6 ms·

> the modern webapp experience is so miserable for the average person. I see this claim a lot and I'm curious what this is based on, can somebody drop some lin

> the modern webapp experience is so miserable for the average person. I see this claim a lot and I'm curious what this is based on, can somebody drop some links to further reading?

marginalia_nu 4y ago
Try getting a slightly shitty phone and visit a place with spotty wifi that drops some packets. It's very enlightening. I'm averaging a 15-30 second TTI on the most js-heavy sites.
gurraman 4y ago
Same. We've been working on a huge React project for several years. Lots of graphs, 3d models etc ... and it is super-snappy. Only slow part is a WebGL-based chart component that visualizes 2-3 M rows of signal data. We can probably decimate the signal data to improve performance, but that has got nothing to do with us using React. N.B. No one is using the app from their mobiles. iPad and computers only. Our reasons for choosing React when there are so many alternatives: prior knowledge, ergonomics, easy onboarding, ecosystem.
- dham 4y ago
  Super-snappy for who? You? with a $4000 Mac Book Pro? Even with 6x CPU slowdown in Chrome, that's not enough throttling for these modern computers to test with.
- eastbound 4y ago
  Modularization. With React, you can delegate a component to one team and use it as a web-component. Actually, why aren’t web-components a thing, that’s another story. But componentization is why React creates clean code.
  - DoesntMatter22 4y ago
    I make this argument all the time and people think I'm an idiot, which is fine. But JSX to me is reason that Svelte and Vue aren't as good. They are faster IMO but with JSX it's nice that you can make a form and then each part of the form can be broken out into separate methods. The reasoning I get all the time is "Why would you want to do that? That's stupid". It's just so much nicer honestly. I'm not a react fan at all but that's one thing I miss about it.
  - josephg 4y ago
    Huh? All of the modern web frameworks let you delegate a component to a team and use it. What does react do here thats special? Honestly, if anything I find react's modularity story much weaker than the competition. In react there's no page-wide state and the story around styling components with CSS is a huge mess. In comparison, Svelte components feel much more modular & self contained because the styles are embedded with the component in a standard way.
iakov 4y ago
It feels like a myth to me as well. We, tech nerds, value "optimized" solutions, "beautiful" code. We buy top-notch hardware, remove bloatware, because we really care about our tools and craft. 90% of the users use shitty hardware. Everything is sorta sluggish on their computers - they boot up slowly, the bunch of crapware in autorun take their sweet time to load & phone home, their wifi us overburdened with devices. Most of the software experience is sluggish for them. They don't care if their web app is sluggish too.
- thegeomaster 4y ago
  Doesn't that have a corollary: if their web app is faster than everything else they use, won't they love it? Anecdotally, those 90% of users are not happy about their experience, they just tolerate it.
- xmcqdpt2 4y ago
  I think if that was the case Apple would be a much smaller company. People buy iPhones because they "feel nice." And the feel they are talking about is performance. If you are forced to use an app with bad performance (say Teams) you cope. Humans are great at coping. Maybe you turn it off and back on again periodically, or alt tab to something else while it's showing a spinner. It's true performance isn't a major selling point but IMO that's because most software products are not sold to users. They are packaged with other products, part of monopolies and imposed to users by others. I buy video games where performance undoubtedly matters. Apart from that, most software I use, I didn't choose, and I'm pleasantly happy when it's not garbage (Outlook, IDEA) and annoyed when it is (Teams, Facebook). In either case, performance wasn't a contributor to my choice: I didn't have a choice.
- kunley 4y ago
  All good except of the last sentence. All the sluggish steps led them to the usage of the web app they need to use, and they need it to be fast. At least, faster than rest of the crap so far. Heck, they may spend rest of the day with this app..
favaq 4y ago
Buy the average $400 windows laptop and $250 android phone and you'll see.
- agloe_dreams 4y ago
  Would you? Most $400 laptops are on 10th gen Intel or such. Thats actually pretty good. A Pentium Gold is actually just on the edge of a modern i3 which in single core. Smokes most 8th gen chips. They are pretty good. $250 in an Android phone can get you a SD 695 5g these days. IT's not fast per say but it absolutely doesn't suck.
  - josephg 4y ago
    Yeah I agree with the GP. Most $400 laptops come pre-loaded with all sorts of janky crap that make that 10th gen intel CPU run like a wounded animal. Most users have no idea how to remove any of it. Or, worse, they'll enable all of the preinstalled antivirus programs because they want their computer to be safe. And it gets worse. I visited my parents once and noticed something weird on my dad's macbook air. Turned out he'd gone out and bought Norton antivirus to install on it (!?). Norton installed a chrome extension which replaced the banner ads on every website he visited with their own ads. I manually deleted the extension from chrome, but norton put it right back again after chrome restarted. If you don't believe me, use performance counters and measure it. Your website runs way slower on your users' computer than you think it does.
