3 ms·
> further shame people into following better practices "Better" as prescribed by who? At this point, I'm under the impression that if you're not implementing A
by codyogden 7y ago
> further shame people into following better practices
"Better" as prescribed by who? At this point, I'm under the impression that if you're not implementing AMP for content, Google is going to rank you lower and now publicly shame you to users. They _say_ this is not the case, but it's impossible to ignore now that they're introducing naming and shaming. It just seems like features way outside the scope of what a web browser should be providing to users.
Editing to add my other thought:
I've built websites that routinely score horribly on Google's proprietary PageSpeed Insights despite fixing everything within my power (usually Google's own analytics scripts score badly), but also score very high on every other reasonable industry test of similar nature. It's hard to convince me that they alone should be an arbiter for this type of feedback given to users.
- jefftk 7y ago> Google's proprietary PageSpeed Insights The previous version of PageSpeed Insights was open source (https://github.com/pagespeed/page-speed https://github.com/pagespeed/page-speed) and the current version is a wrapper around Lighthouse which is also open source (https://github.com/GoogleChrome/lighthouse https://github.com/GoogleChrome/lighthouse). (Disclosure: I work for Google)
- codyogden 7y agoI believe you, obviously. I have historically received drastically different results between, for example, web.dev / Lighthouse and PageSpeed Insights with the latter outputting a very low arbitrary 'rating' or 'score' and the former providing results I would expect. Like a lot of efforts at Google, things seem duplicated. As an outsider, it is a frustrating experience catering to Google's performance ideals because the tools and 'best practice' positions do not seem to be unified in one place.
- jefftk 7y agoI wonder if you might have had a bad experience with the old rules-based PageSpeed Insights? It wasn't as good as the current one, being more of a checklist of "have you done all these things that usually help" and not "we loaded the page, computed metrics, and this is how well it did".