3 ms·

Well, most publishers actually use fairly optimized HTML/CSS and most publishers use a CDN. But there's only so much you can do if you don't want to get rid of

Well, most publishers actually use fairly optimized HTML/CSS and most publishers use a CDN. But there's only so much you can do if you don't want to get rid of those 5 ad networks, 7 analytics services, 2 sidebars and just generally a whole bunch of crap that has nothing to do with the article. The innovation of Facebook instant articles and AMP isn't technical, it's that they have been able to convince publishers that getting rid of all the bells and whistles will actually benefit them – and that if they don't do it, it will harm them because huge traffic drivers like Twitter won't put up with it anymore.

manigandham 11y ago
I disagree - most publishers I've seen (including large and mid-level) have some of the most bloated HTML with megabytes(!) of javascript and CSS just for rendering + all the other stuff you mentioned. They are definitely not optimized. I dont think there is any innovation at all with either Facebook or Google, it's all about keeping the user on their service longer and by hosting the content themselves, they increase speed and claim more user time. It's a pure monopoly play with Apple, Google, Facebook having far more leverage than publishers (who have really none these days). Pubs need traffic to survive which is why they are willing to work with this, but the revenue potential is still up in the air so long-term sustainability is not anywhere near proven. I'm not convinced that this will work as a viable model, beyond the technical implementation.
- zenocon 11y ago
  > I disagree - most publishers I've seen (including large and mid-level) have some of the most bloated HTML with megabytes(!) of javascript and CSS just for rendering + all the other stuff you mentioned. They are definitely not optimized. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/01/business/cost-of-mobile-ads.html http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/01/business/cost-...
mattlutze 11y ago
The search engines just need to penalize sites or result pages that have all these piles of bloat in them if they want to be a forcing function in the mobile web getting quicker. Push crappy experiences lower in the results and you can be sure news and aggregator sites will clean up their act. That Google et. al. are publishing a parallel framework to HTML indicates their goal is not just making mobile web faster, but in controlling that experience, to whatever end they may have in mind.
- mtberatwork 11y ago
  > The search engines just need to penalize sites or result pages that have all these piles of bloat in them if they want to be a forcing function in the mobile web getting quicker. Isn't Google already claiming to demote sites that are slow to load, have content below the fold, etc?

manigandham 11y ago

I disagree - most publishers I've seen (including large and mid-level) have some of the most bloated HTML with megabytes(!) of javascript and CSS just for rendering + all the other stuff you mentioned. They are definitely not optimized. I dont think there is any innovation at all with either Facebook or Google, it's all about keeping the user on their service longer and by hosting the content themselves, they increase speed and claim more user time. It's a pure monopoly play with Apple, Google, Facebook having far more leverage than publishers (who have really none these days). Pubs need traffic to survive which is why they are willing to work with this, but the revenue potential is still up in the air so long-term sustainability is not anywhere near proven. I'm not convinced that this will work as a viable model, beyond the technical implementation.

zenocon 11y ago
> I disagree - most publishers I've seen (including large and mid-level) have some of the most bloated HTML with megabytes(!) of javascript and CSS just for rendering + all the other stuff you mentioned. They are definitely not optimized. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/01/business/cost-of-mobile-ads.html http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/10/01/business/cost-...

mattlutze 11y ago

The search engines just need to penalize sites or result pages that have all these piles of bloat in them if they want to be a forcing function in the mobile web getting quicker. Push crappy experiences lower in the results and you can be sure news and aggregator sites will clean up their act. That Google et. al. are publishing a parallel framework to HTML indicates their goal is not just making mobile web faster, but in controlling that experience, to whatever end they may have in mind.

mtberatwork 11y ago
> The search engines just need to penalize sites or result pages that have all these piles of bloat in them if they want to be a forcing function in the mobile web getting quicker. Isn't Google already claiming to demote sites that are slow to load, have content below the fold, etc?