    - agloe_dreams 4y ago
      Oh I know, but that situation has become less common over the years. Fewer users are buying AV and most AV is getting better so people don’t complain. Users using outdated versions of Windows with IE has a much larger impact (because IE’s JS engine is incredibly awful) But the point I was making was that the average computer has actually gotten pretty good. Most users use near-latest chrome, most laptops have gotten much quicker. And that’s before noting that the average cell phone in the US has BETTER js performance than the average computer. Most US mobile users have a modern iPhone that is faster in single core performance than some 10th gen laptops.
unxdfa 4y ago
Try selling React shit to corporates who have corporate malware infested Edge running on overloaded Citrix nodes or the average corporate android that was made about 3 years ago. We still get <100ms page delivery with server side rendering and lightweight JavaScript DOM overlays. Our React infested competitors, not so much to the point their clients have been shitposting on twitter about it. And we actually can debug our product!
- davidy123 4y ago
  I don't think you are living in the real world. Is Microsoft corporate? React is a first class choice in their frameworks. React is like nearly any other tool, use it well, and it's great. Well optimized React is lightweight to the client and a joy to test and debug. That said, Web Components are even better, but I'm guessing that's science fiction to you.
  - unxdfa 4y ago
    I don't think you are living in the real world. Most React applications do not end up like that in the real world. They turn into poorly architected over complicated nightmares, particularly on sprawling apps which is the reality in the corporate space. Not everyone is building hyper-focused single function tools which can be crammed in an SPA type framework. And the users suffer for this. One of the finest turds I've seen recently is my electricity company's meter reading facility which is an over-engineered react interface for a single web form with two fields and a confirmation box. The whole thing pulls 590k down to do that and takes 5 seconds for the initial page load on an M1 MacBook Pro. That's the real end game for most people. The only reason it's like that is because the people who built it don't know how to do it any other way. And lets be honest about Microsoft: they do everything from a front end or user interface perspective and randomly discontinue bad ideas about 5 years down the line. Like Silverlight, most of WPF, bits of ATL and MFC, an entire mobile phone platform that got rewritten. And their competing framework WinUI 3 doesn't even work properly. Their own O365 web platform is a fine example of where this turns into a buggy mess. I bet react is dead to them within 2 years on one of their schizophrenic switcharoos. The only reason they're into it now is to capture some market from Electron.
akudha 4y ago
I have a beefy machine and fast internet. Yet, JIRA is annoyingly slow. Half the time, pages on my bank’s website take forever to load, or don’t load at all. I don’t have any numbers, just some anecdotal experience like the above. It is not just speed. The UI of many sites suck too. Amazon, GoDaddy, for example. Then there are ads. We don’t see ads in between content anymore. It is content within ads these days. I am thankful that we can do so much online these days. But the experience could be better
- scotty79 4y ago
  Isn't Jira server-side rendered?
  - p_l 4y ago
    Nope, a lot of JIRA runs in the browser. But JIRA main performance issues in my experience are caused by badly sized servers for the level of use.
- SgtBastard 4y ago
  Jira is a not very good product, implemented by worse engineers, that happens to be better than its competitors (ironically proving the point I made further up thread).
  - thiht 4y ago
    > implemented by worse engineers Jira is a 20 years old piece of software. I'm sure today's engineers do their best with the constraints they have. And I'm sure the 2002 engineers did their best with this period's assumptions and solutions. I hate Jira as a product, but please don't attack people like that, have you never had to work on a product you're not 100% satisfied with? :/
    - SgtBastard 4y ago
      https://www.atlassian.com/engineering/post-incident-review-april-2022-outage https://www.atlassian.com/engineering/post-incident-review-a... I stand by what I said. >I’m sure todays engineers do their best with the constraints they have. There are two real constraints in the software engineering world: time and money (especially when we’re talking about an issue tracker, a wiki and a repo + CI\CD pipeline). That Jira and confluences performance remains … not very good, suggests that the engineers are unwilling to, or unable to advocate for, spending the time and money to address this.
modo_mario 4y ago
