- Semantic version is not responsive (sure it looks ok but isn't optimised)
- Tailwind version has 13 inlined SVG icons (on the homepage) which increase DOM size (Semantic version has none)
- Tailwind version uses optimised markup for SEO purposes which leads to increased DOM size (<ul> list for navigation; not wrapping entire article summary in an anchor; using <dl/dt/dd> structure in work section)
This is clearly not comparing apples with apples when it comes to semantic HTML+CSS vs Tailwind.
However, most egregiously, the author goes on to make a bunch of comparisons between the Next.js tailwindui marketing site and his Nuejs-generated template for the argument that "Tailwind is bad for performance". This is deliberately misleading.
There are plenty of valid criticisms of Tailwind but it's hard not to look at this article as anything but a puff piece for the author's framework rather than a serious comparison of two approaches to building UIs.
Tangential but RealLifeLore did a video a while back[1] outlining how Las Vegas manages water intake from Lake Mead and the Colorado River by minimising waste and having extremely efficient water processing facilities which then feed water back.
Maybe there are lessons to be learned there rather than simply taking more.
If signed up to the scheme (most are, including Santander), your old bank is responsible for passing on any deposits directly to your new bank account and the new bank is responsible for processing any transactions made using your old details. This carries on for, I believe 12 months.
I found the Switch Guarantee service to be excellent and believe it's a significant driver of innovation and competition in UK banking (which is far ahead of many other European countries in my experience).
My payees from my old bank were even transferred over to my new one.
(Current account = checking account to any non-UK readers.)
- Semantic version is not responsive (sure it looks ok but isn't optimised)
- Tailwind version has 13 inlined SVG icons (on the homepage) which increase DOM size (Semantic version has none)
- Tailwind version uses optimised markup for SEO purposes which leads to increased DOM size (<ul> list for navigation; not wrapping entire article summary in an anchor; using <dl/dt/dd> structure in work section)
This is clearly not comparing apples with apples when it comes to semantic HTML+CSS vs Tailwind.
However, most egregiously, the author goes on to make a bunch of comparisons between the Next.js tailwindui marketing site and his Nuejs-generated template for the argument that "Tailwind is bad for performance". This is deliberately misleading.
There are plenty of valid criticisms of Tailwind but it's hard not to look at this article as anything but a puff piece for the author's framework rather than a serious comparison of two approaches to building UIs.