7 ms·

Other answers are trying to trick the machine, while the obvious and safe fix is to serve plain html. Just like HN by the way, which is the only bearable si

by gbog 14y ago

Other answers are trying to trick the machine, while the obvious and safe fix is to serve plain html. Just like HN by the way, which is the only bearable site from China on a 3g connection.

ZeroGravitas 14y ago
Though the last time I checked it didn't use gzip, which would improve things radically in that case I'd imagine.
- dbaupp 14y ago
  It still doesn't (but should): https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights#url=https_3A_2F_2Fnews.ycombinator.com_2Fitem_3Fid_3D5181073&mobile=false https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights#url=h...
joshuacc 14y ago
For this particular problem, it doesn't matter whether the site is serving "plain HTML" if the CSS specifies a webfont that the user doesn't already have. So you have two alternatives for a good experience: 1. Use only fonts users have preinstalled. 2. Make sure that you handle downloading webfonts in an intelligent way. For many sites, 1 is fine. But for others which try to set themselves apart with distinctive design, 2 is necessary.
- papsosouid 14y ago
  No, 2 is never necessary. You can set yourself apart with design just fine. The text, actual information people are trying to retrieve, is not part of the design. Specifying a font for the ordinary text is a perfect example of designers prioritizing self-obsessed wankery over the user.
  - kamjam 14y ago
    So all of a sudden we have become a design Nazi and telling people what their website can or can't include for design. The alternative to not allowing custom fonts is that people go back to using text in images to display their custom fonts which sucks when you are dealing with multiple languages or just want to change the text for something else. Or something like Cufon [http://cufon.shoqolate.com http://cufon.shoqolate.com]. Or use flash. I think I prefer webfonts, the developers just need to be smarter about how they are used and the implementation for including them.
    - papsosouid 14y ago
      Your post is both nonsense and repulsive. I suggest you read what you are replying to rather than spewing hyperbolic nazi accusations at people.
      - chc 14y ago
        You may be either very young or not an American English speaker, but the phrase "X Nazi" is American slang denoting somebody who is overly strict about whatever X is. It comes from the "Soup Nazi" episode of Seinfeld, in which a soup shop owner would evict customers from his shop with the declaration "NO SOUP FOR YOU" if they didn't follow a very precise procedure for ordering. It is not actually an accusation of Nazism.
        papsosouid 14y ago
        That is why I said hyperbolic. It is still a very distasteful response, especially considering what it was replying to. I just read my post again, and I still can't find the part where I told "people what their website can or can't include for design".
        chc 14y ago
        You said any designer who chooses a body text font (something designers have been doing for hundreds of years, incidentally) is guilty of "self-obsessed wankery." The difference between that and telling people what they can or can't include is pretty slim.
  - chc 14y ago
    The idea that typography has nothing to do with design is ridiculous on its face. I get that you don't like webfonts and you are welcome to that opinion, but it's silly to suggest that font selection and the placement of text isn't properly the job of a designer.
    - papsosouid 14y ago
      I didn't suggest typography has nothing to do with design. Placement of text is not at issue here, font face choice is. There are many font faces already available. They were created by designers. Ones who specialize in creating fonts in fact. They are much better at it than web designers. Breaking a website so it is entirely unreadable because you feel a non-standard font is prettier is something a bad designer does. It does not help the user, which is the entire point of a web site.
      - chc 14y ago
        > I didn't suggest typography has nothing to do with design. Placement of text is not at issue here, font face choice is. Choice of typefaces is part of typography. You can't place text without a face. > There are many font faces already available. They were created by designers. Ones who specialize in creating fonts in fact. There are about 10 fonts you can rely on people having (assuming you don't care about Linux users!). Several of these are gimmicky and generally not a good choice for anything. You really don't have all that great a selection. > Breaking a website so it is entirely unreadable because you feel a non-standard font is prettier is something a bad designer does. The site isn't entirely unreadable. It just takes a little bit longer to display. A very similar thing happens when a resource takes a while to load and leaves the body text the same color as the background for a long time. I'm a big advocate of having lean sites that display fast. When I'm asked to work on a site, the first thing I suggest is usually optimizing it so everyone sees it quickly (I had the biggest smile when I managed to cut one down from 20 seconds to 1.5 seconds on a slow-ish connection). But even I think just blanket damning custom fonts is really extreme. They really can add a lot to the feel and readability of a site, and they don't always suck.
        14y ago
  - joshuacc 14y ago
    I specified that #2 is sometimes necessary for a specific end (distinctive design). You seem to be arguing that one should never seek that end. I disagree, but that's an entirely different argument.
    - papsosouid 14y ago
      >You seem to be arguing that one should never seek that end. Not at all. I am saying it is in no way necessary to load a non-standard font for the primary textual content in order to achieve the goal of a distinctive design. Loading a font to use for your branding is perfectly reasonable, users aren't there to read that anyways. Punishing the user by making the content not be there because you think distinctive design requires all your text to be unreadble_font_x just bad design.

by gbog 14y ago

Other answers are trying to trick the machine, while the obvious and safe fix is to serve plain html. Just like HN by the way, which is the only bearable site from China on a 3g connection.

