3 ms·
>less than 14 MB It's kind of crazy to me that even that's considered low
by moolcool 8y ago
>less than 14 MB
It's kind of crazy to me that even that's considered low
- maxxxxx 8y agoAgree. And that people feel the need to say "At least it works without Javascript". Our standards have become really low. I would argue that for product sites like this we have massively regressed over the last 10-15 years. Sites that used be easy to read and find information have become a nightmare of one useful paragraph per page.
- mikestew 8y agoWell, I guess it's a little crazy if all you were expecting was 8-bit graphics. But for content like that, yeah, I'm amazed it fits in 14MB.
- Zarel 8y agoI remember when Firefox 2.0 came out, it was 6 MB. Way more impressive, though, was Opera 9 at 5 MB, which, unlike Firefox, also had a built-in email client, IRC client, download manager, BitTorrent client, ad blocker, debugger (Firebug was an extension at the time), sync, and several other impressive features.
- saagarjha 8y agoIt’s mostly high-res images, so I think that might be OK in this case.
- maxxxxx 8y agoWhy do they need these monster images?
- ascagnel_ 8y agoSince this is a product page, I wonder how much of that 14MB is binary data vs. how much is HMTL/JS/CSS. Binary stuff tends to inflate sizes by a pretty big amount, and 14MB wouldn't be big if you've got a lot of high-resolution hero shots. 14MB bundle size would be ridiculous, though.