@beep luckily Tom’s Hardware only clocks in at 13,5mb on a desktop browser.

@beep but actually this is working as intended so it isn't

@beep this thing -> https://upstash.com/ consumes 50mb+ heap size on startup , to display a static landing page.

For youtube, it is consistently 100mb+, for google, it is again 50mb.

@beep I've been wrestling with the idea of setting up a personal website, mostly as an exercise in setting up a workflow with git and MkDocs and so on. And the more I'd try to imagine doing it, the less enthusiasm I have for it.

And right now I'm thinking, what's the point of trying to do it "professionally", when the "professional" model is just obviously extremely bad?

@beep K.I.S.S. - the bane of execs, project owners, and UX designers across the board

@beep@follow.ethanmarcotte.com God, this is awful and sad.

@beep blame javascript

@beep There is no possible excuse for a web page to have content larger than 1 GByte. One factor in this situation is web designers going mad with javascript.

@beep This is very noticeable even on a standard recent (not low-end) phone if you switch between a 3D game and a web page: the game might get 60fps while the web page seems to be reaching about 5.

@beep @daedalus *idly wonders how heavy that TH page is*

@beep @AMS "Why are you trying to use our web site on a phone? We told you 5 times to use our app!"

@beep This very article had three different auto-playing videos, an animation, a comments section, and dozens of pictures for other articles and ads.

@beep proud to say my blog is 3.5kb for the layout and CSS + 7.91kb for the Ko-Fi button, totaling 11,41kb

:)

@beep Funny how if opened without an adblocker, this page loads over 24 MiB of data :hehehe:

@beep I wonder what Mastodon instance they tested it with. It just says "site: Mastodon"

@beep Some of us can remember the days when half the time taken when building a site was spent squeezing every last extra kilobyte out of the code and graphics. It's funny to think that it's nearly a quarter of a century since I escaped from the Web biz.

@beep And of course that is a vast web page with multiple video advertisements ...

@beep As other commentators pointed out it is baffling that TomHardware site with aforementioned article is absolutely riddled with ads and horrible to read without any distractions. Site’s performance and UX be damned.

@beep there's a big old cloud of irony over this of course - but - I'm glad such a big famous old and also bloaty website is running a story like this. More awareness, yes yes.

@beep

> "As the testing above shows, some of the most brutally intensive websites include ... and basically every major social media platform."

I take exception to that. Mastodon loads pretty damn quickly, and it's the only social media site _I_ use daily.

But yes, that article is pretty accurate, and most large players will respond "just use our mobile app instead" (with the unspoken part being 'so we can track and sell literally everything you do, visit, and say')