4 ms·
No but it's been automated very well, battle tested, and plays well with the browser. While I still stumble upon SPA that can't even get navigation right. But
by sametmax 8y ago
No but it's been automated very well, battle tested, and plays well with the browser.
While I still stumble upon SPA that can't even get navigation right.
But the main reason is still this:
I compared the serverless website (considered a state of the art SPA) with the hackernews website (considered a student level website) on an edge connection in the German country side:
Hacker news:
- first load: 6 seconds
- next loads: 3.5 seconds
Serverless:
- first load: 26 seconds
- next loads: 7.5 seconds
For a webpage displaying static text.
- realusername 8y agoI agree with you as well, SPA are generally slower and the navigation always has issues as the application grows. I guess reimplementing the browser navigation is a bit complex. I think a good SPA is a superior experience but a bad SPA is worse than a traditional page load approach.
- paulddraper 8y ago> 26 seconds It takes like 4s for me. Though I think you're kidding yourself if you think HN is typical. I can't see any reason why there should be anything but a very small difference on way or the other.
- sametmax 8y ago> It takes like 4s for me. You are not on an edge connection then. > Though I think you're kidding yourself if you think HN is typical. No, but serverless and NH have the same purpose of mostly displaying text.
- paulddraper 8y agoWhat's an "edge connection"? http://edgeconnection.net/ http://edgeconnection.net/ ?
- sametmax 8y ago2g