Tumblr wins because it's twice as fast

This is a terrible article.<p>The bald assertion that Tumblr is more successful than Posterous because it is faster is repeated about a half dozen times during the piece but no evidence is ever advanced to prove this point.<p>Without further data, at best, we're talking a correlation. I could similarly argue that dropping the 'e' in Tumblr is a 'big reason' Tumblr is more successful than Posterous (which, please note, contains an 'e'!).

I don't know about this... I use tumblr and it usually seems pretty slow to me... normally more than the 3sec load time they quote... haven't tried posterous yet....

It is really a good article. We have more and more sites on the internet but it seems become more and more slow because our web become too "complex".

Tumblr would be even faster if their Javascript was a bit lighter. They use Prototype and various unneeded scripts.

Does web performance matter? For Tumblr and other light blogging service providers, clearly it does and it made a big difference. A recent New York Times article pointed out that "Tumblr Leaves Posterous In the Dust". Both are leading light blogging service providers. However, Tumblr has out-grown Posterous significantly over the last year. Why? it looks like that one big reason is that Tumblr has been twice as fast as Posterous.