<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>DEV Community: Hưng Trần Minh</title>
    <description>The latest articles on DEV Community by Hưng Trần Minh (@hungga1711).</description>
    <link>https://dev.to/hungga1711</link>
    
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://dev.to/feed/hungga1711"/>
    <language>en</language>
    <item>
      <title>Optimizing Software for Extremely Slow Networks (1KB/s)</title>
      <dc:creator>Hưng Trần Minh</dc:creator>
      <pubDate>Sun, 02 Nov 2025 10:32:32 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>https://dev.to/hungga1711/optimizing-software-for-extremely-slow-networks-1kbs-1hfo</link>
      <guid>https://dev.to/hungga1711/optimizing-software-for-extremely-slow-networks-1kbs-1hfo</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Learn how I made software feel fast even on an extremely slow 1KB/s network.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;
I share practical strategies for optimizing frontend, API calls, and data handling.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;



&lt;p&gt;📹 &lt;strong&gt;Real Vessel Network Test&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;

  &lt;iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ATTS6nS_WyA"&gt;
  &lt;/iframe&gt;


&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Recorded on a vessel (using VSAT) while testing the real network speed for an old project (~1KB/s)&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;




&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  The Problem
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The network was extremely slow, and even small amounts of data took a long time to load.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;At this speed, the system I built for normal internet could not work properly:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Frontend&lt;/strong&gt; loaded very slowly.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;API requests&lt;/strong&gt; took a long time or sometimes failed.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;User interactions&lt;/strong&gt; felt unresponsive and laggy.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Most parts of the system assumed a normal network speed.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I realized I needed to think carefully about &lt;strong&gt;how the frontend requests data&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;how the API responds&lt;/strong&gt;, so the system could still &lt;strong&gt;feel usable&lt;/strong&gt; even at 1 KB/s.&lt;/p&gt;




&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  Speeding Up the Software
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;After seeing how the software struggled at 1 KB/s, I focused on improving &lt;strong&gt;every layer&lt;/strong&gt; that affects speed and responsiveness.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;
Here’s how I approached it:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  Frontend
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I built the frontend with &lt;strong&gt;Preact&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;Vite&lt;/strong&gt;, prioritizing fast loading and responsiveness even on extremely slow networks.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h3&gt;
  
  
  1. Why Preact?
&lt;/h3&gt;

&lt;p&gt;On a 1 KB/s connection, every kilobyte matters. Using a large framework like React would make even a simple page feel heavy. That’s why I switched to Preact, it offers the same React-style API (hooks, JSX, context) but with a core size of only ~3 KB gzipped.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;My project uses a &lt;strong&gt;microfrontend architecture&lt;/strong&gt;, where each part of the system is built and &lt;strong&gt;deployed independently&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br&gt;
That means every app ships its own JavaScript runtime — and with React, those runtimes quickly &lt;strong&gt;add up to hundreds of kilobytes&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://media2.dev.to/dynamic/image/width=800%2Cheight=%2Cfit=scale-down%2Cgravity=auto%2Cformat=auto/https%3A%2F%2Fdev-to-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Farticles%2F159o24bnhwftywm58zts.png" class="article-body-image-wrapper"&gt;&lt;img src="https://media2.dev.to/dynamic/image/width=800%2Cheight=%2Cfit=scale-down%2Cgravity=auto%2Cformat=auto/https%3A%2F%2Fdev-to-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Farticles%2F159o24bnhwftywm58zts.png" alt="Microfrontend"&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;By using &lt;strong&gt;Preact&lt;/strong&gt;, that overhead shrinks to just &lt;strong&gt;a few kilobytes per app&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;br&gt;
This makes the overall system load faster and reduces memory usage on low-end devices, while still &lt;strong&gt;keeping the same React-style&lt;/strong&gt; development experience.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h3&gt;
  
  
  Comparing Bundle Size
&lt;/h3&gt;

