3 ms·
> a few hundreds of ms Gotta be honest, I’m grimacing already. An order of magnitude too much.
by morelisp 4y ago
> a few hundreds of ms
Gotta be honest, I’m grimacing already. An order of magnitude too much.
- Existenceblinks 4y agoFor me, generally sub 100ms is acceptable. a few hundreds .. No thanks html over the socket is faster than that.
- nicoburns 4y agoHN, which is about as fast as sites get in my experience takes between 600ms and 800ms to fully load with cache disabled. Around 350ms to load just HTML and CSS. IMO a few hundred milliseconds for something that is actually webapp-like rather than just an information website is quite reasonable.
- wubsitesgood 4y agoNotably, the examples in the OP article are slower by many thousands of ms, not just hundreds. Either way, the post isn't saying you have to abandon app-like experiences. It's only about improving initial HTML delivery regardless of what you do after that.
- morelisp 4y ago> HN, which is about as fast as sites get in my experience We have different experiences. HN is light but it's not fast.