3 ms·
> Google should (and now/soon are?) assess the performance of the page and rank it accordingly If the reading I've done is accurate, Google tried this for quit
by Kalium 6y ago
> Google should (and now/soon are?) assess the performance of the page and rank it accordingly
If the reading I've done is accurate, Google tried this for quite a long time before AMP. The issue seems to be that there are just too many other factors with higher ROI for speed to be prioritized consistently.
IMO, AMP put companies in a position where speed mattered and most other things didn't. It focused minds in ways that using speed as a factor in ranking did not.
- dgb23 6y ago> The issue seems to be that there are just too many other factors with higher ROI for speed to be prioritized consistently. That argument makes zero sense to me. Either they rank faster and lighter sites higher or they don't. AMP is completely orthogonal to that.
- Kalium 6y agoOverall, I think Google does prefer to rank faster-loading sites higher. With that said, as far as I can tell, the difference between two sites is almost never a simple as a single factor. There are hundreds of things that influence rankings. So companies can and do worry more about other concerns, including squeezing more ad income out of each pageview and getting into more search results in the first place. AMP took away a lot of the other things that companies would invest developer time in.
- watwut 6y agoAnd the result are ... crappy amp pages so I have to edit url to see actual page. Having to edit url would matter little on PC, but massively sux at mobile. And it is overall slower then however slow original page was.