Live data from Hacker News

Rebuilding our tech stack for the new facebook.com

engineering.fb.com

11–20 of 489 posts

Re: Rebuilding our tech stack for the new facebook.com

#11
post #2

It looks a lot like the new Twitter. I guess the new trend is just to show multiple tabs from the mobile app at once as the desktop site.

it is yahoo from the 90s

https://cdn.searchenginejournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/...

Nothing new under the sun

Re: Rebuilding our tech stack for the new facebook.com

#14
post #3

Great write up. Glad to see they're making some changes as the current interface still feels like 2005 with the main feed at 500px wide. And as always, dark mode is welcome. I really hope this helps performance on the site. In the past year or so I've been noticing that when the page sits in an unfocused tab for a while, clicking back usually takes 20+ seconds to actually load and I'm stuck at a white screen. It actu…

I've been using the new Facebook and the interface is even slower than before. It also feels (may not actually be) less information-dense, forcing me to interact with the page more to see the same information, compounding the problem.

This is on a i7 laptop.

Re: Rebuilding our tech stack for the new facebook.com

#15
post #6
post #3

Great write up. Glad to see they're making some changes as the current interface still feels like 2005 with the main feed at 500px wide. And as always, dark mode is welcome. I really hope this helps performance on the site. In the past year or so I've been noticing that when the page sits in an unfocused tab for a while, clicking back usually takes 20+ seconds to actually load and I'm stuck at a white screen. It actu…

> And as always, dark mode is welcome. I don't get this infatuation with dark mode, beyond it looking cool. People claim it helps with eye strain, but a brighter background constricts your pupils, improving focus.

Just wanted to point out you might’ve pasted the wrong snippet, which is about eBay’s policies.

Re: Rebuilding our tech stack for the new facebook.com

#16
post #6
post #3

Great write up. Glad to see they're making some changes as the current interface still feels like 2005 with the main feed at 500px wide. And as always, dark mode is welcome. I really hope this helps performance on the site. In the past year or so I've been noticing that when the page sits in an unfocused tab for a while, clicking back usually takes 20+ seconds to actually load and I'm stuck at a white screen. It actu…

> And as always, dark mode is welcome. I don't get this infatuation with dark mode, beyond it looking cool. People claim it helps with eye strain, but a brighter background constricts your pupils, improving focus.

In my experience light mode will work fine on things like e-paper displays, but when you have an emissive or transmissive display the bright light can be straining.

I also feel like dark mode highlights text more, making it easier to identify the text. If I use light mode in text editors I get completely lost very quickly.

Re: Rebuilding our tech stack for the new facebook.com

#18
post #3

Great write up. Glad to see they're making some changes as the current interface still feels like 2005 with the main feed at 500px wide. And as always, dark mode is welcome. I really hope this helps performance on the site. In the past year or so I've been noticing that when the page sits in an unfocused tab for a while, clicking back usually takes 20+ seconds to actually load and I'm stuck at a white screen. It actu…

I've been using the new Facebook and the interface is even slower than before. It also feels (may not actually be) less information-dense, forcing me to interact with the page more to see the same information, compounding the problem. This is on a i7 laptop.

Interesting to hear. I haven't gotten the new interface yet, so time will tell.

I think we need to shift back to 4:3 displays. Widescreen is great for consuming content, but we lose so much vertical space.

Re: Rebuilding our tech stack for the new facebook.com

#19
Quite sincerely, it's a total failure. I got the chance to try the new interface, and it's so slow that it's barely usable. It's even slower than the old website, that was already painfully slow.

Loading a random profile takes 8 seconds. Opening a messenger discussion takes 6 seconds. It reminds me of the new Reddit website. Facebook was more enjoyable to use 12 years ago.

It's really sad that in 2020, 10k+ engineers can't make a photo, video, post and message sharing website that is not a pain to use. We collectively failed as a profession. If one needs 2MB of CSS for such a website, there is clearly a problem.

Re: Rebuilding our tech stack for the new facebook.com

#20
post #4

This is 100% incidental complexity. It's painful to consider that this level of sophisticated engineering is needed to render a website quickly in 2020. What went wrong? I'm personally excited about things like turbolinks and phoenix liveview, which may provide a path out of this mess.

Facebook rendered just fine a decade ago. What changed between now and then, in terms of actual improvement to end user experience, to make it so slow this kind of crap is needed?

My guess is:

- Desire to offload more processing to end user machines to save compute

- More and more ads and user analytics in order to pick which ads to show

- More engineers that irrationally hate the simplicity of PHP

Duct tape on top of abstractions on top of duct tape in order to make a document platform behave like an application platform. Isn't it time to just replace web browsers with something that doesn't suck?

Post reply on HN