3 ms·

Slick website and an interesting idea, unfortunately I'm on android so can't check it out. I hate to be that HN guy, but when I first went to your site, I spen

Slick website and an interesting idea, unfortunately I'm on android so can't check it out. I hate to be that HN guy, but when I first went to your site, I spent nearly 10 seconds looking at a frozen image of a car, with no text or anything, wondering what was going on. Then the hero video started playing and the text was then rendered, but I couldn't actually read the text because there was so much going on behind it. I also didn't notice the play video button until I read some of the comments here too. If I was you I would ditch the hero video and go with something less distracting and less heavy on the page (scrolling was pretty laggy too). It's a shame because the rest of the page looks great and has good copy, but I'd suspect you'd lose quite a few readers in those first 5-10 seconds.

falcolas 12y ago
It was 30 seconds for the full landing page to show for me, and 17 seconds before the hook text flew onto the page. The front page is over 8 megs, and even with a primed cache there are 4 megs which must be downloaded before I can even view the landing page. This will be hell for mobile users. I agree with the parent, this will not be acceptable for many folks. After all, if your website abandon rates will rise by 5% for every second it takes to load, how many will be around after 10, 20, 30 seconds? And while I hate to be "that guy", what value does the dynamic loading provide the end user? What could not be done with a static webpage animated with Javascript after the assets have been loaded?