1

Just noticed a video of Rich Harris, dev at the NYT, debating about SPA and how are they bloated and problematic and what not. He brings an example like Instagram, which has some 1mb bundle size and he says it's too much, we should do like the NYT does

Tried opening a random article in NYT, see scripts downloading around for 1.1mb

I don't want to be THAT GUY, I just say we're talking about "bloated JS apps" and what not, but a gzipped Vue is 21kb. Everything else is your own app so IDK, maybe the bloat isn't that relevant.

P.S. quick suggestion, maybe if you work at the NYT consider stopping the blabber about "MUH SPA ARE BLOATED" and get a paywall which can't be bypassed with fucking inspect element

Comments
  • 2
    I honestly don't see a huge problem with instagram having a 1mb bundle.

    If your internet is fast enough to use instagram, 1mb is nothing. If 1mb is a problem for you, instagram would be unusable anyway regardless of bundle size because instagram content is all photos and videos and stuff which are way above 1mb. The resources saved by getting that 1mb down basically amounts to nothing, especially with caching involved.
  • 1
    @RememberMe yes.

    If you serve a fuckton of content that should be the last of your worries, I agree.

    In my opinion many devs focus on size while ignoring latency....

    Looking at network traffic it's really more disturbing when you have to wait 75 % of the time for the paywall, social media, ad network, HLSL video, <...> shit to load.... That comes after intializing the JS stack tofu of 1 MB.
  • 0
    @IntrusionCM true, but again, instagram content loading times would be same as or more than instagram js/ad loading times, so again largely irrelevant as long as they get an outline up on screen fast enough, which they do iirc.

    But I agree with you in general. I hate it when a site loads sluggishly because of all that crap, although I don't usually care because uBlock Origin lmao
Add Comment