Follow

"Tiny websites are great"

Love this!

I would suggest to use some tiny analytics such as Plausible Analytics (1.4 KB) instead of Google Analytics (45.7 KB). It also doesn't require cookie/GDPR notice which can make tiny websites much less tiny.

tinyprojects.dev/posts/tiny_we

@markosaric My analytics script is 1.55 KB minified because I had to include a polyfill to support IE6, and that's like half the script… :( But only 1.03 KB gzipped though.

@markosaric No analytics is even better and more lightweight 😉

@amolith 👍 i mentioned analytics because that site used ga scripts which are almost 50 KB which doesn't really fit with the tiny sites. for those who like to see some stats there are better options

@markosaric That part sounds great, but if you read his first guide to create a first website (see: tinyprojects.dev/guides/tiny_w) I have the impression he can’t let go of the usual framework addiction. Google Firebase hosting and nodeJS! Really? No thanks.

@hansup @markosaric yeah, that was a bit of a surprise to me, too. You want to go minimal, sure, go ahead, go minimal. Code up the HTML and CSS by hand, then upload it to whatever static hosting you want, boom, done.

@doenietzomoeilijk @hansup @judeswae yeah it can definitely be made "tinier". it even uses google analytics which cannot really be considered tiny. i shared it because i like the concept and the idea behind it.

@hansup I agree with you. Firebase and Node seems overkill. But what would be your tiniest webserver in this particular case? @markosaric

@claus @judeswae @markosaric @aral Prototype-01 is definitively a wonderful thing, but as Aral says himself: “The audience for this post is tinkerers and developers.” It maybe has that kind of simplicity you only understand when you have coded and published a decade or so. It is also more about having a personal server than writing a webpage in html and css.

@hansup @judeswae @markosaric @aral Oh yes absolutely. So nice though. Tiny webserver for your tiny website :)

@claus @judeswae @markosaric @aral yes! A tiny box in your pocket with your personal webspace!

@claus @hansup @judeswae @markosaric Keep an eye on sitejs.org – especially the next release. Fingers crossed, trying to get it out this week finally :)

@aral @claus @hansup @markosaric
Thank you all for sharing.

If I need a local server, I usually go for :

$ python3 -m http.server

That’s the simplest, serve all, one line web server I can think of.

If not, and need a public facing one, I’d go for a paid hosting provider, for sure.

@judeswae @claus @hansup @markosaric

I do:

site

Then I visit https://localhost without certificate errors.

If I want to set up a public-facing one, I do:

ssh my.site
<paste Site.js install command>
site enable

Then I hit my.site

If I want to sync my local site to my public one, I do:

site --sync-to=my.site

Then I have a cup of coffee ;)

sitejs.org

@judeswae @markosaric I would first encourage people to just experience the pure simplicity of html and css locally. Write some html, save and open your pages in a browser.
When ready to publish online, I look for a free or cheap, but reliable host solution. Personally I always payed for hosting. I don’t mind paying for a good service. Self hosting always seems to complicated. I want to concentrate on the content of my pages, not on the maintenance of a server.

@markosaric Tiny web sites are fast, too. I got 99% on Google Page Speed even on dirt cheap commodity web hosting.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Fosstodon

Fosstodon is an English speaking Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.