4 ms·

The original point I made -- that Chrome's dev tools can simulate a slow network connection -- got nit-picked by people saying it can't figure out which CDN ser

The original point I made -- that Chrome's dev tools can simulate a slow network connection -- got nit-picked by people saying it can't figure out which CDN serves which ad bundle. This is not a useful, relevant or even coherent reply. Public web sites that only work for "first world internet" customers shouldn't be a thing. Sites that load 100MB of ads and trackers and fifty different JS frameworks to display a few paragraphs of text should be getting the search-engine death penalty until they clean up their act. They should be thinking about people who aren't on fast broadband connections. If they aren't, the search engines should be. YouTube learned this from the "paradoxical" result of a lighter-weight page increasing load times: http://blog.chriszacharias.com/page-weight-matters http://blog.chriszacharias.com/page-weight-matters (spoiler: it was because the lighter-weight page meant it was suddenly usable by people who had slow connections who couldn't use it previously, and those people began to use it, which skewed the average load time higher)

ucaetano 9y ago
> The original point I made -- that Chrome's dev tools can simulate a slow network connection -- got nit-picked by people saying it can't figure out which CDN serves which ad bundle. This is not a useful, relevant or even coherent reply. Let's say your website is hosted in Jakarta, and serves Indonesian customers. You make it lightweight and fast. Your competitor hosts its website from Singapore, and is much heavier. Now Google, from its datacenter in Singapore, wants to test the load times for your website and your competitor's. Sadly, the host you chose doesn't pay for a lot of international traffic on the cable to Singapore, since it primarily serves the Indonesian market. Google tests both sites, and your competitor's, based in Singapore about a mile away from the Google datacenter, loads several times faster, besides being heavier. Google ranks your competitor higher, and you are pissed off, as your customers load your site faster. Now another case: you and your competitor host your sites in Singapore. You build a lightweight site, and your competitor's is full of heavy assets, with oversized images, etc. Google tests both of your websites and yours loads faster, and is ranked higher. You're happy. But your competitor signs up for Akamai and replicates the heavy assets in local servers in all the major ISPs in Indonesia. Customers in Indonesia search and see both your and your competitor's results. You rank higher and get more clicks, but as your traffic is subject to the congestion on the international cables, your site actually loads far slower than your lower-ranked and heavier competitor. Customers are unhappy. In all of this, simulating a slow connection on Chrome's dev tools is irrelevant, because you don't know where the bottleneck is!
- ubernostrum 9y ago
  Again you are missing the point. And at this point it's hard not to believe you're missing the point deliberately.

ucaetano 9y ago

> The original point I made -- that Chrome's dev tools can simulate a slow network connection -- got nit-picked by people saying it can't figure out which CDN serves which ad bundle. This is not a useful, relevant or even coherent reply. Let's say your website is hosted in Jakarta, and serves Indonesian customers. You make it lightweight and fast. Your competitor hosts its website from Singapore, and is much heavier. Now Google, from its datacenter in Singapore, wants to test the load times for your website and your competitor's. Sadly, the host you chose doesn't pay for a lot of international traffic on the cable to Singapore, since it primarily serves the Indonesian market. Google tests both sites, and your competitor's, based in Singapore about a mile away from the Google datacenter, loads several times faster, besides being heavier. Google ranks your competitor higher, and you are pissed off, as your customers load your site faster. Now another case: you and your competitor host your sites in Singapore. You build a lightweight site, and your competitor's is full of heavy assets, with oversized images, etc. Google tests both of your websites and yours loads faster, and is ranked higher. You're happy. But your competitor signs up for Akamai and replicates the heavy assets in local servers in all the major ISPs in Indonesia. Customers in Indonesia search and see both your and your competitor's results. You rank higher and get more clicks, but as your traffic is subject to the congestion on the international cables, your site actually loads far slower than your lower-ranked and heavier competitor. Customers are unhappy. In all of this, simulating a slow connection on Chrome's dev tools is irrelevant, because you don't know where the bottleneck is!

ubernostrum 9y ago
Again you are missing the point. And at this point it's hard not to believe you're missing the point deliberately.