And I'm glad that I don't work with your project managers, who apparently think that choosing frameworks based on a homepage's arbitrarily "cool" presentation is appropriate methodology.
> Everything you stated is just your opinion (phrases like "anti-pattern" or "bad UX", "style over substance"), and that's fine.
Yes, when somebody says something, it's their opinion -- not sure what point you're even trying to make here, honestly. However, I provided you with specific reasons for those opinions based on decades of published research by countless developers and psychologists. Intentionally slowing down information consumption IS an anti-pattern. Making people scroll dozens of times to read one total paragraph IS bad UX. Limiting information in favor of animations IS style over substance.
Whereas your entire argument is based around the presentation "looking cool," which is an opinion not even shared by the vast majority of commenters in this thread.
> I'm doing web development and UI/UX for some time, same as people who build this (I didn't even know who built this until now). And it checks every mark in my UI/UX book.
You appear to be asserting that "you know better" because you're a web developer. However, I've been a web developer for 25 years, so your attempted posturing doesn't win you any points here. Also, there are literal books on UI/UX -- tons of them, actually -- and they all disagree with your imaginary book.
> Shared with my peers (devs, PO and designers), all think the same. Great UX.
To show you how silly that argument is, I just shared this page with some folks -- three developers and two designers, all of whom have been in the industry for a minimum of a decade -- and asked them to give me a quick <5 word impression of the site. These are their responses:
"Page loads already scrolled to the bottom. Is that what it's supposed to do?"
"some shitty designers wet dream from 10 years ago"
"LOL - this is bad."
"stopped reading at: (What the heck does event.preventDefault do anyway?)"
"Garbage."