3 ms·
Shouldn't Google have done this in the first place instead of AMP?
by wffurr 9y ago
Shouldn't Google have done this in the first place instead of AMP?
- jacksmith21006 9y agoAMP makes it so Google can make speed happen versus this change puts responsibility on third parties to improve speed.
- Klathmon 9y agoThey did, back in 2010 [0]. And suprisingly nobody really changed anything, which is why they eventually came up with the idea for and created AMP. This change is more focused on mobile. [0] https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2010/04/using-site-speed-in-web-search-ranking.html https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2010/04/using-site-speed-i...
- SahAssar 9y agoIt would have made a change if it was more properly communicated and had a stricter penalty. Really, if those sites where warned for having a few MB's of tracking js or unnecessary assets by google and facebook they would have changed. The problem is that the warning was just sent out as blogposts, not as a drop in SERPs.
- wffurr 9y agoAMP was for mobile. That prior change was for desktop. This new change is for mobile. Ergo why didn't they start with an SERP boost for fast mobile pages period rather than the AMP system.