Live data from Hacker News

Browsers are pretty good at loading pages

carter.sande.duodecima.technology

1–10 of 328 posts

Re: Browsers are pretty good at loading pages

#3
I don't get client side navigation. It's a worse experience in every way. It's slow, often doesn't support things like command-click, it usually breaks the back button, and even if it doesn't it breaks the restoration of the scroll position.

The only thing worse is a custom scroll UI.

Why do people try to reinvent the most basic features of a webbrowser? And if they do, why do they always only do a half-assed job at it?

It's infuriating.

Re: Browsers are pretty good at loading pages

#4

I don't get client side navigation. It's a worse experience in every way. It's slow, often doesn't support things like command-click, it usually breaks the back button, and even if it doesn't it breaks the restoration of the scroll position. The only thing worse is a custom scroll UI. Why do people try to reinvent the most basic features of a webbrowser? And if they do, why do they always only do a half-assed job at…

Slow? I'm quite sure the whole point of client side apps is for them to be substantially faster - and most are.

Re: Browsers are pretty good at loading pages

#5

I don't get client side navigation. It's a worse experience in every way. It's slow, often doesn't support things like command-click, it usually breaks the back button, and even if it doesn't it breaks the restoration of the scroll position. The only thing worse is a custom scroll UI. Why do people try to reinvent the most basic features of a webbrowser? And if they do, why do they always only do a half-assed job at…

Slow? I'm quite sure the whole point of client side apps is for them to be substantially faster - and most are.

Did you read the article?

Re: Browsers are pretty good at loading pages

#7
He says the reason people code client-side navigations is to load pages more quickly. That's not the reason. Client-side navigation evolved from single page apps, where we use javascript to create dynamic content on the fly, for example a chat application. Now that you're a stateful single page app, we need to rebuild page navigation if our single-page-app has more than one "page". I understand that projects like Gatsby have used this technique for performance, but I see no reason that today's performance optimizations will be valid tomorrow. Page load performance is not the need driving this pattern generally.

Re: Browsers are pretty good at loading pages

#10

I don't get client side navigation. It's a worse experience in every way. It's slow, often doesn't support things like command-click, it usually breaks the back button, and even if it doesn't it breaks the restoration of the scroll position. The only thing worse is a custom scroll UI. Why do people try to reinvent the most basic features of a webbrowser? And if they do, why do they always only do a half-assed job at…

Sadly I think this is true for a lot of sites. However my experience has been that many (particularly in the last 3-5 years) support command-click, back button navigation, and scroll position restoration.

More often than not, I've seen that tracking scripts break this more than anything else. Particularly command+click.

Still - it'd be great of there was an API to preserve UI state moving into a new entry in browser history. I don't want to lose scroll position for a sidebar if I'm drilling down into a large list of data.

Being able to add hints through markup for when to preserve UI state could go a long way towards making page-refresh based form and navigation behavior competitive again.

Post reply on HN