3 ms·
It’s a really apt comparison. Before PHP and embedded scripting with HTML, and entire contained applications with MVC frameworks, we had our static HTML and our
by jasonjei 7y ago
It’s a really apt comparison. Before PHP and embedded scripting with HTML, and entire contained applications with MVC frameworks, we had our static HTML and our CGI.
Now we have serverless and HTML that talks to our cgi-bin using JavaScript. Life is full circle. Client/server back to the cloud, which reminds me of the dumb-terminal/mainframe days.
- quickthrower2 7y agoBut the key difference is in the "why". Serving that HTML from a nearby web server is a lot faster, and it's easier to distribute static content to a bunch of servers around the world that are near the people requesting them.
- sodabrew 7y agoFixing this for you -> "serving a multi-megabyte bundle of Javascript that renders the entire page through DOM manipulation" from a nearby web server is a lot faster, "in some cases almost being as fast as fetching a single HTML file from across the world."