> Ship less JavaScript
posted on a site shipping 456.1KB of packed JavaScript
posted on a site shipping 456.1KB of packed JavaScript
The author made a statement
> Ship less JavaScript
They chose to post on medium, they could have posted the content anywhere. They chose to give us the above lesson, while ignoring it. Do as I say, not as I do.
> it's another question why Medium decided it is a good idea to ship almost 80k lines of Javascript code for a page whose only purpose is to display a blog post.
Who cares? Why not simply stop using such shitty services?
I didn't, please check your facts. Once again someone tells someone not to do something they're not doing. Well done.
> Staff Engineer at Google working with the Chrome team
Obviously they have the resources to self host in a sane manner.
Time is this really scarce thing that technically apt people often have a limited supply of. He can spend days rolling his own blog app from his own super custom optimized framework and then do all the additional work of getting that content indexed on Google and sprinkle SEO black magic all over it, or he can just put up a blog post on a service where somebody else does all of that for him.
Unless you're really into that sort of thing or are not fully employed, the time saving option is the most sensible one to do if it's "good enough." Which medium is, as evidenced by the fact that we're all talking about it.
Or use one of the existing Google portals they use for sharing content about their products, research, technical findings...
If we're talking about having to conserve time, that seems like a clear waste, either way.
It was, of course, a retorical question. We all know the answer.
People publish on Medium because we messed up. RSS died/was killed and we turned to these centralized solutions, instead. Even its name "Medium" is telling.
When your blog isn't your main job (or anything close to it), I really don't see the problem with using a service like Medium. We're all busy.
When it operates in exactly the manner the author tells us it shouldn't, don't use it.
The blog post repeatedly makes the point that you should measure everything you do and that you shouldn't apply blanket rules to your coding. I think the same logic applies here. The post being on Medium just isn't that relevant.
Posting on a site which insists on breaking the authors first rule just looks silly.
Even if one agrees with that attitude, which I don't, I'd argue it is the author's job to care.
Contributing to a bloated centralized service is not healthy for the Web. Making sure it remains a relevant platform is in his best interests, even from a purely egoistic point of view.
No need to implement yet another one.
As well as several blog like posts at google plus https://plus.google.com/+AddyOsmani
There are numerous official google blogs like the chromium blog https://blog.chromium.org/
As to why he chose medium over his existing blogs only he can tell you. My guess would be that he is using Medium to reach a bigger audience.
The confusing thing is when he he says we and us (talking about his team) it's confusing since it's on Medium. This really should be up on the Google dev blogs if it's official.
Exactly.
- Bytes transferred without JavaScript: ~2MB
- Bytes transferred with JavaScript: ~600kB
No. If you have JavaScript on and scroll through the article the page load is 2.8MB.
"Half a megabyte of packed JS" still sounds way overkill for delayed image loading.. =)
I scroll through the page and no more data is transferred.
I guess what I'm curious about is how you see images at all since I don't get them unless JS is turned on.
Well I guess Medium isn't far from the median.
Still, the "ship less JavaScript" comment rings true: people need to stop cargo-culting all the things into their front-ends. It's colossally annoying at the best of times, and the more-so when you're browsing over a 3G connection. You can basically forget using a lot of websites nowadays if you haven't at least got 3G, and plenty aren't that great on anything less than a 4G connection.