&lt;p&gt;To see how much the choice of framework really matters, I ran a simple test.&lt;br&gt;
I created three minimal “Hello World” apps, one with &lt;strong&gt;React&lt;/strong&gt;, one with &lt;strong&gt;Next.js&lt;/strong&gt;, and one with &lt;strong&gt;Preact&lt;/strong&gt;, all stripped of CSS, assets, and icons. Then I built each project using their respective analyzers:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Next.js&lt;/strong&gt; with &lt;code&gt;next/bundle-analyzer&lt;/code&gt;&lt;br&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;React&lt;/strong&gt; and &lt;strong&gt;Preact&lt;/strong&gt; with &lt;code&gt;nonzzz/vite-bundle-analyzer&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The results below show how much smaller Preact’s bundle is compared to React and Next.js.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://media2.dev.to/dynamic/image/width=800%2Cheight=%2Cfit=scale-down%2Cgravity=auto%2Cformat=auto/https%3A%2F%2Fdev-to-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Farticles%2Fvog1nwajwf3qz37olell.png" class="article-body-image-wrapper"&gt;&lt;img src="https://media2.dev.to/dynamic/image/width=800%2Cheight=%2Cfit=scale-down%2Cgravity=auto%2Cformat=auto/https%3A%2F%2Fdev-to-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Farticles%2Fvog1nwajwf3qz37olell.png" alt="Comparing Bundle Size"&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h3&gt;
  
  
  2. Advanced Frontend Optimizations
&lt;/h3&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Choosing Preact gave me a smaller starting point, but that was only the beginning.&lt;br&gt;
To make the app truly usable on a 1 KB/s network, I applied several architectural and build-level optimizations.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2.1. Bundle Splitting (Dynamic Import + Suspense)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
Instead of shipping one large JavaScript bundle, I split the app into smaller chunks and load only what’s needed, using dynamic &lt;code&gt;import()&lt;/code&gt;, &lt;code&gt;lazy()&lt;/code&gt;, and &lt;code&gt;Suspense&lt;/code&gt; to coordinate loading and fallback UI.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="highlight js-code-highlight"&gt;
&lt;pre class="highlight javascript"&gt;&lt;code&gt;&lt;span class="k"&gt;import&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="p"&gt;{&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="nx"&gt;h&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;,&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="nx"&gt;Suspense&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="p"&gt;}&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="k"&gt;from&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="dl"&gt;'&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="s1"&gt;preact&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="dl"&gt;'&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;span class="k"&gt;import&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="p"&gt;{&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="nx"&gt;lazy&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="p"&gt;}&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="k"&gt;from&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="dl"&gt;'&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="s1"&gt;preact/compat&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="dl"&gt;'&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;;&lt;/span&gt;

&lt;span class="kd"&gt;const&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="nx"&gt;Heavy&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="o"&gt;=&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="nf"&gt;lazy&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;(()&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="o"&gt;=&amp;gt;&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="k"&gt;import&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;(&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="dl"&gt;'&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="s1"&gt;./HeavyComponent&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="dl"&gt;'&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;));&lt;/span&gt;

&lt;span class="k"&gt;export&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="k"&gt;default&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="kd"&gt;function&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="nf"&gt;App&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;()&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="p"&gt;{&lt;/span&gt;
  &lt;span class="k"&gt;return &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;(&lt;/span&gt;
    &lt;span class="o"&gt;&amp;lt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="nx"&gt;Suspense&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="nx"&gt;fallback&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="o"&gt;=&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;{&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="o"&gt;&amp;lt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="nx"&gt;div&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="o"&gt;&amp;gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="nx"&gt;Loading&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;...&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="o"&gt;&amp;lt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="sr"&gt;/div&amp;gt;}&amp;gt; /&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="o"&gt;/&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="nx"&gt;shown&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="k"&gt;while&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="nx"&gt;HeavyComponent&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="nx"&gt;loads&lt;/span&gt;
      &lt;span class="o"&gt;&amp;lt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="nx"&gt;Heavy&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="o"&gt;/&amp;gt;&lt;/span&gt;
    &lt;span class="o"&gt;&amp;lt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="sr"&gt;/Suspense&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="err"&gt;&amp;gt;
&lt;/span&gt;  &lt;span class="p"&gt;);&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;span class="p"&gt;}&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;

&lt;/div&gt;



