4 ms·
Maybe so, but how much of that 1.65MB of Javascript is cached by the browser?
by AdamTReineke 15y ago
Maybe so, but how much of that 1.65MB of Javascript is cached by the browser?
- pyre 15y agoIf the initial load-up time is slow, then you're probably less likely to click that Twitter link knowing that the initial page-load is always slow. The warm-cache situation only matters to people that are on Twitter all the time, so this possibly has the effect of keeping existing users happy while raising a barrier to new users (or pushing infrequent users to completely abandon the system). Secondly, you're only looking at download size (the importance of is really to imply a certain amount of time it takes to download those resources). Since Twitter's JS platform is about doing all of the HTML rendering on the client-side that has to be taken into account (this wasn't a concern in the past when it was mostly done on the server-side). If the page takes 3s ~ 5s to load even with a warm cache and a tiny (size) ajax-request, then it sort of defeats the purpose (unless your purpose is to relieve server-load instead of in-browser load times).