5 ms·

Here's a common example, from a FAANG company: 72mb and 367 requests to display around 2,000 characters of text. Maybe double that if you count the "hyperlinks.

Here's a common example, from a FAANG company: 72mb and 367 requests to display around 2,000 characters of text. Maybe double that if you count the "hyperlinks." Single page applications are horrible, and oh-so-common. https://imgur.com/a/v2rud7T https://imgur.com/a/v2rud7T

deergomoo 6y ago
They really don’t have to be. Unfortunately a lot of them are just built really badly, by people with fast hardware and gigabit networks. With good code splitting, which is supported basically out of the box by Webpack and all the big front-end frameworks, I would argue a well-written SPA transmits less data in the long run than a fully server-rendered app. The initial payload is bigger by a few hundred KB sure, but after that: - Like server rendered pages, you still only load pages on demand, thanks to code splitting - Unlike server-rendered pages, you can cache everything except the data that changes, because it’s JavaScript not HTML. Yes you’re still making a request for fresh data on every page load, but while the code is cached you need only download the raw data itself. You’d have to be really clumsy to send a JSON payload bigger than a full HTML document containing a rendered representation of the same data. Of course, this only really applies to apps. Static or infrequently changed content, you’re better off either server rendering or just serving static files. You can also make the argument that it would be more efficient to serve mostly static HTML, with the bare minimum JavaScript required to fetch new data, but ultimately everything is a trade off :)
scoot 6y ago
72 millibits doesn't sound feasible for even the most minimalist of websites. ;) Seriously though, this isn't just a "grammar" thing. If you don't know the difference between millibits and megabytes, you probably shouldn't post on the subject of page size (or anything else relating to bandwidth consumption / network performance).
- stjo 6y ago
  I understand what you are trying to say - proper use of units is important, especially on a technical topic. The SI[0] is simple, everybody can take a look and understand it in a minute and never make a mistake again. But you really don't need to be so condescending. I still hate it when people flag comments like yours because maybe it sounds "offensive" or something, but you can improve your tone too. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_System_of_Units https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_System_of_Units
- boplicity 6y ago
  Ironically, you seemed to have full (and complete) understanding of my intended meaning. Maybe you shouldn't comment on the use of language unless you have an understanding of linguistic deep structures. ;)
  - scoot 6y ago
    The fact that someone was able to infer a possible alternative meaning, just because the actual meaning wasn't credible doesn't make it any more correct. In this case though, it was the context (1MB Club) that gave the clue. So, no.
saagarjha 6y ago
Apple marketing page?

deergomoo 6y ago

They really don’t have to be. Unfortunately a lot of them are just built really badly, by people with fast hardware and gigabit networks. With good code splitting, which is supported basically out of the box by Webpack and all the big front-end frameworks, I would argue a well-written SPA transmits less data in the long run than a fully server-rendered app. The initial payload is bigger by a few hundred KB sure, but after that: - Like server rendered pages, you still only load pages on demand, thanks to code splitting - Unlike server-rendered pages, you can cache everything except the data that changes, because it’s JavaScript not HTML. Yes you’re still making a request for fresh data on every page load, but while the code is cached you need only download the raw data itself. You’d have to be really clumsy to send a JSON payload bigger than a full HTML document containing a rendered representation of the same data. Of course, this only really applies to apps. Static or infrequently changed content, you’re better off either server rendering or just serving static files. You can also make the argument that it would be more efficient to serve mostly static HTML, with the bare minimum JavaScript required to fetch new data, but ultimately everything is a trade off :)

scoot 6y ago

72 millibits doesn't sound feasible for even the most minimalist of websites. ;) Seriously though, this isn't just a "grammar" thing. If you don't know the difference between millibits and megabytes, you probably shouldn't post on the subject of page size (or anything else relating to bandwidth consumption / network performance).

stjo 6y ago
I understand what you are trying to say - proper use of units is important, especially on a technical topic. The SI[0] is simple, everybody can take a look and understand it in a minute and never make a mistake again. But you really don't need to be so condescending. I still hate it when people flag comments like yours because maybe it sounds "offensive" or something, but you can improve your tone too. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_System_of_Units https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_System_of_Units
boplicity 6y ago
Ironically, you seemed to have full (and complete) understanding of my intended meaning. Maybe you shouldn't comment on the use of language unless you have an understanding of linguistic deep structures. ;)
- scoot 6y ago
  The fact that someone was able to infer a possible alternative meaning, just because the actual meaning wasn't credible doesn't make it any more correct. In this case though, it was the context (1MB Club) that gave the clue. So, no.

saagarjha 6y ago

Apple marketing page?