logoalt Hacker News

PunchyHamsteryesterday at 8:47 PM14 repliesview on HN

Our developers managed to run around 750MB per website open once.

They have put in ticket with ops that the server is slow and could we look at it. So we looked. Every single video on a page with long video list pre-loaded a part of it. The single reason the site didn't ran like shit for them is coz office had direct fiber to out datacenter few blocks away.

We really shouldn't allow web developers more than 128kbit of connection speed, anything more and they just make nonsense out of it.


Replies

vunderbayesterday at 9:46 PM

PSA for those who aren’t aware: Chromium/Firefox-based browsers have a Network tab in the developer tools where you can dial down your bandwidth to simulate a slower 3G or 4G connection.

Combined with CPU throttling, it's a decent sanity check to see how well your site will perform on more modest setups.

show 8 replies
chrismorgantoday at 4:26 AM

Peanuts! My wife’s workplace has an internal photo gallery page. If your device can cope with it and you wait long enough, it’ll load about 14GB of images (so far). In practice, it will crawl along badly and eventually just crash your browser (or more), especially if you’re on a phone.

The single-line change of adding loading=lazy to the <img> elements wouldn’t fix everything, but it would make the page at least basically usable.

show 2 replies
kevin_thibedeauyesterday at 11:48 PM

> We really shouldn't allow web developers more than 128kbit

Marketing dept. too. They're the primary culprits in all the tracking scripts.

show 3 replies
hibikirtoday at 2:38 AM

You don't even need video for this: I once worked for a company that put a carousel with everything in the product line, and every element was just pointing to the high resolution photography assets: The one that maybe would be useful for full page print media ads. 6000x4000 pngs. It worked fine in the office, they said. Add another nice background that size, a few more to have on the sides as you scroll down...

I was asked to look at the site when it was already live, and some VP of the parent company decided to visit the site from their phone at home.

show 1 reply
ceejayozyesterday at 8:57 PM

Same for fancy computers. Dev on a fast one if you like, but test things out on a Chromebook.

show 3 replies
nitwit005today at 6:10 PM

There's essentially zero chance the developers get to make choices about the ads and ad tracking.

I wouldn't even guarantee it's developers adding it. I'm sure they have some sort of content management system for doing article and ad layout.

Gravitylosstoday at 10:12 AM

Should also give designers periodically small displays with low maximum contrast, and have them actually try to achieve everyday tasks with the UX they have designed.

jacquesmtoday at 8:18 AM

Yes, and a machine that is at least two generations behind the latest. That will cut down on bloat significantly.

Joel_Mckayyesterday at 9:02 PM

If you want to see context aware pre-fetching done right go to mcmaster.com ...

There are good reasons to have a small cheap development staging server, as the rate-limited connection implicitly trains people what not to include. =3

show 2 replies
littlecranky67today at 9:08 AM

Well as long as the website was already full loaded and responsive, and the videos show a thumbnail/placeholder, you are not blocked by that. Preloading and even very agressive pre-loading are a thing nowaadays. It is hostile to the user (because it draws their network traffic they pay for) but project managers will often override that to maximize gains from ad revenue.

socalgal2today at 2:17 AM

this is a general problem with lots of development. Network, Memory, GPU Speed. Designer / Engineer is on a modern Mac with 16-64 gig of ram and fast internet. They never try how their code/design works on some low end Intel UHD 630 or whatever. Lots of developers making 8-13 layer blob backgrounds that runs at 60 for 120fps on their modern mac but at 5-10fps on the average person's PC because of 15x overdraw.

anthkyesterday at 10:52 PM

I used the text web (https://text.npr.org and the like) thru Lyx. Also, Usenet, Gopher, Gemini, some 16 KBPS opus streams, everything under 2.7 KBPS when my phone data plan was throttled and I was using it in tethering mode. Tons of sites did work, but Gopher://magical.fish ran really fast.

Bitlbee saved (and still saves) my ass with tons of the protocols available via IRC using nearly nil data to connect. Also you can connect with any IRC client since early 90's.

Not just web developers. Electron lovers should be trottled with 2GB of RAM machines and some older Celeron/Core Duo machine with a GL 2.1 compatible video card. It it desktop 'app' smooth on that machine, your project it's ready.

sublinearyesterday at 9:01 PM

I'm pretty damn sure those videos were put on the page because someone in marketing wanted them. I'm pretty sure then QA complained the videos loaded too slowly, so the preloading was added. Then, the upper management responsible for the mess shrugged their shoulders and let it ship.

You're not insightful for noticing a website is dog slow or that there is a ton of data being served (almost none of which is actually the code). Please stop blaming the devs. You're laundering blame. Almost no detail of a web site or app is ever up to the devs alone.

From the perspective of the devs, they expect that the infrastructure can handle what the business wanted. If you have a problem you really should punch up, not down.

show 9 replies