Funny, after seeing the same comparison of server- vs client-... • Aaron Parecki

76°F

Funny, after seeing the same comparison of server- vs client-side rendering of HTML, I had the opposite reaction: http://www.onebigfluke.com/2015/01/experimentally-verified-why-client-side.html

TL;DR: Client-side and server-side rendering are approximately equivalent for moderately-sized pages. The author uses this data to justify his use of client-side rendering, while I use this data to justify server-side rendering.

#indieweb

Portland, Oregon, USA

Sun, Jan 18, 2015 9:07pm -08:00 #indieweb

5 likes 4 replies
Have you written a response to this? Let me know the URL:
- Nate Goldman ngoldman.me
  
  @aaronpk An isomorphic approach makes the most sense to me. Server render on first request, client handles further state change.
  
  Mon, Jan 19, 2015 8:01am +00:00 (via brid-gy.appspot.com)
- Brett Slatkin onebigfluke.com
  
  @aaronpk Thanks!
  
  Mon, Jan 19, 2015 6:39am +00:00 (via brid-gy.appspot.com)
- Aaron Parecki aaronparecki.com
  
  @haxor Indeed! Great writeup too, it was a good read.
  
  Mon, Jan 19, 2015 6:39am +00:00 (via brid-gy.appspot.com)
- Brett Slatkin onebigfluke.com
  
  @aaronpk And your conclusion is fine too. It's a design choice based on what problem you're trying to solve.
  
  Mon, Jan 19, 2015 6:26am +00:00 (via brid-gy.appspot.com)

Posted in /notes