3 ms·
PWAs aren't literally faster — caching aside, they load the same data and it takes the same amount of time over the same connection. But there is a percieved pe
by Veen 9y ago
PWAs aren't literally faster — caching aside, they load the same data and it takes the same amount of time over the same connection. But there is a percieved performance boost if the PWA uses caching and preloading intelligently. The first load might take a little longer, loading the first tweets will take just as long, but scrolling through the timeline should be faster and page transitions can be almost instantaneous.
- madeofpalk 9y agoOkay so this actually goes straight to the heart of everything that's wrong with the web development communities obsession with PWAs. The technologies behind PWAs are fine, but people need to learn how to properly assess these buzzwords and learn if their suitable for the particular use cases of their site. The main use case of Twitter is to look at your timeline, yet Twitter Lite somehow screwed that up and made it slower, even on subsequent loads. Not only that, the particular implementation provides arguably a worse experience, doing things like showing three different 'loaders' on the path to the timeline (Twitter icon 'splash screen' (wtf, I thought this was all preached?), spinner for the whole 'app', and then spinner for the timeline). Reminds me a lot of people's obsession with Webpack and code-splitting - I'm sure a huge majority of projects will find >75% of their JS bundle weight being their dependencies.