[t8sr]

My friend, it renders at 15 fps on a literal supercomputer. It takes 30 seconds to load. The time between clicking a button and something happening is measured in seconds. It may be successful, but it is not good.

The problem is that you’ve (and we all have) learned to accept absolute garbage. It’s clearly possible to do better, because smaller companies have managed to build well functioning software that exceeds the performance of Google’s slop by a factor of 50.

I’m not saying RETVRN to plain JS, but clearly the horrid performance of modern web apps has /something/ to do with the 2 frameworks they’re all built on.

[tehbeard]

> Takes 30 seconds to load.

Tried a cleared cache load, open and usable in 3 seconds, loading my work inbox which is fairly busy and not clean.

I'm not sure what FPS has to do with this? Have you some sort of fancy windows 11 animations extension installed that star wipes from inbox to email view and it's stuttering??

I click and email it shows instantly, the only thing close to "low FPS" is it loads in some styles for a calendar notification and there's a minor layout shift on the email.

What / how are you using it that you apparently get such piss poor performance?

[procaryote]

Our experiences of gmail are very different.

[lmm]

> clearly the horrid performance of modern web apps has /something/ to do with the 2 frameworks they’re all built on.

Nonsense. Apps from all frameworks and none show the same performance issues, and you can find exceptionally snappy examples from almost all frameworks too. Modern webapps are slow because the business incentives are to make them slow, the technology choices are incidental.