4 ms·

>I'm not convinced the web pages were really _that_ slow to start with, so it feels like an unnecessary project (well, excepting the fact that web-page bloat ha

>I'm not convinced the web pages were really _that_ slow to start with, so it feels like an unnecessary project (well, excepting the fact that web-page bloat has massively increased as people use more and more javascript libraries &c.). Right. It's super easy to make lightning fast web pages. In fact, that's the default state of a static HTML page. It actually takes a lot _more_ work to make pages slow by adding tons of javascript, dependencies, server-side applications, etc. From the article linked elsewhere in this thread: >The 90th percentile weight for the canonical version is 5,229kb. [...] The 90th percentile request count for the canonical version is 647 There's the problem. Over 5 megabytes and 647 requests for one article? 5MB is equivalent to about 20 full-length novels or 1,000 pages of text. And 647 requests?! That must be one extremely comprehensive article, right? No, it's 1 request for a brief article and 646 unnecessary requests wasting bandwidth to load unnecessary stuff. Then people wonder why it's slow. But someone put in a lot of work to fluff that page up to be that huge and slow and use that many requests.

stordoff 8y ago
> The 90th percentile weight for the canonical version is 5,229kb. I get antsy when I made a page over 100KB (excluding images, and even then anything over 1MB starts to feel excessive unless it's something particularly reliant on images). 5MB feels very high.
- gregable 8y ago
  I'm with you, but it's the reality. I just searched for "NASA" on google news, clicked the first thing not from JPL (https://www.fool.com/investing/2019/01/12/whos-who-in-nasas-next-space-race.aspx https://www.fool.com/investing/2019/01/12/whos-who-in-nasas-...) and it loaded 2.6MB cold cache. Fetched the same on the AMP Cache: https://www-fool-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.fool.com/amp/investing/2019/01/12/whos-who-in-nasas-next-space-race.aspx https://www-fool-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.fool.com/amp... 200KB cold cache. Removing the likely cached resources (amp javascript, fontawesome cdn font) and the payload is ~35KB. It's certainly possible to make a lightweight page, as hacker news is a great example, but people aren't doing it. For whatever reason, AMP seems to be effective at making the web actually follow best practices.
  - grenadier21 8y ago
    No it's not. All the AMP websites I've seen were just as bad as their non-AMP counterparts. Reddit's AMP pages in particular, are slow and immensely frustrating to use.
  - JohnFen 8y ago
    > AMP seems to be effective at making the web actually follow best practices. Then those best practices aren't very good. In my experience, AMP is, on the whole, a detrimental thing that degrades web pages. All I want is some way of telling sites to never give me an AMP page.
gtf21 8y ago
This is why I have µMatrix -- it's amazing just how many unnecessary requests it has blocked. I am constantly amazed at just how bloated (and carelessly built) websites have become.

stordoff 8y ago

> The 90th percentile weight for the canonical version is 5,229kb. I get antsy when I made a page over 100KB (excluding images, and even then anything over 1MB starts to feel excessive unless it's something particularly reliant on images). 5MB feels very high.

gregable 8y ago
I'm with you, but it's the reality. I just searched for "NASA" on google news, clicked the first thing not from JPL (https://www.fool.com/investing/2019/01/12/whos-who-in-nasas-next-space-race.aspx https://www.fool.com/investing/2019/01/12/whos-who-in-nasas-...) and it loaded 2.6MB cold cache. Fetched the same on the AMP Cache: https://www-fool-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.fool.com/amp/investing/2019/01/12/whos-who-in-nasas-next-space-race.aspx https://www-fool-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.fool.com/amp... 200KB cold cache. Removing the likely cached resources (amp javascript, fontawesome cdn font) and the payload is ~35KB. It's certainly possible to make a lightweight page, as hacker news is a great example, but people aren't doing it. For whatever reason, AMP seems to be effective at making the web actually follow best practices.
- grenadier21 8y ago
  No it's not. All the AMP websites I've seen were just as bad as their non-AMP counterparts. Reddit's AMP pages in particular, are slow and immensely frustrating to use.
- JohnFen 8y ago
  > AMP seems to be effective at making the web actually follow best practices. Then those best practices aren't very good. In my experience, AMP is, on the whole, a detrimental thing that degrades web pages. All I want is some way of telling sites to never give me an AMP page.

gtf21 8y ago

This is why I have µMatrix -- it's amazing just how many unnecessary requests it has blocked. I am constantly amazed at just how bloated (and carelessly built) websites have become.