4 ms·
Back in the day this would happen because somebody needed to load a whole Flash applet. Web 2.0 was supposed to take us away from that. I suspect the main reas
by munchbunny 9y ago
Back in the day this would happen because somebody needed to load a whole Flash applet. Web 2.0 was supposed to take us away from that.
I suspect the main reason people do it is because progressive loading has the potential to leave your page half-rendered, which looks bad. So you block the whole thing until you can present it in its entirety.
But it's the web. We're used to pages half-loading, and we're used to starting to read text before everything has been loaded. The right way to fix that problem is to make your design more lean, not to stick everything behind a 15-30s loading spinner.
- lvoudour 9y agoSince mobile browsing is so prevalent, you would expect websites to be more optimised for mobile cpus/bandwidth and therefore very fast on ethernet connected desktops. But more and more I find sites that take so much time to load I feel I'm back to dial-up days. This blog doesn't even have ads. It's absurd considering the fact we can stream full HD content in several devices on the same connection
- throwanem 9y agoPeople develop on localhost or local servers, and don't think about what happens when the RTT exceeds a millisecond.