Re:Standardizing lessons learned from AMP
by dmitriid on Sunday March 11, 2018 @06:51AM
(#16562513)
My personal non-AMP page weighs ~800 KB (including all images and JS). It still has no chance in hell competing against a 2.4 MB AMP page because I don't have Google's CDN.
Even if I follow all of Google's own performance guidelines, it won't help, as AMP pages load faster than text-only http://motherfuckingwebsite.com
> It's not "cheating" if it works in a real-world situation.
Re:Standardizing lessons learned from AMP
by Ajedi32 on Sunday March 11, 2018 @09:51PM
(#16565718)
Call it cheating if you want. I as a user still strongly prefer a "cheating" site that loads instantly over a "non-cheating" one that I have to wait 5 seconds to load.
Even if I follow all of Google's own performance guidelines, it won't help, as AMP pages load faster than text-only http://motherfuckingwebsite.com
> It's not "cheating" if it works in a real-world situation.
No. It's still cheating. Even if it works