&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2.2. Server-Side Rendering (SSR)&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;SSR speeds up perceived performance by sending ready-to-render HTML directly from the server.&lt;br&gt;
Users see content immediately, even long before JavaScript finishes loading.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;However, that HTML is static at first.&lt;br&gt;
The page still needs to download and hydrate JavaScript before it becomes interactive.&lt;br&gt;
That’s why the size of the client bundle still matters, and this is where Preact shines.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;In short: &lt;strong&gt;SSR gives instant content, and Preact makes it interactive faster&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2.3. Asset Optimization &amp;amp; Caching&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Even with SSR and small bundles, the network is often the slowest part of the system.&lt;br&gt;
To minimize loading time, I focused on reducing asset size and making browser caching more effective.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;All static assets, JavaScript, CSS, and images, are deployed with &lt;strong&gt;hashed filenames&lt;/strong&gt; (e.g., main.[hash].js) so browsers can cache them indefinitely.&lt;br&gt;
When a new build is deployed, only the changed files are downloaded again.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Assets are served through a &lt;strong&gt;CDN&lt;/strong&gt;, which delivers them from the nearest edge location, greatly improving latency, especially important on slow or unstable connections.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://media2.dev.to/dynamic/image/width=800%2Cheight=%2Cfit=scale-down%2Cgravity=auto%2Cformat=auto/https%3A%2F%2Fdev-to-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Farticles%2F0eyz5j19vwuz8nfiyf9f.png" class="article-body-image-wrapper"&gt;&lt;img src="https://media2.dev.to/dynamic/image/width=800%2Cheight=%2Cfit=scale-down%2Cgravity=auto%2Cformat=auto/https%3A%2F%2Fdev-to-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Farticles%2F0eyz5j19vwuz8nfiyf9f.png" alt="CDN"&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Each asset is served with:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;code&gt;Cache-Control: public, max-age=31536000, immutable&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;while HTML remains lightly cached so users always get the latest version.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Images are converted to &lt;strong&gt;WebP&lt;/strong&gt; to reduce file size without visible quality loss, and placeholders are used for lazy loading so content appears immediately.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://media2.dev.to/dynamic/image/width=800%2Cheight=%2Cfit=scale-down%2Cgravity=auto%2Cformat=auto/https%3A%2F%2Fdev-to-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Farticles%2F8bevnsc3qggmi8xy25u5.png" class="article-body-image-wrapper"&gt;&lt;img src="https://media2.dev.to/dynamic/image/width=800%2Cheight=%2Cfit=scale-down%2Cgravity=auto%2Cformat=auto/https%3A%2F%2Fdev-to-uploads.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Farticles%2F8bevnsc3qggmi8xy25u5.png" alt="PNG and WebP"&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  Backend
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Even with a lightweight frontend, the app can still feel slow if the API is heavy.&lt;br&gt;
To optimize both speed and payload size, I focused on several key areas:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1. Zstd Compression&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
The backend uses &lt;strong&gt;Zstd&lt;/strong&gt; at &lt;strong&gt;level 21&lt;/strong&gt; for maximum compression, but only if the client requests it.&lt;br&gt;
Responses include a header indicating the compression method (&lt;code&gt;Content-Encoding: zstd&lt;/code&gt;), so clients that don’t support it still receive plain data.&lt;br&gt;
This dramatically reduces payload size while remaining compatible.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Example&lt;/strong&gt;: The client sends the following request:&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="highlight js-code-highlight"&gt;
&lt;pre class="highlight http"&gt;&lt;code&gt;&lt;span class="nf"&gt;GET&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="nn"&gt;/api/data&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="k"&gt;HTTP&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="o"&gt;/&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="m"&gt;1.1&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;span class="na"&gt;Host&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="s"&gt;example.com&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;span class="na"&gt;Accept-Encoding&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="s"&gt;gzip, zstd&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;

&lt;/div&gt;



&lt;p&gt;The &lt;code&gt;Accept-Encoding&lt;/code&gt; header tells the server that the client can accept compressed data in the gzip or zstd formats, and prefers the server to send compressed data if possible.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Example&lt;/strong&gt;: The server sends the following response:&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="highlight js-code-highlight"&gt;
&lt;pre class="highlight http"&gt;&lt;code&gt;&lt;span class="k"&gt;HTTP&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="o"&gt;/&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="m"&gt;1.1&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="m"&gt;200&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="ne"&gt;OK&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;span class="na"&gt;Content-Encoding&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="s"&gt;zstd&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;span class="na"&gt;Content-Length&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;:&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="s"&gt;12345&lt;/span&gt;

