OSNews

In the UK here. my line speed is 512k, so 500kb is a short wait. However I do not want 1 page sucking up every bit of bandwidth I have. I listen to net radio, I download files, other machines share the bandwidth. The bandwidth is shared, it doesn't belong to a single page, so 500kb is heavy.
The fact is lines are faster. Without meaning to be philosophical, they can be faster to download same contents in less time OR more contents in the same time. That doesn't change the fact my DSL can download at 150-200KB/s. That doesn't mean every page should be 500KB. It only means that pages CAN be 500KB or 1MB.

HTML insecure? HTML is just markup, it is 100% secure. SQL injection [...]
I only mentioned SQL, which would deserve a larger discussion and it's was not meant to be part of this one. Web applications based on HTML are insecure and securing an HTML web application sometimes takes more time than programming features themselves. Not because application is complex but for the very nature of HTML. Newer technologies like ASP.NET or (maybe) JSF (I don't know it very well) might help but yet they're a sort of hack to overcome HTML limitations.

a 1 meg page? Never visited one, and hope never to do so. Correctly written pages should never reach that, by correctly written I mean css based layouts, which generally come in 1/3rd the size of their table based equivalent.
I don't like this kind of approach to problems. "Hope never to do so"? Why? My line allows me to download 1MB in a few seconds so it would not be a problem to view a 1MB page. That's why people try to improve speeds. Suggesting a webpage should not be heavier than 100KB makes it all so... 1998... Should we suggest people to stop improving speeds because (after all) designing a webpage heavier than 200KB is an error so we don't need 4mpbs lines? Of course not...

C'me on... page complexity grows as contents grow and that's honestly good. I want to have more contents, not less or the same amount I had in 1998. And I'll tell you more: presentation of such contents today is *NOT* optimized just because markup was not smarter enough. So we have scrolling pages which is a design nonsense, for example, and all those HTML-style things which are frankly gross. And that's why, for example, MS (AFAIK) removed % values from XAML. This way, designers will be forced to OPTIMIZE their presentation layer and make it well-suited for users instead dependent on how lazy developer is. This is good, IMO.

Flash can never be a standard. Why? because only Macromedia can write a flash player. The flash specification license says so.
Maybe it's right. Maybe it's not. Honestly, I don't care very much about this thing. I hope you're not going to bore me with something like "Macromedia should open-source Flash..."! ;-) Really, that's something I care less.