Took some time, but I'm really happy with these scores!

What did you test it with? Congrats btw

@dontPanic 📌

🏕️

Looks like the Chrome Dev Tools, theres an Audits tab

@dontPanic The audit tab in Chrome Dev Tools, as @trickory says

the time till it is actually interactive is worrying

I don't know much about web design, but 8 seconds to load the site seems to be more than I would wait, and all the other scores don't really affect me.
But of course a slow website on the first entry is better than a fast one on page 2 ...

@anonymus19941 You're assuming wrong. It takes about 3 seconds to load the page so you can see things and read stuff. This is called the "First contentful paint".

The rest of the time is used for loading the rest of the page which you don't see immediately because you need to scroll down for that first (data, assets such as javascript).

I can improve the performance quite a bit, but the loading experience for the average user isn't 8 seconds.

Way to go... ^^

@JoshBent I'm working on that 😩

@Fast-Nop lmao, are you loading an empty html page? 😂

@localjoost no, that's the landing page - and with browser cache cleared before. That's where you can get with a static page if you handcraft HTML and CSS.

@anonymus19941 You can simulate slow connection speed which is probably what he did.

@localjoost If the page uses Javascript (which it probably does), it takes 8 seconds until one is able to fully use it.
I understand that it's hard to make it much faster without loosing functionality, but as a user I'd prefer @Fast-Nop 's website 😉
@trickory Well, maybe the user has a slow connection ...

@anonymus19941 Sure thats the point of testing it. But can you create the same functionality without JS?

@anonymus19941 Well there is some JS on the landing page, but inline vanilla JS. However, even if I go for a sub-page where I need JQuery because of features, and even if I check the URL directly to bypass pre-loading, the numbers still stay the same.

JS itself does not make websites slow - and JQuery is only a 100 kB when minimised, which is 38 kB over the wire if the server is configured to properly gzip JS files.

@trickory As I said, I don't know much about web design (aka nothing). I also don't know what's the goal of the website.
I would try to do as much as possible with PHP to decrease the number of connections and the size of the website. But maybe this is not possible or is done already, or maybe it's not that important, I don't know.
I just think that 8 seconds are a bit long, but I also don't know which functions are missing before "interactive".
And as I don't know all of those, this discussion is a bit pointless.

You didn't run tests for for pwa?

@Fast-Nop I don't know about your landing page, but mine used quite some images (I properly resized them tho).

Anyway, I'm happy with my scores and if I load it normally I don't think it's slow so nothing to worry about :)

@nothappy I did, after. Score was about 80, but I'm not sure if I want to make it pwa proof. The website isn't something people are gonna go back to multiple times.

@localjoost well with 8 seconds until interactive, of course they won't go back multiple times. ;-)

Thanks for this post I managed to save over 5 seconds on a page load on simulated 3g because of this tool.

@MisterArie did you also try https://gtmetrix.com ? I found that even more revealing.

@Fast-Nop not yet will try this probably later today.

@Fast-Nop Thanks for the suggestion, score comes out lower on there. I'll look into it soon