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

Cdnjs - the missing cdn

cdnjs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 79 posts

Re: Cdnjs - the missing cdn

#22

Post by benjiweber »

Nux wrote: post #20
dasony wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea is that users wouldn't have to download the same jquery or whatever script over and over for every site they visit. It makes less sense when it comes to not-so-popular script files, but I guess there's a convenience factor too.

Ok. So I didn't miss anything obvious. :-) This might have been handy back in the dial-up days, but not now. Now I see it as a security and stability risk.

CDNs get the content cached closer to the end user than you are likely to be yourself.

Round trip time is especially important when you're loading several assets in a single page.

CDNs also often provide higher availability than you can provide yourself

Using someone else's CDN is considerably cheaper than serving resources yourself. e.g. Using jquery from google cdn. Bandwidth costs for "small" javascript files start to add up once you have 100 million people loading it each day.

Re: Cdnjs - the missing cdn

#23

Post by vidarh »

josteink wrote: post #19

For every one of these CDNs you use, chances that people with scriptblockers will use your site goes down. When I see that a site tries to resolve scripts from 50 domains, for what should really just be static HTML, I generally leave. So please. Don't use CDNs. If you want people to trust you, host your own damn stuff on your own domain.

Users that care, or even notice, are so few that you are noise compared to the number of users that will leave if the site loads slower, so the CDN is likely to be a net win many times over.

Re: Cdnjs - the missing cdn

#24

Post by alexchamberlain »

ryankirkman wrote: post #11
ambirex wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same people who are doing the cdnjs have been planning do a CSS one as well, https://github.com/cdnjs/cdncss

Yep. We plan on launching the css component our our offering in the near future.

I've just submitted a pull request with both versions of normalize.css. https://github.com/cdnjs/cdncss/pull/15

Re: Cdnjs - the missing cdn

#25

Post by sergiotapia »

josteink wrote: post #19

For every one of these CDNs you use, chances that people with scriptblockers will use your site goes down. When I see that a site tries to resolve scripts from 50 domains, for what should really just be static HTML, I generally leave. So please. Don't use CDNs. If you want people to trust you, host your own damn stuff on your own domain.

You are in the vast minority. A tremendously small percentage of users will actually care about a non-issue like that.

Re: Cdnjs - the missing cdn

#26

Post by gbelote »

Nux wrote: post #15

Ok, I'm not a developer and I'm probably missing the big picture or smth; my question: - All this fuss is about hosting a few text files none bigger than several KB?? Who in this world does NOT afford to host a few small files nowadays?

Performance is more dominated by latency than file size, and folks usually care about this more for page load time of a page than bandwidth cost. CDNs are usually better than hosting on your server directly, because they have better latency properties (many CDN endpoints which are more likely to be "closer" to the end user).

The advantage of sharing a CDN (as opposed to every site having it's own) is caching. If I visit website-a.com and they include jquery.js from cdnjs.com then I visit website-b.com that also uses the same file, I don't have to download it twice and website-b.com loads faster than if it served that file itself. That's the big win, IMO, but unfortunately depends on cdnjs having a high density of use. Even still, if you can shave a 100ms of the loading of your page that can matter.

Re: Cdnjs - the missing cdn

#30

Post by Nux »

sergiotapia wrote: post #25
josteink wrote: post #19

For every one of these CDNs you use, chances that people with scriptblockers will use your site goes down. When I see that a site tries to resolve scripts from 50 domains, for what should really just be static HTML, I generally leave. So please. Don't use CDNs. If you want people to trust you, host your own damn stuff on your own domain.

You are in the vast minority. A tremendously small percentage of users will actually care about a non-issue like that.

Unfortunately he is in vast minority. Only when you start using NoScript or generally paying more attention to your browser's status bar do you start to realise the scale of the ridiculousness.
Post reply on HN