3 ms·
Well, that was a horrible experience. Sure, my connection is unforgivably slow, but a long player download (in my case, about four minutes) followed by a long p
by stan_rogers 14y ago
Well, that was a horrible experience. Sure, my connection is unforgivably slow, but a long player download (in my case, about four minutes) followed by a long per-page content download (with no apparent prefetch) means that I didn't get very far before bailing. Oh, and none of the usual keyboard navigation (arrows) work. There are a lot of ways to present something like this that work; this doesn't, particularly.
- miahi 14y agoThe presentation looked fine and loaded really fast on my Android phone using 3G network.
- epaik 14y agoOn the other end of the spectrum, I thought the presentation was impressive. I have a typical broadband connection, and I thought it worked just fine. The loading time seemed instantaneous. I actually appreciate that modern websites are increasingly being designed for higher standards of internet bandwidth/connectivity. It's not that I think bandwidth isn't precious, but when websites can deliver beautiful content at the cost of an extra 10th of a second of loading time on a modern connection, I think it's worth it. A four minute download time on your part implies you have some kind of dial-up connection, is there a reason why you haven't upgraded to a faster service?
- stan_rogers 14y agoActually, that's what was passing for 3G at the time (it's not always rock-solid, and one doesn't have private towers). It doesn't take a lot of stuttering to make a site like that fail. Beauty and responsiveness are not mutually exclusive, and none of the content I saw warranted a player -- garden-variety HTML and CSS would have done as well.