Your first point may be true, but it completely ignores the reality of a vast number of WordPress sites that don't use a plugin to generate a separate, static, site.
As to your second point, what do you imagine that "well-designed theme[s]" have to do with sites taking well over a second to start returning HTML?
> Your first point may be true, but it completely ignores the reality of a vast number of WordPress sites that don't use a plugin to generate a separate, static, site.
For the record, I would never run WordPress as non-static unless I had no other option. I'm not defending WordPress in any way. I just didn't see the need to mention its flaws because the parent comment already had.
I would personally prefer not to use WordPress at all, but it is the de facto standard for marketing websites, and marketers don't know or care about the performance and security nightmare that is standard WordPress. Since that is the reality, I felt that it was helpful to let people know how to deal with it constructively instead of just deploying insecure, slow websites.
> As to your second point, what do you imagine that "well-designed theme[s]" have to do with sites taking well over a second to start returning HTML?
That was stated in the context of static websites. If you're running non-static WP, you're just fucked.
As to your second point, what do you imagine that "well-designed theme[s]" have to do with sites taking well over a second to start returning HTML?