>> Making the file smaller doesn't reduce latency No, but I think the parent was making the case for combining everything into a single file (jQuery + app) whi

>> Making the file smaller doesn't reduce latency No, but I think the parent was making the case for combining everything into a single file (jQuery + app) which has benefits in reducing number of HTTP requests, especially important on mobile for example. >> The point of a CDN is local distribution, not just load balancing. Personally, I build web-apps for UK customers, and host in the UK, so this is a non-issue. I suspect the same is true for a lot of people building complex web-apps (i.e. apps complex enough that you should care about your build process). >> You also get to share a cache with other sites; if you point to jQuery on Google's CDN, and the visitor has been to any other site using that CDN, they already have the file cached. Not really true, they have to have hit another site that has uses that exact version of jQuery in order to have it cached. There was a study done recently that illustrated this was very unlikely. I wish I could link to it, but all I can tell you is Alex Sexton referenced it on the Shoptalk podcast [1]. Edit: Another commenter has now referenced the survey in question [2]. [1] http://shoptalkshow.com/episodes/061-with-alex-sexton/ http://shoptalkshow.com/episodes/061-with-alex-sexton/ [2] http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2013/03/18/http-archive-jquery/ http://www.stevesouders.com/blog/2013/03/18/http-archive-jqu...