Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A 14kb page can load much faster than a 15kb page (2022)

endtimes.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 324 posts

Re: A 14kb page can load much faster than a 15kb page (2022)

#121

Post by VanTodi »

susam wrote: post #74

I just checked my home page [1] and it has a compressed transfer size of 7.0 kB. / 2.7 kB main.css 2.5 kB favicon.png 1.8 kB ------------------- Total 7.0 kB Not bad, I think! I generate the blog listing on the home page (as well as the rest of my website) with my own static site generator, written in Common Lisp [2]. On a limited number of mathematical posts [3], I use KaTeX with client-side rendering. On such pages…

Another idea maybe would be to load the heavy library after the initial page is done. But it's loaded and heavy nonetheless. Or you could create svgs for the formulas and load them when they are in the viewport. Just my 2 cents

Re: A 14kb page can load much faster than a 15kb page (2022)

#122

Post by simgt »

noduerme wrote: post #91
simgt wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the environmental impact of jackasses mining jackass coin, or jackasses training LLMs is not insignificant Whataboutism. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism > You're just pushing the idea that all human activity is some sort of disease that's best disposed of. That's essentially just wishing the worst on your own species for being successful. Strawmaning. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man Every blo…

> the environmental impact of jackasses mining jackass coin, or jackasses training LLMs is not insignificant (this was actually stated in agreement with the original poster, who you clearly misunderstood, so there's no "what-about" involved here. They were condemning all kinds of consumption, including the frivolous ones I mentioned). But I'm afraid you've missed both my small point and my wider point. My small point…

> if the primary concern is simply to reduce resource consumption to a minimum

..."required".

That allows you to fit pretty much everything in that requirement. Which actually makes my initial point a bit weak, as some would put "delivering 4K quality tiktok videos" as a requirement.

Point is that energy consumption and broad environmental impact has to be a constraint in how we design our systems (and businesses).

I stand by my accusations of whataboutism and strawmaning, though.

Re: A 14kb page can load much faster than a 15kb page (2022)

#124

Post by fsh »

samrus wrote: post #79
9dev wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not what I said. Only that the responsible engineers know which tradeoffs they make, and are competent enough to do so.

The decision to use react for the start menu wasnt out of competency. The guy said on twitter that thats what he knew so he used it [1]. Didnt think twice. Head empty no thoughts 1 https://x.com/philtrem22/status/1927161666732523596

It is indeed an impressive feat of engineering to make the start menu take several seconds to launch in the age of 5 GHz many-core CPUs, unlimited RAM, and multi-GByte/s SSDs. As an added bonus, I now have to re-boot every couple of days or the search function stops working completely.

Re: A 14kb page can load much faster than a 15kb page (2022)

#125

Post by fleebee »

Alifatisk wrote: post #106

I agree with the sentiment here, the thing is, I've noticed that the newer generations are using frameworks like Next.js as default for building simple static websites. That's their bare bone start. The era of plain html + css (and maybe a sprinkle of js) feels like it's fading away, sadly.

I think you're late enough for that realization that the trend already shifted back a bit. Most frameworks I've dealt with can emit static generated sites, Next.js included. Astro feels like it's designed for that purpose from the ground up.

Re: A 14kb page can load much faster than a 15kb page (2022)

#126

Post by justmarc »

hackerman_fi wrote: post #102
justmarc wrote: post #70

Does anyone know have examples of tiny, yet aesthetically pleasing websites or pages? Would love it if someone kept a list.

There is an example link in the article. Listing more examples would serve no purpose apart from web design perspective

Well, exactly that, I'm looking for inspiration.

Re: A 14kb page can load much faster than a 15kb page (2022)

#127

Post by BlackFly »

welpo wrote: post #95
susam wrote: post #74

I just checked my home page [1] and it has a compressed transfer size of 7.0 kB. / 2.7 kB main.css 2.5 kB favicon.png 1.8 kB ------------------- Total 7.0 kB Not bad, I think! I generate the blog listing on the home page (as well as the rest of my website) with my own static site generator, written in Common Lisp [2]. On a limited number of mathematical posts [3], I use KaTeX with client-side rendering. On such pages…

> That said, I do use KaTeX with client-side rendering on a limited number of pages that have mathematical content You could try replacing KaTeX with MathML: https://w3c.github.io/mathml-core/

Katex renders to MathML (either server side or client side). Generally people want a slightly more fluent way of describing an equation than is permitted by a soup of html tags. The various tex dialects (generally just referred to as latex) are the preferred methods of doing that.

Re: A 14kb page can load much faster than a 15kb page (2022)

#128

Post by sangeeth96 »

ksec wrote: post #11

Missing 2021 in the title. I know it is not the exact topic, but sometimes I think we dont need the fastest response time but consistent response time. Like every single page within the site to be fully rendered with exactly 1s. Nothing more nothing less.

I think the advise is still very relevant though. Plus, the varying network conditions mentioned in the article would ensure it’s difficult if impossible to guarantee consistent response time. As someone with spotty cellular coverage, I can understand the pains of browsing when you’re stuck with that.

Re: A 14kb page can load much faster than a 15kb page (2022)

#129

Post by londons_explore »

crawshaw wrote: post #20

If you want to have fun with this: the initial window (IW) is determined by the sender. So you can configure your server to the right number of packets for your website. It would look something like: ip route change default via dev initcwnd 20 initrwnd 20 A web search suggests CDNs are now at 30 packets for the initial window, so you get 45kb there.

be a bad citizen and just set it to 1000 packets... There isn't really any downside apart from potentially clogging up someone who has a dialup connection and bufferbloat.

Re: A 14kb page can load much faster than a 15kb page (2022)

#130

Post by hsbauauvhabzb »

hackerman_fi wrote: post #111

The article has IMO two flawed arguments: 1. There is math for how long it takes to send even one packet over satellite connection (~1600ms). Its a weak argument for the 14kb rule since there is no comparison with a larger website. 10 packets wont necessarily take 16 seconds. 2. There is a mention that images on webpage are included in this 14kb rule. In what case are images inlined to a page’s initial load? If this…

Also the assumption that my userbase uses low latency satellite connections, and are somehow unable to put up with my website, when every other website in current existence is multiple megabytes.
Post reply on HN