8 ms·
Mobile Website Speed Testing Tool
- elktea 10y agoLooks like a nice skin on top of the existing PageSpeed tools
- CaptSpify 10y agoHm... It doesn't return anything for my site. It runs the tests, says 100% done, then returns to the home-screen without an input field. Anyone else?
- justinsaccount 10y agoNeat, I had it report on itself.. DESKTOP SPEED 96/100 GOOD MOBILE SPEED 94/100 GOOD MOBILE FRIENDLINESS 100/100 GOOD
- zitterbewegung 10y agohttp://www.google.com/ http://www.google.com/ gets 100 out of 100 for everything.
- akjainaj 10y agohahahaha, it looks like they hit their own captcha! http://i.imgur.com/cnPWqwz.png http://i.imgur.com/cnPWqwz.png
- tyre 10y agoDark pattern pet peeve once you complete the test. The options are either: Yes, send me my report and occasional emails with helpful tips on how to improve my online presence. Google may send me recommendations for certain Google products and services and contact me with further help and tips based on my TestMySite results. Or: No thanks, I don’t want to get my detailed results. What if I want to get my results, but not subscribe to your marketing drip campaign? Screenshot: https://www.dropbox.com/s/csm6j5u9hq5wubw/Screenshot%202017-01-10%2013.32.32.png?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/csm6j5u9hq5wubw/Screenshot%202017-...
- armenarmen 10y agoThe quid pro quo bit seems pretty standard and reasonable, annoying but reasonable
- ronilan 10y agoYes it is. But then again, providing the user with a unique shareable URL would be much better for the user. And, this is just my own opinion[1], obviously, but, providing the best user experience possible, whether designing a new Internet browser or a new tweak to the look of the homepage is very important. It is wise to take great care to ensure that services will ultimately serve the user, rather than the provider's internal goal or bottom line. When building new tools and applications, they should work so well you don’t have to consider how they might have been designed differently. [1] well not really mine... https://www.google.com/about/company/philosophy/ https://www.google.com/about/company/philosophy/
- fuck_google 10y agoJust like corruption and police brutality in many parts of the world.
- chinathrow 10y agoAnnoying as hell. Might use a throwaway address.
- TurningCanadian 10y ago
- deepuj 10y agoMeh, they make you sign up with email to see full results.
- deepuj 10y agoMeh, they make you sign up with email to see full results.
- avenoir 10y agoIf it provides the scores I'm assuming it also has detailed information on how those scores were calculated. Why not provide the detailed results right away instead of collecting emails. Every time I see "Get Something Free" or something similar my bullshit meter starts peaking right away.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- chinathrow 10y agoThat site uses my speakers on mobile chrome. Does anyone know why?
- michelb 10y agoIt plays a video, even though it has no sound your browser will show a speaker icon.
- Jugurtha 10y agoI don't understand. Why not simply use PageSpeed where it tells you exactly what to fix to improve each aspect? https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/ https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/
- shakna 10y agoThey seem to be in the process of replacing PageSpeed. First: > PageSpeed Insights has moved the User Experience test for mobile pages into the Mobile Friendly Test And then a bigger launch about this fancier version.
- Jugurtha 10y agoMobile Friendly(MF) is worse than PageSpeed Insights(PSI) in every possible (perceivable) way: - PSI is fast. MF is slow. - PSI is general (mobile and desktop). MF is, well, for mobile. - PSI just asks for the site, gives you results. MF checks if you're a robot, you check a site, and checks again you're not a robot if you want to use it again. - PSI gives you exactly what's wrong with your site, which rules were broken, and how to fix them. Which lines to add to your CSS. Where to add them (deferring loading CSS if you want to, adding JavaScript), and gives you a score for each thing, if you change stuff you can look at your score improve. It then orients you to resources for additional reading. MF is binary: good, not good. Doesn't give you info. Doesn't give you actionable info. Gives you basically nothing. I don't see any reason to use MF (or for it to even exist under its current form and non-features) and every reason to use PSI. Then again, every time I discover a Google product, after a few days I have the misfortune of seeing a red warning telling me it'll be discontinued. It's happened many times.
- BugsJustFindMe 10y agoI ran it on a tiny static 99.9% text-only site that finishes loading in 0.15s, a full 0.1s of which is a 1.5KB creative commons graphic, and google knocks 9 points off on mobile because I don't defer the 8ms request for 374 bytes of CSS? Seems arbitrary.
- mankyd 10y agoPageSpeed, which this is based on, uses a relative metric last I checked. I.E. If you have a 2 byte site and can remove 1 byte, you'd get ~50 points off. It's not quite that simple, but that's the basic idea.