&amp;lt;compressed data in zstd&amp;gt;
&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;

&lt;/div&gt;



&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2. Binary Serialization with Protobuf&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
To minimize payload size and speed up parsing, API responses are encoded using Protobuf instead of JSON.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Protobuf&lt;/strong&gt; is compact, fast, and easy to maintain, making it ideal for low-bandwidth scenarios.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I also considered alternatives:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;JSON&lt;/strong&gt;: human-readable, but verbose and slower to parse.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;FlatBuffers&lt;/strong&gt;: extremely compact and fast, but complex to maintain and harder to evolve over time.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Protobuf&lt;/strong&gt; hits the sweet spot: small payloads, fast parsing, and maintainable schema evolution.&lt;br&gt;
&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="highlight js-code-highlight"&gt;
&lt;pre class="highlight protobuf"&gt;&lt;code&gt;&lt;span class="na"&gt;syntax&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="o"&gt;=&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="s"&gt;"proto3"&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;;&lt;/span&gt;

&lt;span class="kd"&gt;message&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="nc"&gt;User&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="p"&gt;{&lt;/span&gt;
    &lt;span class="kt"&gt;string&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="na"&gt;name&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="o"&gt;=&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="mi"&gt;1&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;;&lt;/span&gt;
    &lt;span class="k"&gt;repeated&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="n"&gt;Address&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="na"&gt;address&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="o"&gt;=&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="mi"&gt;2&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;span class="p"&gt;}&lt;/span&gt;

&lt;span class="kd"&gt;message&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="nc"&gt;Address&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="p"&gt;{&lt;/span&gt;
    &lt;span class="kt"&gt;string&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="na"&gt;line&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="o"&gt;=&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span class="mi"&gt;1&lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class="p"&gt;;&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;span class="p"&gt;}&lt;/span&gt;
&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/pre&gt;

&lt;/div&gt;



&lt;p&gt;For real-world performance benchmarks, see &lt;a href="https://github.com/protobufjs/protobuf.js/?tab=readme-ov-file#performance" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;protobuf.js performance&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;3. HTTP/3 Transport&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;All API requests use &lt;strong&gt;HTTP/3&lt;/strong&gt;, taking advantage of &lt;strong&gt;QUIC’s&lt;/strong&gt; multiplexed streams and improved loss recovery.&lt;br&gt;
Compared to HTTP/2 or HTTP/1.1, HTTP/3 reduces latency, avoids head-of-line blocking, and handles packet loss more efficiently, especially beneficial on &lt;strong&gt;unstable&lt;/strong&gt; or &lt;strong&gt;slow networks&lt;/strong&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;




&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  Summary
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Optimizing for slow networks requires attention to every layer of the stack, from frontend rendering to API transport.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Frontend optimizations:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Preact + Vite&lt;/strong&gt; for minimal bundle size and fast hydration&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Bundle splitting&lt;/strong&gt; with &lt;code&gt;lazy()&lt;/code&gt; + &lt;code&gt;Suspense&lt;/code&gt; for component and route-level lazy loading&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;SSR&lt;/strong&gt; to deliver instant HTML, with Preact’s small runtime enabling much faster hydration than Next.js&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Asset optimization &amp;amp; caching&lt;/strong&gt; with hashed filenames, CDN delivery, and WebP images&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;API optimizations:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Zstd compression&lt;/strong&gt; (level 21) applied conditionally for maximum payload reduction&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;Protobuf&lt;/strong&gt; for compact, fast, and maintainable serialization&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;HTTP/3 transport&lt;/strong&gt; for low-latency, reliable delivery on unstable networks&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ul&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Combined, these strategies allowed the app to remain fast, responsive, and usable even at 1 KB/s, while keeping the total payload minimal.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Thanks for reading! &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I hope these insights give you practical ideas for building fast and responsive apps, even on extremely slow networks.&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
      <category>frontend</category>
      <category>backend</category>
      <category>api</category>
      <category>performance</category>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
