3 ms·
One thing completely ignored by this post, especially for actual web applications, is that it doesn't actually break JS files down to see why it is so large. Fo
by lifthrasiir 3y ago
One thing completely ignored by this post, especially for actual web applications, is that it doesn't actually break JS files down to see why it is so large. For example, Google Translate is not an one-interaction app once you start to look further; it somehow has dictionaries, alternative suggestions, transliterations, pronunciations, a lot of input methods and more. I still agree that 2.5 MB is too much even after accounting that fact and some optional features can and should be lazily loaded, but as it currently stands, the post is so lazy that it doesn't help any further discussion.
- BandButcher 3y agoDon't want to hate on the author's post but the screenshots being slow to load made me chuckle, understandable as images can be big and there were a lot, but just found it a little ironic.
- crooked-v 3y agoThese days, slow-loading images usually mean that somebody hasn't bothered to use any of the automatic tooling various frameworks and platforms have for optimized viewport- and pixel density-based image sets, and just stuck in a maximum size 10+ MB image.
- troupo 3y agoWhich absolutely false for the website in question
- blue_pants 3y agoCould you suggest some of those automatic tools?
- littlecranky67 3y agoYes, next/image which is part of Next.js Framework </irony>
- troupo 3y ago> For example, Google Translate is not an one-interaction app once you start to look further; it somehow has dictionaries, alternative suggestions, transliterations, pronunciations, a lot of input methods and more. Almost none of those are loaded in the initial bundle, are they? All those come as data from the server. How much JS do you need for `if data.transliteration show icon with audio embed`?
- lifthrasiir 3y ago> Almost none of those are loaded in the initial bundle, are they? In my testing, at least some input methods are indeed included in the initial requests (!). And that's why I'm stressing it is not "one-interaction" app; it is interactive enough that some (but not all) upfront loading might be justifiable.
- infensus 3y ago100% agree. Most of these apps could definitely use some optimization, but trivializing them to something like "wow few MBs of javascript just to show a text box" makes this comparison completely useless