4 ms·
It's a page about animations, so it's obviously going to be more media heavy than your average page. And the average random website is decently large anyway. N
by theelous3 3y ago
It's a page about animations, so it's obviously going to be more media heavy than your average page. And the average random website is decently large anyway.
NYT is 11mb, wapo is 22, scrolling down once on reddit is like 40mb.
100 and something mb doesn't warrant pre-warning for a page specifically promising animations.
- anon_cow1111 3y agoIf the videos were mp4/webm, the whole page would be about 1/10th the size. Gif format was never intended for this type of use. (and yes, thanks for pointing out several other horribly bloated websites, luckily browsing with JS disabled cuts them down to a few mb at most like they should be)
- Agentlien 3y agoI was worried about my blog entries being too heavy. I kept them under 3MiB each. Then I made one where I realised it really needed some rather big videos for illustration. It ended up being 43MiB and... After thinking about it for a while I decided that was fine. The few people interested in my work are unlikely to even notice the download.
- vGPU 3y agoWhat are you browsing on, a blackberry bold?
- tedunangst 3y agoAnimation doesn't have to imply huge. The animations on this page could be done with a few kilobytes of GL shader.