In my case it's extensive anecdotal experience. First when I was a budget constrained student with bad hardware. Of course now I use a really good midrange phone, good laptop and pc. Then i noticed a stark differences in attitude in the 2 studies I did at uni. One was more plain compsci. The other more web/mobile design and development. The later paid absolutely 0 attention to optimisation. Whether it was speed, download size or anything of the sort. The former treated an inneficient slution as invalid or at least graded lower. (Note this was in Beligum) First time I started paying more attention to this where it wasn't when it wasn't in the context of being a budget constraint student was when I did a temporary IT support stint at a gigantic international pharma company and the software was so sluggish it was....insane. Dozens of people at our facility staring at a slugish webinterface waiting at every action and doing loads of those for every ticket. It was so infuriating I tried to make a browser plugin to prefill stuff with comon defaults the moment they were available knowing I'd never use it beyond those 3 months. Years of time must've been wasted staring at little loading circles because management did not use the software. Then when I made native software for a manufacturing industry niche where i was told some suggested db retrieval and prerendering optimisations and such weren't worth the time....And sure. These were lowwage foreign workers using it, it didn't hamper much at all and our time was expensive. Maybe the business wouldn't get the money out of it....but then i ventured to production and notice more than a hundred people pulling the same actions many times a day thousands of times a year ....and see them waiting split seconds or multiple seconds depending on the actions that counted up to combined wasted minutes, hours, days, weeks and I realised what a load of bollocks it was. Additionally when I helped extend various ERP's I realised the old ones were faaar from great but the move to web based interfaces really didn't do us much favours. Then I come home and try to help my various layman family members on their comparatively slower windows and android devices and it becomes veeery apparent that this is not just a professional software issue. Slugish UI libraries on slugish frameworks on a slugish OS with various other slugish apps. Coming home to a fast pc running Linux and using stuff i write in my free time using C++ or rust or even just various native apps on windows feels like such a extremely stark contrast. My conclusion is that users won't care enough up to a certain point as studies show However I do believe that what those studies don't show is that for a good part this is because it's the default for many of them. They think this is just what tech is and all those countless small waittimes behind actions is normal.
codeptualize 4y ago
I’m seeing a lot of anecdotes, not a lot of research. Nngroup used to publish analyses of the state of usability, but I don’t think they have done one recently. The old ones always showed progress, and that’s also what I would expect talking about the average situation. Average progress doesn’t mean there are no shitty situations and we should always strive to improve, I just think claims like this are not helpful as they are used to make blanket statements about nuanced situations. Unless you can back them up of course, and I would still love to see the data if anyone can find it.
resonious 4y ago
Sadly all I have is more anecdotes, but you can get those yourself by asking any non tech worker what they think of using any software.
- codeptualize 4y ago
  I've been involved in quite a lot of usability testing and I'm often positively surprised by the responses. Which is why I'm sort of skeptical when reading such claims. Also because I think user experience overall has improved, by a lot, the standards now are so much higher than the used to be. I think it almost always comes down to one thing: Can people achieve the thing they want to achieve in a somewhat efficient way? If the answer is yes there is lots of tolerance for all sorts of crap before people experience it in a negative way. That means managing the experience. As example a multi minute upload process can be totally fine if handled properly, a .5s delay on an input can make it unusable. My point being; reality is a lot more nuanced than the blanket "it all sucks, and performance is everything" statement, and personally I don't think it's helpful. Unless we can actually look at metrics and assess their importance and how we can address them. Don't get me wrong; we should absolutely keep trying to improve, especially crafting well made usable interfaces that are a delight to use. Performance is certainly very important, but it's not the be all end all of user experience and atm wrongly used to justify silly points why [my fav framework] is so much better than React.
0xblinq 4y ago
Just go and use the “new” Reddit. Take any metric you want from there.
- brettermeier 4y ago
  The new Reddit is so slow... after some bingescrolling I often give up due to the annoying loading times and close the site. I always imagine that many people react like this on super slow websites, but on the other hand it's Reddit and many people don't know which site to visit instead :P
  - 0xblinq 4y ago
    Try https://old.reddit.com https://old.reddit.com The day they disable it, I’m not using it anymore.
colin_jack 4y ago
This is part of a whole series of posts: https://infrequently.org/2022/12/performance-baseline-2023/ https://infrequently.org/2022/12/performance-baseline-2023/

