4 ms·

I (thankfully) don't have to use Salesforce very often. But from my experience, the Lightning Experience always felt non-performant compared to the traditional

I (thankfully) don't have to use Salesforce very often. But from my experience, the Lightning Experience always felt non-performant compared to the traditional server-rendered pages. Things always took a noticeable amount of time to finish loading. Even though the traditional interface is, by appearance alone, quite traditional, as least it felt fast. I don't know if Lightning's problems were with poor performing front end code, or poor API performance. But I was always underwhelmed when testing the SPA version of Salesforce.

hliyan 7y ago
I was using SFDC extensively when the Lightning experience first arrived, and my experience tallies with yours. I ended up switching back to the old experience to get my day to day work done.
- tdviking21 7y ago
  Ugh, ya, I had to immediately switch back to the traditional. Lightning was so slow.
rjldev 7y ago
This was also my experience with lighting components
nullwasamistake 7y ago
The vast majority of Salesforce code is "legacy", so you don't get a lot of people sticking around that know modern web stuff. I saw the same thing happen at a previous employer. Nobody that knew modern web development would stick around and let their skills rot, so our "new SPA" interface was build by a team that only knows jQuery
dzhiurgis 7y ago
One of the bigger mistakes Salesforce made with Lightning is moving from purely transactional model to default-cached-no-way-to-purge model. Without letting a single developer to know that they did it, what are the pitfalls or how to disable it (you can't). WRT Lightning motivation, sounds like a much better option would've been supplement older server-rendered pages with some JS, update the stylesheets and make server language more useable. In fact server language is still there, still heavily used and still lacking expressiveness so badly that it's 10x slower to prototype on it rather than client side JS...

hliyan 7y ago

I was using SFDC extensively when the Lightning experience first arrived, and my experience tallies with yours. I ended up switching back to the old experience to get my day to day work done.

tdviking21 7y ago
Ugh, ya, I had to immediately switch back to the traditional. Lightning was so slow.

rjldev 7y ago

This was also my experience with lighting components

nullwasamistake 7y ago

The vast majority of Salesforce code is "legacy", so you don't get a lot of people sticking around that know modern web stuff. I saw the same thing happen at a previous employer. Nobody that knew modern web development would stick around and let their skills rot, so our "new SPA" interface was build by a team that only knows jQuery

dzhiurgis 7y ago

One of the bigger mistakes Salesforce made with Lightning is moving from purely transactional model to default-cached-no-way-to-purge model. Without letting a single developer to know that they did it, what are the pitfalls or how to disable it (you can't). WRT Lightning motivation, sounds like a much better option would've been supplement older server-rendered pages with some JS, update the stylesheets and make server language more useable. In fact server language is still there, still heavily used and still lacking expressiveness so badly that it's 10x slower to prototype on it rather than client side JS...