4 ms·
While I agree with your comment about Google, I disagree with this one: > If the only change is that it loads faster, and he doesn't grow his audience, then he
by vog 11y ago
While I agree with your comment about Google, I disagree with this one:
> If the only change is that it loads faster, and he doesn't grow his audience, then he hasn't really achieved anything.
If this makes his readers happier, it is a success nonetheless.
Maybe this is a startup/HN thing that everything must grow and grow. But that isn't the only successful strategy, even from a purely economic point of view.
If you have a niche, and serve that niche very well, you can beat your competitors by quality rather than quantity. Not all niches are large. If you manage to cover 100% of your niche, it is a huge success! - even if 100% means just a few thousand people.
- wahsd 11y agoload time is not a success factor in and of itself. Fast load times for bad content will not lead to success as little as really great content with horrible load times. But that being said, I am a proponent of significantly prioritizing load times over everything else. Load time should be a constant multiplier in decisions. If a "great feature" significantly taxes load time it needs to either die or be optimized.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]