> The YouTube homepage is once again 15mb/90 requests
You look to be measuring the wrong thing there: 15MB is the uncompressed size; the actual amount transferred is only 3MB. (The two biggest JavaScript files are about 10.5MB, but 2MB on the wire.) And it’s the transfer size that the article is talking about.
(Now the uncompressed size does matter too, especially for JavaScript where that code has to all be parsed and executed, and 10MB will block for multiple seconds on particularly slow mobile devices, but that’s about CPUs, whereas the article is focusing on networks.)
On a slow or bitty connection that could still impact the video playback, perhaps even causing a stutter or few, due to competing with it for a share of the throughput possible, if only for a short time, so I think it is still valid to consider as potentially blocking content.
You look to be measuring the wrong thing there: 15MB is the uncompressed size; the actual amount transferred is only 3MB. (The two biggest JavaScript files are about 10.5MB, but 2MB on the wire.) And it’s the transfer size that the article is talking about.
(Now the uncompressed size does matter too, especially for JavaScript where that code has to all be parsed and executed, and 10MB will block for multiple seconds on particularly slow mobile devices, but that’s about CPUs, whereas the article is focusing on networks.)