17

fuck these websites thAT ARE GETTING SO GOD DAMN HEAVY THEY LOAD WHEN I TURN OFF THE WIFI.

literally just fuckin shut off the wifi while this one bloated, shitty website loading aND THE WEBSITE DISPLAYED. of course, the gigabytes of javascript haven't loaded so the buttons weren't functional, bUT AT LEAST I COULD SEE THE CONTENT INSTEAD OF A WHITE SCREEN.

if ur gonna have a shitload of assets at least make your websites be viewable while the page is loading

Comments
  • 2
  • 1
    As Internet gets faster, Web sites get bigger. Because often 1, 2 or even 5 seconds are acceptable to test audiences. Above that and websites are going to lose users.

    There is no economic sense in optimising a web app when it's in this range.

    By the way, people with slow Internet connections are generally more forgiving for slow loading websites, probably believing it is their connection's fault.

    By the way, I don't remember where I saw those numbers. So if someone has the source or a source disproving those numbers, I'd be glad for a link.
  • 0
    Man just add async attribute to your garbage scripts, if it’s an spa just enable chunking goddamit
  • 3
    @TheCommoner282 5 seconds, you must be kidding. 300ms would be okay, maybe 500, but 5 seconds is just really unhealthy. (too bad nowadays no one cares anymore)
  • 1
    @saucyatom honestly. Five seconds isn't that long. Had once a misconfigured dns setting and two servers had to time out before the third server had an answer. Well at the end of the week I mentioned that the Internet is kind of sluggish just to find out that none of my colleagues had it.

    It was just mildly annoying.
  • 1
    @saucyatom depends on the audience. Performance requirements for internal tooling are typically described as "fuck all"
  • 1
    @F1973 What an awesome read!
  • 1
    @Mark-Zuckerberg :)

    Not my OC though.
  • 2
    It's a rotten design, and still today many, many web devs think it's brilliant to pass the processing load to the client instead of writing efficient code on the server. Maybe this makes me a dinosaur, but pages that you can't curl or view source are bullshit.
  • 0
    @bahua Writing a somewhat complex web app using server side rendering is somewhat shitballs compared to JS these days, which is why it's being done. Granted, some web pages have tons and tons of bloat which is bad, never push shit down the wire. In any case, clients have tons of processing power and memory for caching which is why they are utilized.

    It is not gonna stop there. Once WebAssembly is mature enough, we might see native desktop applications running in the browser.
  • 0
    @aldkjdjs That is probably true (it is partly true for me, I do some backend and cloud stuff besides React). But they are paid to use that framework and over time become very good at it. Nothing really wrong with specializing in my mind at least.

    The market wants rockstar and ninja {framework} developers and that's what theyre getting.
  • 0
    @aldkjdjs a framework also brings order. It brings functionality. It's cleaner code.

    The same is not true for backend frameworks. They add far less to the language.

    I haven't seen a server side rendered app that did not grow to an unmaintainable mess. But I've seen clearly structured big Vue projects.
  • 1
    Pushing off processing to the client encourages(and even rewards) sloppy, wasteful code. I understand that server-side processing can become a giant inefficient mess too, but two things:

    1) I am not defending, and will not ever defend java. It's a fucking blight and I wish its use on the web could be uninvented. Its use encourages all the same sloppy practices that JS encourages, and over time generates impossible applications developed by a string of developers who never met each other, adding kludge after kludge.

    2) Code discipline is more than possible. There are abundant resources to apply responsible practices to server-side code, so the fraction of a second of page loading afforded by interpreted server-side languages like python, ruby, php, and perl is possible and maintainable with just a little effort on the front end. I am confident that the reason I don't see these languages in heavy use in enterprise deployments(compared to java) is simply because they're not maintained and supported by a company with sales people with calf implants.
  • 1
    @TheCommoner282 @bahua you can definitely make a maintainable web app with server side rendering. have you tried go? lots of the server side rendering tools/languages are outdated but go and its templates make it easy.
  • 0
    Internet didn't age well
  • 1
    @theabbie Why yes, the internet kinda sucks in some ways.

    - It harbors child pornography
    - It harbors far right-wing echo chambers
    - It is slowly and mentally ruining an entire generation self-esteem.
    - It is a shithole of EU cookies and marketing newsletters
    - Anything and everything should be on the internet
    - It has turned us into social profilers (don't need to get to know people, you just check their social medias and judge thereafter)
  • 0
    @theuser Still it's the best
  • 0
    @theuser You should publish a blog on internet about how internet is fucked up.
  • 1
    @F1973 With those bullet points (and probably a few more) you have an entire book. They are all rabbit holes.
  • 0
    @theuser I know only one Rabbit hole.
Add Comment