3 ms·
I think that one of the interesting features with AMP to get good performance is its free ("for now"[1]) caching system. They also mention that "Google has pro
by vmarsy 10y ago
I think that one of the interesting features with AMP to get good performance is its free ("for now"[1]) caching system.
They also mention that "Google has provided a cache that can be used by anyone at no cost, and all AMPs will be cached by the Google AMP Cache. Other companies may build their own AMP cache as well."[2], However I wasn't able to find any documentation on how could someone build its own cache, and how to configure its AMP pages to point to your own cache instead of Google's.
[1] https://developers.google.com/amp/cache/reference/limits https://developers.google.com/amp/cache/reference/limits
[2] https://www.ampproject.org/docs/support/faqs.html https://www.ampproject.org/docs/support/faqs.html
- userbinator 10y agoEven without AMP, Google caches pages for its search results and I frequently find the cached version both faster-loading and with less "fluff", especially the text-only option, than the actual page.
- tangue 10y agoThat was the first reason I tried to AMP. But the more I'm digging into it, the more I realize how responsive webdesign isn't the right solution ( a strange mix of Tetris and Cluedo ). AMP is a seductive solution to post mobile webdesign. In many ways it's the natural, non-bloated, evolution of Bootstrap's standardized layout.