Do they still have that limit of - what was it, 10k?
It's a suggested limit.
Why? - Mobile devices have limited screens. Long pages on small screens are confusing, because users can't see the big picture and feel lost. Some mobile devices with limited memory still can't handle pages that are more than a few Kb but, in essence, the 10Kb limit was set for usability reasons. Some screens may be big enough to display pages with more content. The 10Kb limit ensures that the page is still usable on devices with small screens.
How? - Focus on the piece of information that you want to deliver, and build the page around it.
More Information - Severity: low.
Useful improvements are possible.
Category: Keep it small.
Smaller sites make users happier by costing less in time and money.
Best practice: PAGE_SIZE_LIMIT
Ensure that the overall size of page is appropriate to the memory limitations of the device.
I pulled the above from a report for this topic. It's pretty lean weighing in at 12.5kb. :)
When you run the W3C mobileOK Checker (http://Validator.W3.org/mobile/), review the details of the report closely. Click on the alert icons at the left of each row to see full details. I mean, that tool is pretty clear and specific in the instructions provided for suggestions. You'll find all sorts of neat tips nicely organized within each item that was flagged for review.
I remember us struggling with that.
Me too, and I still do. It requires that you carefully plan the alternate stylesheets so that large images are trimmed, replaced, etc. You also have to give consideration to scripts and that is where it gets to be a real pain in the arse. The best you can do is shoot for a smaller page doing everything within your power to reduce ALL files sizes.
Speaking of which, ever look at most pngs these days? I mean, take a look at some of the file sizes. Many folks are not optimizing them for on screen viewing and they are 2 to 10 times larger than they need to be, file size wise. For example, I've mistakenly uploaded PNG8 files that I didn't run through an optimization export. They were small icons that should have been 3k or less. They were 32k before the optimization export. That's pretty extreme and I see it being a prevalent issue with many sites. They're phat! Mobile-Friendly Comparison
Google at 100%
Facebook at 85%
Twitter at 76%
^ Those are above average scores based on the number of sites I've inspected since that tool was released.
When you are 100% compliant, you can claim conformance using POWDER...