4 ms·
All of this is unnecessary. Because it's actually possible to build lightweight and fast and yet beautiful websites. The available tools aren't the problem. The
by WA 10y ago
All of this is unnecessary. Because it's actually possible to build lightweight and fast and yet beautiful websites. The available tools aren't the problem. The problem are the people who design their garbage collectors called websites.
Someone in another thread suggested to colorize the address bar based on bytes transferred and/or requests made. Maybe it'll wake people up if they visit a website and it has some nice dark red color to show how much bandwidth is wasted.
- some1else 10y agoYour observation that it's possible to build xyz type of websites does not adequately discount the necessity of such features. I'm talking about improving those lightweight and beautiful websites even further. I implement some of those features on every project, to deliver the maximum content & experience quality in every network and device condition possible. You can't seriously try to shoe-horn the entire platform into whatever your vision of beauty is. Please keep an open mind about a complex future medium, that can effectively accommodate Netflix, YouTube, Facebook, Wikipedia, Photoshop, Open Office, Google Maps, Skype, Auto CAD, Grand Theft Auto VR, ...
- WA 10y agoPoint taken and I'm sure, you (and I for that matter) would benefit from your suggestions. But it wouldn't change anything for the existing bloated websites, because they could be written in a lightweight way but aren't.