That's not what I've said, and I somewhat agree with the original point, but this trend of wanting to cater to the lowest denominator rubs me the wrong way.

Some guys think the web should be usable with a 50€ smartphone on GPRS, and I say no, because there's a middle ground.

How about just caring for the real world instead of the numbers provided by the internet provider? Those download numbers are for the best case scenario. And unlike broadband 4G is not reliable at all.

> because there's a middle ground

So where's your middle ground?

>Some guys think the web should be usable with a 50€ smartphone

You went to the other extreme though. Most people in high-income countries don't even have FTTH.

Have you read anything about Facebook’s emerging markets? They want to cater to those people themselves!

The web should be usable on a 28.8k modem from the mid 90s. Why wouldn't it be?

There is absolutely no excuse. The app is not doing protein folding, its merely showing text!

Surprise, many many ppl use facebook in crap laptops, fb is popular with everyone.

No, it's not merely showing text. Facebook does a thousand things more than show text. You could argue those features don't belong in Facebook, but you can't argue that features are supposed not to take up any space, because that's unrealistic.