[lelanthran]

> irrelevant metrics such as page weight[0] instead of user centric perf metrics[1].

I don't know if that is irrelevant to the argument "Web Designs are Getting too Complicated".

The argument as stated is kinda ambiguous.

Lets say I wrote a small web app that consisted of exactly 5 input forms with not more than 4 input elements each, backed by a database of 3 tables.

If my front-end uses a tech depending on eleven 3rd party components (vite, npm, a treeshaker, a linter, react, redux, tailwind, sass, graphql, websockets, typescript) then you can get into the situation where both these things are true:

1. The user PoV is that this is a simple webapp which is easy to use

and

2. The developers PoV is that this is an over-engineered design that could have been done in a day with no build-step nor anything beyond HTML, CSS and Javascript.

[jameslk]

Yes the fuzzy use of “complicated” is part of the problem with this article. I am assuming “complicated” here means it’s consequential to users from a bad UX perspective because the article mentions some business stats:

> Google's research shows users form opinions about websites in 50 milliseconds. If your site takes over 3 seconds to load, you've lost 53% of mobile users. Amazon found every 100ms delay costs them 1% of sales.

In which case, my argument still stands that they’re focusing on the wrong perf metric (page weight).

The least complicated webpage is a blank page, but users won’t find that too useful. That’s why we don’t use page weight as our North Star in the web perf world