Re: What we need
Interesting fact about HTML5 sites that I see these days. They take up so much more resource, so much more screen space than those 'authentic 1990s' sites.
Maybe, but this not down to HTML5 itself. Take the BBC website: first of all it runs a script to send you to "right" domain, so I get bbc.com shoved down my throat. Then, the news page at least spits out a mobile page pretty quickly but immediately fucks things up by adding to it (manipulation of the DOM is always a killer. The actual layout itself using media queries and Flexbox is a lot simpler which is why the browser can actually parse and start to paint faster than the old table-based layout (the newer page is 32 KB and is parsed in 600 ms, the older one 45 KB and takes a second to parse). Well, that would be the case if all the shit was removed. The BBC website would also load a lot faster without all the hooks for the irrelevant crap below the fold: BBC Magazine, BBC Trending (I do hope this is getting binned in the current review), etc. As for the images: the larger images in the content make sense on a modern machine.
Commercial websites recently have let their agenda be driven by the advertising industry. They're realising too late that this is not what the users want (buy it's the advertisers who pay).
So as usual, it's a bad workman who blames his tools.