4 ms·
> What happened between then and now that suddenly nothing works? The average expection changed. Back in the day, everyone was on $SLOW_SPEED, so pages were de
by rmc 10y ago
> What happened between then and now that suddenly nothing works?
The average expection changed. Back in the day, everyone was on $SLOW_SPEED, so pages were designed for it. Now-a-days they can, and do design, pages for higher speeds
- 72deluxe 10y agoYes and the average page size has sky-rocketed, despite there being no more actual content (i.e. text). Instead we have animations of images or text fading in as we scroll down a page and lots of Javascript to do things I do not know. Kind of makes me miss the old plain HTML days - much less CPU intensive too.
- JustSomeNobody 10y agoBut still should make sure low speed works. But try convincing some privileged 20 something developer of that.
- nindalf 10y agoIt's really not about a privileged youngster, it's about business priorities. Most of the time the cost benefit ratio doesn't justify the effort to optimise for high latency high packet-loss connections. Let's say 1% of your potential users use such connections. It only makes sense to support them if your total userbase is a large enough number. For Google, it's a no-brainer. For other sites, it's something to consider. At work we did something similar a few years ago with our Android app. We dropped support for Android 2.3 users because we only had a couple hundred of them and it didn't justify the developer cost to maintain it. WhatsApp only dropped support a month ago. I don't think that was because they were somehow less privileged than us. The casual ageism in your comment is unbecoming. You could reconsider it.
- JustSomeNobody 10y agoI could, but I've worked with too many examples that only care about writing new code in whatever is the latest hotness and moving on. They[0] don't want to fix their bugs. They don't care about anything but "works on my machine." They certainly don't care about using bandwidth. [0] The ones I've worked with
- nsp 10y agoBring it up! They're newer to development then you are, they're newer to life. They're far more likely to have always have had high speed internet growing up, and not have had that visceral experience. The initial reaction will probably be negative, but initial negative reactions to perceived increases in scope/work is basically a universal human trait, it's surmountable.
- flukus 10y ago> Let's say 1% of your potential users use such connections. It only makes sense to support them if your total userbase is a large enough number. For Google, it's a no-brainer. For other sites, it's something to consider. Your making it usable for that 1%, but you're making it better for the other 99%.
- emodendroket 10y agoYou aren't necessarily, though. Efforts spent optimizing the existing functionality are not being spent adding new features.
- flukus 10y agoBut your optimizing things people are using frequently, not adding things they probably aren't. Adding features is usually diminishing returns as well.
- emodendroket 10y agoEven if you just want to polish or optimize existing functionality, bandwidth usage may not be the biggest bottleneck for all or most users.
- gkya 10y agoWhat is an ageism? People are always inventing new ways to get offended...
- freehunter 10y agoI've heard about ageism (like racism, but for people of different ages) since around 2000-2001. Really around the time baby boomers started getting close to retirement age and some companies decided it was a better deal to fire them or lay them off than pay the pensions they had earned, and also with the DotCom boom where startups would only hire 20-somethings. It's not really a new term.