4 ms·

Are there any documented cases of a business failing because their JS payload was too large? I get that smaller code is easier to understand/work with, but I've

by swanson 11y ago

Are there any documented cases of a business failing because their JS payload was too large? I get that smaller code is easier to understand/work with, but I've never been able to internalize the desire for small payload -- just doesn't seem like it ever matters outside of philosophic reasons for saving user's bandwidth (especially if it comes with a steep tooling cost). It strikes me as a technical pursuit in search of a problem -- but certainly willing to be convinced otherwise.

s986s 11y ago
Site loading speed is very important https://blog.kissmetrics.com/loading-time/ https://blog.kissmetrics.com/loading-time/
rickboyce 11y ago
I think there are circumstances where it is very valuable - it depends on your target audience. For example on mobile, connection speeds in major cities in developed countries maybe rocketing, but substantial areas still need to make a lot happen with very little bandwidth. So it can be a small competitive advantage.
- arohner 11y ago
  See my reply to your sibling comment. You can measure very real changes in SEO, user engagement, bounce rate, conversion rate and sales on even small changes (100ms) in page load times. I have personally seen conversion rates vary by 4x based on page load speed.
tyingq 11y ago
I don't know that it would result in a business failing, but there's certainly lost opportunity. Marks and Spencer is a fairly recent example, perhaps not JS payload specifically, but lower conversions related to site performance. Considering the audience might help as well. For example, if rural U.S. dwellers are a demographic you want, many of them are on low bandwidth connections.
arohner 11y ago
Google found a 0.5 second delay caused a 20% decrease in repeat traffic, that persisted after the delay went away (http://glinden.blogspot.com/2006/11/marissa-mayer-at-web-20.html http://glinden.blogspot.com/2006/11/marissa-mayer-at-web-20....) Amazon found every 100ms slower the site loaded, they lost 1% in revenue: http://www.gduchamp.com/media/StanfordDataMining.2006-11-28.pdf http://www.gduchamp.com/media/StanfordDataMining.2006-11-28.... Walmart.com found a very large change in conversion rate based on page load times: ( http://www.slideshare.net/devonauerswald/walmart-pagespeedslide http://www.slideshare.net/devonauerswald/walmart-pagespeedsl... slide 37) My own customers have seen 4x different conversion rate, when grouped by page load time. (i.e. same slide as walmart page 37 above, where the peak is 4x higher than the lowest performing group). Your business probably won't fail because it's slow, but it will certainly make less money because it's slow.
- robocat 11y ago
  > My own customers have seen 4x different conversion rate, when grouped by page load time Was that a controlled test? If just a correlation, then other variables might confound i.e. users from overseas, users with a slow connection, users with a slow computer. Agree with you though!
  - arohner 11y ago
    I agree there's certainly some correlation, but we can fix e.g. "slow connections" and "slow computers" by not serving 9MB auto-playing hero videos [edit:] when it's not appropriate for your user demographics. I'm not in the position to intentionally slow down my customers, so I haven't run a controlled test. Google's test was controlled though.
- draw_down 11y ago
  But in this context, the issue becomes how much JS bundle weight it takes to cause a 0.5 second delay. And there are many other things that can slow down page load time (and especially perceived page load time) that either don't involve JS at all, or are not directly caused by the amount of JS that gets loaded.
swang 11y ago
As a user have you never clicked the back button because the page was taking too long to load? Businesses won't fail outright, but they will probably lose users/customers who decide not to spend time on the site because of load speed.

by swanson 11y ago

s986s 11y ago

Site loading speed is very important https://blog.kissmetrics.com/loading-time/ https://blog.kissmetrics.com/loading-time/

rickboyce 11y ago

I think there are circumstances where it is very valuable - it depends on your target audience. For example on mobile, connection speeds in major cities in developed countries maybe rocketing, but substantial areas still need to make a lot happen with very little bandwidth. So it can be a small competitive advantage.

arohner 11y ago
See my reply to your sibling comment. You can measure very real changes in SEO, user engagement, bounce rate, conversion rate and sales on even small changes (100ms) in page load times. I have personally seen conversion rates vary by 4x based on page load speed.

tyingq 11y ago

I don't know that it would result in a business failing, but there's certainly lost opportunity. Marks and Spencer is a fairly recent example, perhaps not JS payload specifically, but lower conversions related to site performance. Considering the audience might help as well. For example, if rural U.S. dwellers are a demographic you want, many of them are on low bandwidth connections.

arohner 11y ago

Google found a 0.5 second delay caused a 20% decrease in repeat traffic, that persisted after the delay went away (http://glinden.blogspot.com/2006/11/marissa-mayer-at-web-20.html http://glinden.blogspot.com/2006/11/marissa-mayer-at-web-20....) Amazon found every 100ms slower the site loaded, they lost 1% in revenue: http://www.gduchamp.com/media/StanfordDataMining.2006-11-28.pdf http://www.gduchamp.com/media/StanfordDataMining.2006-11-28.... Walmart.com found a very large change in conversion rate based on page load times: ( http://www.slideshare.net/devonauerswald/walmart-pagespeedslide http://www.slideshare.net/devonauerswald/walmart-pagespeedsl... slide 37) My own customers have seen 4x different conversion rate, when grouped by page load time. (i.e. same slide as walmart page 37 above, where the peak is 4x higher than the lowest performing group). Your business probably won't fail because it's slow, but it will certainly make less money because it's slow.

robocat 11y ago
> My own customers have seen 4x different conversion rate, when grouped by page load time Was that a controlled test? If just a correlation, then other variables might confound i.e. users from overseas, users with a slow connection, users with a slow computer. Agree with you though!
- arohner 11y ago
  I agree there's certainly some correlation, but we can fix e.g. "slow connections" and "slow computers" by not serving 9MB auto-playing hero videos [edit:] when it's not appropriate for your user demographics. I'm not in the position to intentionally slow down my customers, so I haven't run a controlled test. Google's test was controlled though.
draw_down 11y ago
But in this context, the issue becomes how much JS bundle weight it takes to cause a 0.5 second delay. And there are many other things that can slow down page load time (and especially perceived page load time) that either don't involve JS at all, or are not directly caused by the amount of JS that gets loaded.

swang 11y ago

As a user have you never clicked the back button because the page was taking too long to load? Businesses won't fail outright, but they will probably lose users/customers who decide not to spend time on the site because of load speed.