ZeroGravitas 14y ago

Though the last time I checked it didn't use gzip, which would improve things radically in that case I'd imagine.

dbaupp 14y ago
It still doesn't (but should): https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights#url=https_3A_2F_2Fnews.ycombinator.com_2Fitem_3Fid_3D5181073&mobile=false https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights#url=h...

joshuacc 14y ago

For this particular problem, it doesn't matter whether the site is serving "plain HTML" if the CSS specifies a webfont that the user doesn't already have. So you have two alternatives for a good experience: 1. Use only fonts users have preinstalled. 2. Make sure that you handle downloading webfonts in an intelligent way. For many sites, 1 is fine. But for others which try to set themselves apart with distinctive design, 2 is necessary.

papsosouid 14y ago
No, 2 is never necessary. You can set yourself apart with design just fine. The text, actual information people are trying to retrieve, is not part of the design. Specifying a font for the ordinary text is a perfect example of designers prioritizing self-obsessed wankery over the user.
- kamjam 14y ago
  So all of a sudden we have become a design Nazi and telling people what their website can or can't include for design. The alternative to not allowing custom fonts is that people go back to using text in images to display their custom fonts which sucks when you are dealing with multiple languages or just want to change the text for something else. Or something like Cufon [http://cufon.shoqolate.com http://cufon.shoqolate.com]. Or use flash. I think I prefer webfonts, the developers just need to be smarter about how they are used and the implementation for including them.
  - papsosouid 14y ago
    Your post is both nonsense and repulsive. I suggest you read what you are replying to rather than spewing hyperbolic nazi accusations at people.
    - chc 14y ago
      You may be either very young or not an American English speaker, but the phrase "X Nazi" is American slang denoting somebody who is overly strict about whatever X is. It comes from the "Soup Nazi" episode of Seinfeld, in which a soup shop owner would evict customers from his shop with the declaration "NO SOUP FOR YOU" if they didn't follow a very precise procedure for ordering. It is not actually an accusation of Nazism.
      - papsosouid 14y ago
        That is why I said hyperbolic. It is still a very distasteful response, especially considering what it was replying to. I just read my post again, and I still can't find the part where I told "people what their website can or can't include for design".
        chc 14y ago
        You said any designer who chooses a body text font (something designers have been doing for hundreds of years, incidentally) is guilty of "self-obsessed wankery." The difference between that and telling people what they can or can't include is pretty slim.
- chc 14y ago
  The idea that typography has nothing to do with design is ridiculous on its face. I get that you don't like webfonts and you are welcome to that opinion, but it's silly to suggest that font selection and the placement of text isn't properly the job of a designer.
  - papsosouid 14y ago
    I didn't suggest typography has nothing to do with design. Placement of text is not at issue here, font face choice is. There are many font faces already available. They were created by designers. Ones who specialize in creating fonts in fact. They are much better at it than web designers. Breaking a website so it is entirely unreadable because you feel a non-standard font is prettier is something a bad designer does. It does not help the user, which is the entire point of a web site.
    - chc 14y ago
      > I didn't suggest typography has nothing to do with design. Placement of text is not at issue here, font face choice is. Choice of typefaces is part of typography. You can't place text without a face. > There are many font faces already available. They were created by designers. Ones who specialize in creating fonts in fact. There are about 10 fonts you can rely on people having (assuming you don't care about Linux users!). Several of these are gimmicky and generally not a good choice for anything. You really don't have all that great a selection. > Breaking a website so it is entirely unreadable because you feel a non-standard font is prettier is something a bad designer does. The site isn't entirely unreadable. It just takes a little bit longer to display. A very similar thing happens when a resource takes a while to load and leaves the body text the same color as the background for a long time. I'm a big advocate of having lean sites that display fast. When I'm asked to work on a site, the first thing I suggest is usually optimizing it so everyone sees it quickly (I had the biggest smile when I managed to cut one down from 20 seconds to 1.5 seconds on a slow-ish connection). But even I think just blanket damning custom fonts is really extreme. They really can add a lot to the feel and readability of a site, and they don't always suck.
      - 14y ago
- joshuacc 14y ago
  I specified that #2 is sometimes necessary for a specific end (distinctive design). You seem to be arguing that one should never seek that end. I disagree, but that's an entirely different argument.
  - papsosouid 14y ago
    >You seem to be arguing that one should never seek that end. Not at all. I am saying it is in no way necessary to load a non-standard font for the primary textual content in order to achieve the goal of a distinctive design. Loading a font to use for your branding is perfectly reasonable, users aren't there to read that anyways. Punishing the user by making the content not be there because you think distinctive design requires all your text to be unreadble_font_x just bad design.