4 ms·
This is strictly slower than an AMP preload, which is why I mention that even a .txt file will load slower. The .txt file document still requires a network roun
by gregable 9y ago
This is strictly slower than an AMP preload, which is why I mention that even a .txt file will load slower. The .txt file document still requires a network round-trip, regardless of javascript.
On some wired connections, a network round trip is within user-perceivable 'instant', but for many people on mobile devices, this is very noticeable.
https://hpbn.co/mobile-networks/ https://hpbn.co/mobile-networks/
Even on the best LTE networks, the 'core network latency' is 40-50ms. 'core network latency' is the latency for getting the packet from the phone to tower to the packet gateway. This is before the packet even goes on the internet. And you need to double it for the round trip. You usually need to double the whole thing for initial DNS lookup.
Best possible latencies for an html page load on excellent LTE connections without prefetching are around 150-200ms. Most users in the world will experience >1s. A United States major city wired connection is not at all representative of what most people experience on a mobile connection.
- dingo_bat 9y agoYeah I was talking about computers, not phones.
- fixermark 9y agoThen you are missing the point of AMP. Increasingly, phones are the dominant computing tool accessing Google search results. Optimizing for phone experience is key to serving the largest growing demographic of searchers.
- tscs37 9y agoPreloading website content is not what I want for my phone. I have a very low datacap and I go out of my way to disable AMP and preloading because web publishers believe that my bandwidth can be used freely by them in an effort to "reduce latency". Instead it robs me of the little data I have for my cap.
- gregable 9y agoThat's fair, but I think losing perspective of the tradeoffs. The AMP preload will fetch only the main html file and AMP javascript. Images, videos, etc are all deferred until later. The javascript is cached for a year, so you probably already have it. So, compressed, this is probably ~100kb or less. Google doesn't start preloading 50 documents, it loads the top result or 2. Even viewing a hundred amp pages in a month is going to cost you less data than one 10kx10k unoptimized image that a publisher decides to load, which happens a lot. Note that AMP optimizes images too taking into account your device resolution, so it's most likely saving you bytes.
- tscs37 9y agoI don't want anyone preloading anything on my mobile connection other than the absolute necessary. Period. Everything else wastes my bandwidth and I don't care that it is only 100kb, my monthly, effective datacap is about 50MB and I always browser without images. The "100kb or less" is only about 500 pages preloaded, not accounting for the size of the google webpage itself. I'd rather not have any preload at all.
- gregable 9y agoNote also that Google doesn't show AMP for desktop user-agents.
- vanadium 9y agoAny WebPageTest comparison between Desktop and Mobile will demonstrate that RTT can be _vastly_ different between Desktop and Mobile. Just look at Time to First Byte (TTFB); when you pile on SSL negotiation (since most have moved to HTTPS), the advantage is even greater since all AMP pages currently fall under the aegis of Google's domain and all non-AMP pages will require that overhead at first click.