3 ms·
> There is a downside though: a copy has to be downloaded for each website, so each first website load is slowed down. Just stop loading 100 resources on a si
by dna_polymerase 7y ago
> There is a downside though: a copy has to be downloaded for each website, so each first website load is slowed down.
Just stop loading 100 resources on a single pageload. If a website loads just one css and maybe one js there wouldn't be any performance issues, unless of course those files are several megabytes in size.
- Camillo 7y agoIf we just keep posting "it's broken for me with JS turned off, it should work without it" on every other Hacker News thread, surely people will be convinced eventually, and everyone will just stop using JavaScript frameworks and libraries and go back to HTML4, with full support for Lynx. I feel like we're really close now. Come on guys, one last push. /s
- dna_polymerase 7y agoI'm not advocating for no JS or something like that. All I'm asking for is web-devs using less resources. Use all those frameworks, but do you really need 100 requests to show a blog post?
- buckminster 7y agoI don't suppose the complaining here was the reason, but I have noticed several major UK sites (in retail and delivery) become more friendly to browsing without javascript recently. So-called progress is not inevitable.