You have a good point in this thread but you rope in all sorts of irrelevant things to try to make it. You regularly conflate "frameworks!" with "just too much JS for this page". React is 35kb. You point your finger at frameworks but that isn't the problem here at all.
-
-
Replying to @ryanflorence @slightlylate
For instance, lets talk about that hero image, it's 242 kilobytes which is about seven Reacts! Or fonts. They've got 216 KB of fonts. That's another six Reacts! Their initial bundle should be smaller, but frameworks are the least of this site's problems.
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @ryanflorence
Fonts are a problem, but images aren't critical path. And font download is in competition with the JS in this trace.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @slightlylate @ryanflorence
I mean, if your point is that this site wasn't built well, ok. But nothing hurts as much as script, and there's waaaaaay too much of it here.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate
Right. Site wasn't built great, so why do you continually go straight for frameworks as the problem when they represent < 40kb of it?
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @ryanflorence
Why is it that the sites I see that avoid adopting framework-of-the-minute tend to do so much better? If you read my post you'll hopefully understand that I'm discussing a management and culture issue. Frameworks we can't afford being overused are a symptom.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate
You don't talk about any other symptoms though. Can you link me to two sites that don't use "framework-of-the-minute"? I'd love to see what they are.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ryanflorence
ICYMI, I linked a trace of such a site in the post itself: https://www.webpagetest.org/result/180827_FR_7ca373cd8e9e200d531c63fa03a14809/ …
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @slightlylate @ryanflorence
This is a fascinating contrast. Interestingly to me, about 60% of the difference in Start Render and 36% of the difference in TTI is due to http://vets.gov 's very slow TTFB. (Which is not to argue that it's not quite heavy on JS for a static site.)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @xander76 @ryanflorence
Here's an overlay of first-load traces: https://www.webpagetest.org/video/compare.php?tests=180827_FR_7ca373cd8e9e200d531c63fa03a14809-r:1-c:0,180912_6Q_5fd08e0ef64071de6f3cd266c36a3cac-r:2-c:0 …
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Notably the http://Gov.uk site pulls in ~120K of fonts vs. ~145K for http://Vets.gov , yet font fetching takes less than half as long because it isn't in contention for the pipe.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
& Web Standards TL; Blink API OWNER
Named PWAs w/
DMs open. Tweets my own; press@google.com for official comms.