> the modern webapp experience is so miserable for the average person. I see this claim a lot and I'm curious what this is based on, can somebody drop some links to further reading?

marginalia_nu 4y ago

Try getting a slightly shitty phone and visit a place with spotty wifi that drops some packets. It's very enlightening. I'm averaging a 15-30 second TTI on the most js-heavy sites.

gurraman 4y ago

Same. We've been working on a huge React project for several years. Lots of graphs, 3d models etc ... and it is super-snappy. Only slow part is a WebGL-based chart component that visualizes 2-3 M rows of signal data. We can probably decimate the signal data to improve performance, but that has got nothing to do with us using React. N.B. No one is using the app from their mobiles. iPad and computers only. Our reasons for choosing React when there are so many alternatives: prior knowledge, ergonomics, easy onboarding, ecosystem.

dham 4y ago
Super-snappy for who? You? with a $4000 Mac Book Pro? Even with 6x CPU slowdown in Chrome, that's not enough throttling for these modern computers to test with.
eastbound 4y ago
Modularization. With React, you can delegate a component to one team and use it as a web-component. Actually, why aren’t web-components a thing, that’s another story. But componentization is why React creates clean code.
- DoesntMatter22 4y ago
  I make this argument all the time and people think I'm an idiot, which is fine. But JSX to me is reason that Svelte and Vue aren't as good. They are faster IMO but with JSX it's nice that you can make a form and then each part of the form can be broken out into separate methods. The reasoning I get all the time is "Why would you want to do that? That's stupid". It's just so much nicer honestly. I'm not a react fan at all but that's one thing I miss about it.
- josephg 4y ago
  Huh? All of the modern web frameworks let you delegate a component to a team and use it. What does react do here thats special? Honestly, if anything I find react's modularity story much weaker than the competition. In react there's no page-wide state and the story around styling components with CSS is a huge mess. In comparison, Svelte components feel much more modular & self contained because the styles are embedded with the component in a standard way.

iakov 4y ago

It feels like a myth to me as well. We, tech nerds, value "optimized" solutions, "beautiful" code. We buy top-notch hardware, remove bloatware, because we really care about our tools and craft. 90% of the users use shitty hardware. Everything is sorta sluggish on their computers - they boot up slowly, the bunch of crapware in autorun take their sweet time to load & phone home, their wifi us overburdened with devices. Most of the software experience is sluggish for them. They don't care if their web app is sluggish too.

thegeomaster 4y ago
Doesn't that have a corollary: if their web app is faster than everything else they use, won't they love it? Anecdotally, those 90% of users are not happy about their experience, they just tolerate it.
xmcqdpt2 4y ago
I think if that was the case Apple would be a much smaller company. People buy iPhones because they "feel nice." And the feel they are talking about is performance. If you are forced to use an app with bad performance (say Teams) you cope. Humans are great at coping. Maybe you turn it off and back on again periodically, or alt tab to something else while it's showing a spinner. It's true performance isn't a major selling point but IMO that's because most software products are not sold to users. They are packaged with other products, part of monopolies and imposed to users by others. I buy video games where performance undoubtedly matters. Apart from that, most software I use, I didn't choose, and I'm pleasantly happy when it's not garbage (Outlook, IDEA) and annoyed when it is (Teams, Facebook). In either case, performance wasn't a contributor to my choice: I didn't have a choice.
kunley 4y ago
All good except of the last sentence. All the sluggish steps led them to the usage of the web app they need to use, and they need it to be fast. At least, faster than rest of the crap so far. Heck, they may spend rest of the day with this app..

favaq 4y ago

Buy the average $400 windows laptop and $250 android phone and you'll see.

