Eh how exactly is authored CSS size related to the browser (not including conditional IE comments which are… a thing?)? Can you elaborate because I fail to see how this would be Firefox’ fault (and for the record I’m not a Firefox user, in fact I’m not exactly a fan).
which can be a reasonable approach in certain scenarios, usecase matters of course.
What many sites don’t seem to do is above-the-fold CSS, though to be fair that is REALLY hard to optimize for.
The problem isn’t the usage of CSS/JS frameworks in itself, the problem is how developers use it. I see it way too much that devs include a whole framework and then start overwriting half the styles to “reset” them, then go ahead and overwrite them to their target values. Which is kinda stupid in the first place.
If you go deeper though most CSS frameworks are modular, you can take whatever you want. You can even integrate them with SASS or LESS to personalize them in the build process, but not a lot of devs seem to do that.
If you selfhost, compile your own version with the modules and styles you need, chances are the file won’t even be that big in the end.
If you’re a dev and you want or need to include the complete framework including all modules and overwrite select styles that’s fine too. But for the love of all that is holy at least use a widely spread CDN and don’t host it on your own servers/CDN. Because that’s what’s really frustrating. If you’re using a widely spread CDN chances are visitors have the file cached already and it’s not a big deal, but if you’re selfhosting it’s just fkin annoying (and also costly because traffic costs).