Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by throwawayy1001 2702 days ago
> What is going to be the limit?

He suggests 1mb, personally I still think it is too much.

> How I, as a developer, make sure my website works everywhere?

1mb for a single page isn't enough?

> What with sites that use a lot of code but still work fast?

It's fast if the resources are near your device (CDN), most websites don't do that at all.

2 comments

I think we already do this. Its built into the fabric of the web. Not sure why we are proposing arbitrary limits and additional user opt in for this.

Wether a website wants to be inefficient or has a good reason for having a lot of resources it impacts the speed with which the site loads. The slower the site loads the more users are going to abandon the site. Stats say by 2 seconds most users have abandoned a slow loading site. Caveat that if the user feels the site is really worth the wait, they will wait longer.

So seems everything in this proposal is already addressed...

> 1mb for a single page isn't enough?

What about single-page apps where the whole app is "a single page". With this proposal, even lazily loading the extra bits would hit the limit.

I strongly suspect the true purpose of this would be to make javascript unusable for all but the most trivial cases, and to train end users to fear it like a virus, or find its presence annoying, making it an anti-feature. Killing SPAs would probably be a feature in that case.