agloe_dreams 4y ago
Would you? Most $400 laptops are on 10th gen Intel or such. Thats actually pretty good. A Pentium Gold is actually just on the edge of a modern i3 which in single core. Smokes most 8th gen chips. They are pretty good. $250 in an Android phone can get you a SD 695 5g these days. IT's not fast per say but it absolutely doesn't suck.
- josephg 4y ago
  Yeah I agree with the GP. Most $400 laptops come pre-loaded with all sorts of janky crap that make that 10th gen intel CPU run like a wounded animal. Most users have no idea how to remove any of it. Or, worse, they'll enable all of the preinstalled antivirus programs because they want their computer to be safe. And it gets worse. I visited my parents once and noticed something weird on my dad's macbook air. Turned out he'd gone out and bought Norton antivirus to install on it (!?). Norton installed a chrome extension which replaced the banner ads on every website he visited with their own ads. I manually deleted the extension from chrome, but norton put it right back again after chrome restarted. If you don't believe me, use performance counters and measure it. Your website runs way slower on your users' computer than you think it does.
  - agloe_dreams 4y ago
    Oh I know, but that situation has become less common over the years. Fewer users are buying AV and most AV is getting better so people don’t complain. Users using outdated versions of Windows with IE has a much larger impact (because IE’s JS engine is incredibly awful) But the point I was making was that the average computer has actually gotten pretty good. Most users use near-latest chrome, most laptops have gotten much quicker. And that’s before noting that the average cell phone in the US has BETTER js performance than the average computer. Most US mobile users have a modern iPhone that is faster in single core performance than some 10th gen laptops.

unxdfa 4y ago

Try selling React shit to corporates who have corporate malware infested Edge running on overloaded Citrix nodes or the average corporate android that was made about 3 years ago. We still get <100ms page delivery with server side rendering and lightweight JavaScript DOM overlays. Our React infested competitors, not so much to the point their clients have been shitposting on twitter about it. And we actually can debug our product!

davidy123 4y ago
I don't think you are living in the real world. Is Microsoft corporate? React is a first class choice in their frameworks. React is like nearly any other tool, use it well, and it's great. Well optimized React is lightweight to the client and a joy to test and debug. That said, Web Components are even better, but I'm guessing that's science fiction to you.
- unxdfa 4y ago
  I don't think you are living in the real world. Most React applications do not end up like that in the real world. They turn into poorly architected over complicated nightmares, particularly on sprawling apps which is the reality in the corporate space. Not everyone is building hyper-focused single function tools which can be crammed in an SPA type framework. And the users suffer for this. One of the finest turds I've seen recently is my electricity company's meter reading facility which is an over-engineered react interface for a single web form with two fields and a confirmation box. The whole thing pulls 590k down to do that and takes 5 seconds for the initial page load on an M1 MacBook Pro. That's the real end game for most people. The only reason it's like that is because the people who built it don't know how to do it any other way. And lets be honest about Microsoft: they do everything from a front end or user interface perspective and randomly discontinue bad ideas about 5 years down the line. Like Silverlight, most of WPF, bits of ATL and MFC, an entire mobile phone platform that got rewritten. And their competing framework WinUI 3 doesn't even work properly. Their own O365 web platform is a fine example of where this turns into a buggy mess. I bet react is dead to them within 2 years on one of their schizophrenic switcharoos. The only reason they're into it now is to capture some market from Electron.

akudha 4y ago

I have a beefy machine and fast internet. Yet, JIRA is annoyingly slow. Half the time, pages on my bank’s website take forever to load, or don’t load at all. I don’t have any numbers, just some anecdotal experience like the above. It is not just speed. The UI of many sites suck too. Amazon, GoDaddy, for example. Then there are ads. We don’t see ads in between content anymore. It is content within ads these days. I am thankful that we can do so much online these days. But the experience could be better

scotty79 4y ago
Isn't Jira server-side rendered?
- p_l 4y ago
  Nope, a lot of JIRA runs in the browser. But JIRA main performance issues in my experience are caused by badly sized servers for the level of use.
SgtBastard 4y ago
Jira is a not very good product, implemented by worse engineers, that happens to be better than its competitors (ironically proving the point I made further up thread).
- thiht 4y ago
  > implemented by worse engineers Jira is a 20 years old piece of software. I'm sure today's engineers do their best with the constraints they have. And I'm sure the 2002 engineers did their best with this period's assumptions and solutions. I hate Jira as a product, but please don't attack people like that, have you never had to work on a product you're not 100% satisfied with? :/
  - SgtBastard 4y ago
    https://www.atlassian.com/engineering/post-incident-review-april-2022-outage https://www.atlassian.com/engineering/post-incident-review-a... I stand by what I said. >I’m sure todays engineers do their best with the constraints they have. There are two real constraints in the software engineering world: time and money (especially when we’re talking about an issue tracker, a wiki and a repo + CI\CD pipeline). That Jira and confluences performance remains … not very good, suggests that the engineers are unwilling to, or unable to advocate for, spending the time and money to address this.

