> But when it’s on every page, from a web performance perspective, it equates to a lot of data. Author of this article is apparently unaware of browser caches.

> But when it’s on every page, from a web performance perspective, it equates to a lot of data. Author of this article is apparently unaware of browser caches. > JavaScript is known as a “render-blocking” resource. Yeah, if only there was, like, an async attribute or something. > The graph below shows time to interactivity dropped from 11.34 seconds to 9.43 seconds So, jQuery is way too heavy for these people, but interaction tracking analytics (these packages usually start around 200kB) is perfectly fine? > total page load time dropped from 19.44 seconds to 17.75 seconds Burying the lede here, if my team celebrated a 17 second page load, we'd be fired on the spot. Going out on a limb here to suggest jQuery is the least of their problems.