2 ms·

I was with you 100% about the AMP stuff, but a statement like "page loads within 1-2 seconds do not make a major impact" is just so laughably wrong that I have

I was with you 100% about the AMP stuff, but a statement like "page loads within 1-2 seconds do not make a major impact" is just so laughably wrong that I have to wonder where you source your information. If you actually work in the space, it would behoove you to do some A/B testing on different page load speeds. You will quickly see that it does indeed make a huge impact on user interaction. That is leaving aside the fact that nobody is actually investing the time they'd spend in AMP to make their website faster. It's simply not something the really bad publishers (for example, a lot of the news space) care about, for reasons I have never managed to follow.

manigandham 8y ago
Why is it wrong? My identity isn't hidden, you can easily check my industry experience. I'm speaking on TBs of data directly measured everyday on the publishers we work with. I also said "especially if the actual text content is available immediately", which it almost always is. It's the other assets on the page that slow down loading. If you check the top 5k sites, none of them load any faster than 1-2 seconds, but many focus on optimizing for the first paint experience while loading the full site content over a few seconds. This is basically what AMP does, but taken to an extreme degree. There are many other factors like content types, page depth, dwell time, user activity, etc. that all matter, and it really takes 3+ seconds to start seeing significant effects on user sessions and revenue. Publishers don't make performance a priority because of something called yield management and a host of other complex business reasons related to revenue. Making the site more performant is usually not worth the limited dev resources, which again are affected by things like AMP.

2 ms·

I was with you 100% about the AMP stuff, but a statement like "page loads within 1-2 seconds do not make a major impact" is just so laughably wrong that I have

by krageon 8y ago

manigandham 8y ago
Why is it wrong? My identity isn't hidden, you can easily check my industry experience. I'm speaking on TBs of data directly measured everyday on the publishers we work with. I also said "especially if the actual text content is available immediately", which it almost always is. It's the other assets on the page that slow down loading. If you check the top 5k sites, none of them load any faster than 1-2 seconds, but many focus on optimizing for the first paint experience while loading the full site content over a few seconds. This is basically what AMP does, but taken to an extreme degree. There are many other factors like content types, page depth, dwell time, user activity, etc. that all matter, and it really takes 3+ seconds to start seeing significant effects on user sessions and revenue. Publishers don't make performance a priority because of something called yield management and a host of other complex business reasons related to revenue. Making the site more performant is usually not worth the limited dev resources, which again are affected by things like AMP.