modo_mario 4y ago

In my case it's extensive anecdotal experience. First when I was a budget constrained student with bad hardware. Of course now I use a really good midrange phone, good laptop and pc. Then i noticed a stark differences in attitude in the 2 studies I did at uni. One was more plain compsci. The other more web/mobile design and development. The later paid absolutely 0 attention to optimisation. Whether it was speed, download size or anything of the sort. The former treated an inneficient slution as invalid or at least graded lower. (Note this was in Beligum) First time I started paying more attention to this where it wasn't when it wasn't in the context of being a budget constraint student was when I did a temporary IT support stint at a gigantic international pharma company and the software was so sluggish it was....insane. Dozens of people at our facility staring at a slugish webinterface waiting at every action and doing loads of those for every ticket. It was so infuriating I tried to make a browser plugin to prefill stuff with comon defaults the moment they were available knowing I'd never use it beyond those 3 months. Years of time must've been wasted staring at little loading circles because management did not use the software. Then when I made native software for a manufacturing industry niche where i was told some suggested db retrieval and prerendering optimisations and such weren't worth the time....And sure. These were lowwage foreign workers using it, it didn't hamper much at all and our time was expensive. Maybe the business wouldn't get the money out of it....but then i ventured to production and notice more than a hundred people pulling the same actions many times a day thousands of times a year ....and see them waiting split seconds or multiple seconds depending on the actions that counted up to combined wasted minutes, hours, days, weeks and I realised what a load of bollocks it was. Additionally when I helped extend various ERP's I realised the old ones were faaar from great but the move to web based interfaces really didn't do us much favours. Then I come home and try to help my various layman family members on their comparatively slower windows and android devices and it becomes veeery apparent that this is not just a professional software issue. Slugish UI libraries on slugish frameworks on a slugish OS with various other slugish apps. Coming home to a fast pc running Linux and using stuff i write in my free time using C++ or rust or even just various native apps on windows feels like such a extremely stark contrast. My conclusion is that users won't care enough up to a certain point as studies show However I do believe that what those studies don't show is that for a good part this is because it's the default for many of them. They think this is just what tech is and all those countless small waittimes behind actions is normal.

codeptualize 4y ago

I’m seeing a lot of anecdotes, not a lot of research. Nngroup used to publish analyses of the state of usability, but I don’t think they have done one recently. The old ones always showed progress, and that’s also what I would expect talking about the average situation. Average progress doesn’t mean there are no shitty situations and we should always strive to improve, I just think claims like this are not helpful as they are used to make blanket statements about nuanced situations. Unless you can back them up of course, and I would still love to see the data if anyone can find it.

resonious 4y ago

Sadly all I have is more anecdotes, but you can get those yourself by asking any non tech worker what they think of using any software.

codeptualize 4y ago
I've been involved in quite a lot of usability testing and I'm often positively surprised by the responses. Which is why I'm sort of skeptical when reading such claims. Also because I think user experience overall has improved, by a lot, the standards now are so much higher than the used to be. I think it almost always comes down to one thing: Can people achieve the thing they want to achieve in a somewhat efficient way? If the answer is yes there is lots of tolerance for all sorts of crap before people experience it in a negative way. That means managing the experience. As example a multi minute upload process can be totally fine if handled properly, a .5s delay on an input can make it unusable. My point being; reality is a lot more nuanced than the blanket "it all sucks, and performance is everything" statement, and personally I don't think it's helpful. Unless we can actually look at metrics and assess their importance and how we can address them. Don't get me wrong; we should absolutely keep trying to improve, especially crafting well made usable interfaces that are a delight to use. Performance is certainly very important, but it's not the be all end all of user experience and atm wrongly used to justify silly points why [my fav framework] is so much better than React.

0xblinq 4y ago

Just go and use the “new” Reddit. Take any metric you want from there.

brettermeier 4y ago
The new Reddit is so slow... after some bingescrolling I often give up due to the annoying loading times and close the site. I always imagine that many people react like this on super slow websites, but on the other hand it's Reddit and many people don't know which site to visit instead :P
- 0xblinq 4y ago
  Try https://old.reddit.com https://old.reddit.com The day they disable it, I’m not using it anymore.

colin_jack 4y ago

This is part of a whole series of posts: https://infrequently.org/2022/12/performance-baseline-2023/ https://infrequently.org/2022/12/performance-baseline-2023/