> You comment shows that you have no practical knowledge of the web ecosystem
You're talking to a person with 20 years of frontend development experience. But sure, do go on with your assumptions.
Also, no idea what "web ecosystem" has to do with the patently false claim of " the most powerful layouting system and rendering engine.", but do go on
> The reality is that web is fast enough
I never claimed it wasn't. But, again, without clarification of what fast is, or what enough is, it's again nebulous, and wrong for a very wide variety of use cases.
> it is the first choice for building a new cross-platform product and for migrating legacy projects.
I have no idea what this has to do with any of the things in this discussion.
> Your pedantic arguments are not going to reverse that trend.
Java applets and ActiveX also where the bee's knees and the best thing since sliced bread, and drove businesses and brought in billions of dollars in revenue.
All this has literally nothing to do with the technology and how bad or good it is.
I have also been writing for the web for over 20 years. This doesn't really mean anything though. That is why measures are all that matters. Bad measures are still monumentally better than no measures at all.
The sad reality is that most people writing for the web today cannot do so without a framework. They have no idea how the layers underneath actually work. If you want to understand performance you must measure for it in multiple different ways and have something meaningful to compare it to. All modern browsers provide fantastic performance measuring tools in their developer tools. Its how I got my OS GUI (in a browser) to execute as fast as within 60ms of page load.
I couldn't agree with you more.
Sadly enough the supercomputers we have still let us get away with the worst of the worst of performances with little penalties