you don't - user experience matters to everyone. Have you ever seen something completely insane and everyone around doesn't seem to recognize how awful it really is. That is the web of today. 60-80 requests? 1MB+ single pages? Your functionality, I don't care if its Facebook - does not need that much. It is not necessary.…
Honestly, I think "a daily drumbeat about how bloated, how needlessly complex, how ridiculous most of the world's web applications really are" pretty much describes every HN conversation on any article with even a remote connection to web technologies.
Re: Page Weight Matters (2012)
#13If you have an engineering mind and care about such things - you care about complexity. Even if you don't - user experience matters to everyone. Have you ever seen something completely insane and everyone around doesn't seem to recognize how awful it really is. That is the web of today. 60-80 requests? 1MB+ single pages? Your functionality, I don't care if its Facebook - does not need that much. It is not necessary.…
Honestly, I think "a daily drumbeat about how bloated, how needlessly complex, how ridiculous most of the world's web applications really are" pretty much describes every HN conversation on any article with even a remote connection to web technologies.
Jeez, you aren't kidding. It's as though, if we bitch enough about the technical deficiencies, the economic and social circumstances that cause them will, I dunno, vanish into thin air I guess. This topic is pretty much just red meat here
Re: Page Weight Matters (2012)
#14Thought certainly an interesting anecdote, I don't understand how a video streaming site like YouTube would be useful in a market where a 100K download takes 2+ minutes. You'd have to open a page, walk away for an hour, and hope everything was OK when you got back.
I only ever watch youtube videos via youtube-dl, but I still use a browser to navigate the site to find videos to download.
Re: Page Weight Matters (2012)
#15Comments from the last time this was posted: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4957992
Wow. The verge was the poster child for most bloated site even three years ago, long before the recent ruckus.
Re: Page Weight Matters (2012)
#16It is insane. One of my favourites is the "about.me" site, which is meant to be a simple online business card. Picking a random page from https://about.me/people/featured, you get a page weighing over 3MB!
http://tools.pingdom.com/fpt/#!/F4VDN/https://about.me/penta...
Re: Page Weight Matters (2012)
#17Earlier quoted context omitted.
whoosh! You missed the whole point.
That you can't always look at a single metric as a basis for success? This is rudimentary analytics here. Is there a single person who believes making client side code heavy is the way to go? Do people really think user experience should take a back seat to cool stuff on a site like YouTube?
Try "what makes a site merely inconvenient for some can render it completely unusable for others, and so one should not overlook minor issues because they don't seem worth fixing."
Re: Page Weight Matters (2012)
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
whoosh! You missed the whole point.
That you can't always look at a single metric as a basis for success? This is rudimentary analytics here. Is there a single person who believes making client side code heavy is the way to go? Do people really think user experience should take a back seat to cool stuff on a site like YouTube?
The problem of unknown unknowns.
Re: Page Weight Matters (2012)
#19Coming from a low bandwidth, high latency part of the world, I can't confirm this enough.
Today, I have 2 mbit and can use Netflix or Youtube just fine, but mere 4 years ago, I had 600k and, boy, that was hard. Hard as in loading youtube URL and go for a coffee.
UPDATE:
In case Duolingo developers are listening, please test your site on high latency and very low bandwidth scenarios. I just love your site, but lessons behave too strangely when internet is bad here.