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

The impact of removing jQuery on our web performance

insidegovuk.blog.gov.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 283 posts

Re: The impact of removing jQuery on our web performance

#191

Post by denton-scratch »

> especially compared to images which can be multiple megabytes in size

Please don't put images of multi-megabytes size on web-pages. My boss put a 10-megabyte image on the homepage of one of our clients; he fancied himself a photographer, and he took the photo. It gave a 10s page-load time from a desktop PC. I offered to shrink it for him, which would have taken 2 minutes; he wasn't having it.

I don't think it was pride in his photo; I think the client wasn't paying their bills, and he wanted to punish them.

But please, shrink your images to fit on the screen of your most-capable target device. There's no need for super-hi-res posters on websites.

Re: The impact of removing jQuery on our web performance

#192

Post by Beltalowda »

yokoprime wrote: post #50

jQuery was nice in a pre transcompiled js world, but those days are long gone.

I very intentionally avoid that world when I can because the tooling overhead is just too much, and the general state of the tooling does not leave me impressed. I don't think I'm the one, and there are plenty of older sites/apps just churning along. Don't confuse popularity with ubiquity.

Re: The impact of removing jQuery on our web performance

#193

Post by GordonS »

yardstick wrote: post #187
kllrnohj wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They have to descent all the way to 2G to see any meaningful difference Somewhat shockingly according to https://www.cambridgewireless.co.uk/news/cw-journal/why-2g-w... 12% of mobile network connections in the UK are still on 2G? That's surprisingly high usage, and would definitely be worth optimizing. Although usage that high would then explain why 2G shutdown is still 10 years(!) away for the UK. Phones still on…

I wouldn’t read too much into 2G figures meaning 2G-only phones (or 3G). In my experience once you get out of populated areas connections often drop to 2G, even on my 5G capable iPhone. It’s mostly a coverage issue not a handset issue.

It varies wildly depending on which network you are on. For example, on EE I get 4G coverage almost everywhere - even across remote parts of the Scottish Highlands and Islands. OTOH, my missus is with Three, and she rarely gets 4G at all outside of towns and cities.

Re: The impact of removing jQuery on our web performance

#194

Post by seydor »

kllrnohj wrote: post #173
fleddr wrote: post #154

The team at gov.uk is doing an excellent job regarding web performance, credit where credit is due. In many ways role model behavior. Still, the results are such a stretch as to not have that much meaning. They have to descent all the way to 2G to see any meaningful difference, and I'm assuming they are cold visits (typical in lab-based testing). For those exceptional users, this creates a difference from very poor (…

> They have to descent all the way to 2G to see any meaningful difference Somewhat shockingly according to https://www.cambridgewireless.co.uk/news/cw-journal/why-2g-w... 12% of mobile network connections in the UK are still on 2G? That's surprisingly high usage, and would definitely be worth optimizing. Although usage that high would then explain why 2G shutdown is still 10 years(!) away for the UK. Phones still on…

Maybe it's home alarms

Re: The impact of removing jQuery on our web performance

#195

Post by chippy »

Couple of relevant previous discussions around this subject:

Gov.uk drops jQuery from their front end (90 days ago|437 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31434434

How and why we removed jQuery from Gov.uk (5 days ago|43 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32423422

Re: The impact of removing jQuery on our web performance

#197

Post by denton-scratch »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #182
fleddr wrote: post #154

The team at gov.uk is doing an excellent job regarding web performance, credit where credit is due. In many ways role model behavior. Still, the results are such a stretch as to not have that much meaning. They have to descent all the way to 2G to see any meaningful difference, and I'm assuming they are cold visits (typical in lab-based testing). For those exceptional users, this creates a difference from very poor (…

I am also excited about gov.uk tech blog posts. My point: They are always "looking in the mirror": "How can we become faster and more accessible?" Making digital gov't websites as accessible as possible is an incredibly important social priority for modern governments in the 21st century.

> Making digital gov't websites as accessible as possible is an incredibly important

Indeed - websites are the most convenient way to access government services.

So it's important that government websites don't rely on technology that isn't universally available. So I wish gov.uk sites would stop insisting on a smartphone (or SMS) for 2FA. Phones have these problems:

* They cost a lot.

* It's impossible for the average user to check the 2FA app is secure.

* They run on batteries that go flat.

* they are not owned by their owners.

Please, always offer email as a 2FA choice.

Re: The impact of removing jQuery on our web performance

#198

Post by izabera »

magnio wrote: post #16
ctrlmeta wrote: post #4

Has anyone noticed how all UK government websites like https://www.gov.uk/ , https://www.nhs.uk/ , https://tfl.gov.uk/ , https://coronavirus.data.gov.uk/ have the same look-and-feel and the same UX? Are there more such examples of countries that have uniform UX for their government websites?

Yes, this is an example of government design systems, which are becoming popular among developed countries: - The UK: https://design-system.service.gov.uk/ - The US: https://designsystem.digital.gov/ - Canada: https://www.canada.ca/en/government/about/design-system.html - Argentina: https://argob.github.io/poncho/ - Italy: https://designers.italia.it/ - Singapore: https://www.designsystem.tech.gov.sg/ - Estonia: http…

I would remove Italy from that list. It's all very random.

https://www.salute.gov.it/portale/home.html

https://www.dgc.gov.it/web/

https://www.governo.it/

https://www.interno.gov.it/it

https://presidenza.governo.it/USRI/confessioni/diritti_umani...

https://www.senato.it/

https://www.mef.gov.it/

https://www.camera.it/

https://www.agenziaentrate.gov.it/portale/

http://www.impresa.gov.it/intro/info/news.html

Re: The impact of removing jQuery on our web performance

#199

Post by joshstrange »

dccoolgai wrote: post #190
fleddr wrote: post #154

The team at gov.uk is doing an excellent job regarding web performance, credit where credit is due. In many ways role model behavior. Still, the results are such a stretch as to not have that much meaning. They have to descent all the way to 2G to see any meaningful difference, and I'm assuming they are cold visits (typical in lab-based testing). For those exceptional users, this creates a difference from very poor (…

Exactly. It was cute for a few years, but these jQuery bashing thoughtpieces are so worn out now. As React and the long tail of frameworks slides into it's twilight years, it's clear in retrospect that jQuery was just a much more responsible and sound architecture (mostly because it cleaved to standards) than any of the things that spawned the 1000 "why I'm leaving jQuery for _this_" blogposts every day.

I think you are conflating 2 different things. jQuery -> vanilla JS and jQuery -> framework (React/Vue/Angular/etc). Though I'm not sure where you getting the idea that JS/TS frontend frameworks are sliding into their "twilight years".

Re: The impact of removing jQuery on our web performance

#200

Post by klysm »

commandlinefan wrote: post #180
sanitycheck wrote: post #178

Honestly if they'd just used jQuery instead of React all the way through they'd be loading a lot less JS and performance would be vastly better on those slow old devices. After all, jQuery was made for the slow old devices, in the time they were not slow or old. The real problem is that jQuery is not new and shiny, and nobody wants to be doing jQuery in 2022.

In addition to which, jQuery was actual useful - React is just pure overhead with no real functionality.

I don’t understand how you can claim that react is pure overhead. Sure it does have overhead, but it’s also a really useful abstraction. How composable abstraction for UI components that enables local reasoning not functionality.

jQuery is just pure overhead with no real functionality compared to vanilla js.

Post reply on HN