[joshuamorton]

I think that's misleading. I tested a few times this morning, and had clean-cache "load" times of 10-35 seconds, but I could use the app within 5 and chrome devtools showed ready in under 10.

So I'm curious what your metric is. Is it until the last resource is fully rendered in devtools, until the ready action fires, or until you can actually do things?

[JoshuaAshton]

My metric was until the loading bar finished on the little fancy but useless opening letter animation which also probably took a significant time to load.

[explainplease]

Do you hear yourself? You said to him:

> 23 seconds is abnormal, not the experience of most users, and therefore likely either not consistent for you (maybe your WiFi connection dropped) or due to some wierd configuration on your end.

And then you said:

> I tested a few times this morning, and had clean-cache "load" times of 10-35 seconds

And the middle of that range is 22.5 seconds. And you accuse him (a commenter on HN) of being so inexperienced that he can't distinguish between a new UI's very slow load times and his WiFi disconnecting?

> (Technically speaking, I work on Gmail, but unrelated to this)

Is everyone on the Gmail team like this? If so, no wonder we're having these problems. Google just won't listen.

The first thing I noticed about the new UI, and the thing I notice every time I load it, is that it takes 5-10 times as long to load as the former UI. It's just yet another reason to migrate off of Gmail for me.

[joshuamorton]

If you read the rest of the comment, you'd see that the relevant load time was <5 seconds, and that the longer load time was misleading. I was checking to see if the way they were measuring was useful or not. They clarified, and for some reason what was taking 3-5 seconds for me across multiple machines takes them 5x that. In other words, I was asking what his benchmark was, because it's easy to stumble into a misleading one, even for an experienced user.

I mentioned wifi dropping because that's exactly the reason it took 35 seconds to load. Every other time was sub 15.

Please follow the guidelines and respond to the strongest possible interpretation of what I'm saying, which is on fact trying to understand the issue, not in fact blaming someone. There's no reason to be rude or accusatory.

[explainplease]

> Please follow the guidelines and respond to the strongest possible interpretation of what I'm saying, which is on fact trying to understand the issue, not in fact blaming someone. There's no reason to be rude or accusatory.

It would be good if you would do the same. Your comments to him seem to not follow those guidelines.