- dazc 10y agoSadly, I think, it is that simple.
- markdown 10y ago> 374 bytes of CSS Put it <style> tags in the <head>. No reason to use an external file for so little. It's not worth the overhead.
- dwrowe 10y agoThat's certainly true, but to his point - it's an 8ms call - is it worth the number of points Google knocks off?
- SahAssar 10y agoIf it's on http2 and/or preloaded that certainly isn't true.
- BugsJustFindMe 10y agoCounterpoint, there's no reason to uglify something simple and clean by copy-pasting CSS into it to just to shave the remaining hairs off the dog's balls* when we already have a nice interface for read-once-use-everywhere references. * - I don't know if that's a real expression. It doesn't even seem to fit, but I like it so I'mma keep it.
- brian_herman 10y agohttp://imgur.com/tRkHsPA http://imgur.com/tRkHsPA They seem to be using chrome 27.
- mattei 10y agoThe PageSpeed Insights[0] tool is better. Less scrolling to see results, actionable steps to fix issues and no scroll hijacking. Also seems to scan websites quicker. [0] https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/ https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/
- chrischen 10y agoI find testing using these types of tools better, as it gives a real world performance metric (actual load times) https://tools.pingdom.com/#!/dJNbUe/www.instapainting.com https://tools.pingdom.com/#!/dJNbUe/www.instapainting.com
- thekonqueror 10y agoYou should try http://mobitest.akamai.com/m/index.cgi http://mobitest.akamai.com/m/index.cgi or http://webpagetest.org http://webpagetest.org instead for accurate results.
- greenspot 10y agoThey say that more people surf the web on mobile than on desktop. Does anyone has some more data on this? What do they include in 'mobile', also tablets? I surf on my phone a lot but I still surf on my notebook as well, actually the entire day at the office
- pmlnr 10y agoHave you considered this might include China, India, etc., you know, outside the US? :) https://www.techinasia.com/china-mobile-internet-users-statistics-behavior https://www.techinasia.com/china-mobile-internet-users-stati...
- TheAceOfHearts 10y agoJust tried it out, now waiting for the reports. It'd be nice if they let me sign in with my Google account, so I can generate multiple reports without having to repeatedly type in my email. It seems reasonable to assume that anyone that uses a tool like this would likely have multiple pages or sites they'd want to check, no?
- runn1ng 10y agoWhen you test google.com with this, you get captchas as a preview. And I guess the captcha page is what this tests then.
- dx034 10y agoI tested reddit (which I hate using on mobile), and it got a Poor 63/100 for speed while high marks for mobile optimization. I guess it's a perfect representation of many SPAs out there. Fancy JS frameworks that are built for mobile, but it takes 10s+ to load if you're not on Wifi/4G.
- ThomPete 10y ago"Eliminate render-blocking JavaScript and CSS in above-the-fold content" What does this mean exactly?
- pbhjpbhj 10y ago"withgoogle.com" looks like a phishing domain. What's wrong with subdomains?
- majortennis 10y agoI had to whois them
- BillinghamJ 10y agoDifferent security requirements. I believe anything under google.com is subject to quite strict rules.
- pmlnr 10y agoDear Google, Stripping metadata from images is _not_ optimization. Please stop recommending this.
- zimmerx 10y agoSpeaking to some of the Google developers and the head of mobile web performance - not even Google use their own tool as a measure / benchmark for performance. PageSpeed Insights is both broken and convoluted at best. - No support for HTTP/2 -- This means that if you follow all the "right" approaches for performance with HTTP/2, you'll be slapped with a terrible PageSpeed score due to it not taking into account the effect of multi plexing connections. - Has constant bugs around determining the flow of assets on the page and thinks that assets at the bottom become render blocking when they do not Google tend to use a combination of their own tooling + WebPageTest.org (which is also theirs) to test performance issues. This tool is mainly geared at the non-developer type, but it's unfortunately misleading and just wrong. It doesn't measure speed, it measures performance methodologies and whether they have been implemented or not (and old ones at that). The more important metrics are time to paint, time to domcontentready. Using WebPageTest will get you what you want. I find it pretty offensive and misleading that Google is using such a tool and promoting it to users, because frankly it misses the entire point of performance. Things like this: "Eliminate render-blocking JavaScript and CSS in above-the-fold content" when you're running an H/2 site with an appcache and pushing assets is just downright wrong. It's sad that there's a general miscommunication within the company about performance. Ilya Gregorik and co say one thing, and the rest say another.
- mrmondo 10y agoIronically this site does not work correctly for me on my phone. On the latest stable safari and iOS version the field to enter your email to get the report is missing. No ad blockers enabled etc...