[taf2]

I had the exact opposite reaction to Wordpress - I found it an excellent reference for studying how to build a great CMS. For me its code is concise and easy to follow. The time I spent with Wordpress was a great adventure in someone else's code... I think debugging WP is pretty fun!

[BorisMelnik]

agree, while it may have some technical limitations it is one of the most successful CMS's ever, and gaining in being a very successful open source program as well. I'm a bigtime WordPress user and really don't have any problems with it. Most of my websites load in under 2 seconds (with a lot of tweaking) so I really can't complain.

[pjbrunet]

I can't remember where I read this but I think Google's new "gold standard" for load time is < 1s. A couple of years ago I think it was < 3s.

[eropple]

Perhaps two whole seconds fine for your needs, but to put in perspective your performance-is-fine claims in multiple posts in this thread: I won't go live with a site that doesn't render in under 150ms, because I consider doing worse than that disrespectful to my users and wasteful of their time. The amount of effort I have had to put in in the past to make WordPress perform even adequately has been disgusting.

[taf2]

I think the confusion is a page can render in 150ms but load time in the above comment was more about when the load event would fire on your site. 2 seconds for load event is pretty good. It's not google fast but it's not bad if your site has any images or loads css/js - most the WP sites I've ever dealt with have 50-60ms render times...

[eropple]

Two seconds to fire a load event would not be allowed out of the test environment anywhere I have worked.

[BorisMelnik]

correct, ttfb for instance on many servers is 1 second alone. A framework being rendered vs the entire load time of a website are 2 completely different metrics.