Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

That Page must have been really expensive. Fully responsive, seemingly tested on iPad and iPhone back when mobile browser penetration was much lower compared to now. Incredible loading times, maybe they used a lot of asset preprocessing/compressing to make the page load that fast.

One thing that bothers me is that there is no Google Analytics. Without good tracking they might not be able to optimise conversion rates of the landing page in the long run.



Its not a single page application though. That really hurts usability. As a user I want to load the entire web application up front, then deal with JavaScript loading nonsense constantly.

Why should big powerful servers do the work when I have my battery constrained smartphone/laptop to do the heavy lifting?


Angular is basically just IKEA for web pages.


Haha. But is it? I'm having a very hard time reading this on a phone. The text is too small and when I zoom in (unlike on desktop) it doesn't reflow.

I don't understand this "no css is best css" trope.. this is unusable on mobile.

(Explicit note of the obvious which should go without saying: not a criticism of the page. Just about this HN meme of revering css-less pages. )


At least you get to zoom in, which is not true with most of the mobile websites these days.


I agree!


You can add an html meta tag that would solve the mobile issues you're describing, without CSS.

    <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1">


If you set initial-scale=1, isn't width=device-width redundant?


it's probably there cause some early implementation somewhere tried to be "smart" if you weren't explicit.

too lazy to give you definitive answer, but:

[1] https://www.w3.org/TR/css-device-adapt-1/

[2] https://benfrain.com/understanding-the-viewport-meta-tag-and...


Amazing what you could achieve with Adobe PageMill!


you are wrong. They've skipped out on parallax scrolling. So obviously there was a finite budget.


you can make the site look 2017 and still work at incredible 2005 speeds by just sprinkling some CSS3


People forget that web pages require maintenance. This is a great example of the benefits that come from keeping plenty of spare HTML on hand. Though I hate think about the cost of to taxpayers of a <p> in 1997...and the </p> tags? Well that's just plain over engineering. Oh wait, it's Nasa.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: