• HewlettHackard@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    1 year ago

    This was more interesting than I expected. Though they didn’t clarify why it costs $700,000, given the context I assume it’s customers on slower devices/connectivity leaving rather than something like bandwidth?

      • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        The funny thing is that internet speeds, back in 2006, were significantly lower than today. And here we are, with 10x the speeds and pages somehow loading slower than back then!

    • Orvanis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      That was what I got from the article too. That the 700k was lost opportunity due to a poor user experience, not that it actually was them spending more money.

    • neil@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Often, it boils down to one common problem: Too much client-side JavaScript. This is not a cost-free error. One retailer realized they were losing $700,000 a year per kilobyte of JavaScript, Russell said.

      “You may be losing all of the users who don’t have those devices because the experience is so bad,” he said.

      They just didn’t link to the one retailer’s context. But it’s “bring back old reddit” energy directed at everything SPA.

    • malloc@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      One retailer realized they were losing $700,000 a year per kilobyte of JavaScript, Russell said.

      It’s a retailer so definitely lost sales or conversions