161–170 of 181 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A few 10 ms makes no difference. About a 1-2% difference per 100 ms seems well supported (e.g. [1]), at least if your page load time is already low enough. 7% is very high, but some effect is expected. 1: https://developers.google.com/web/fundamentals/performance/w...
I don't buy it. So what you are saying is 2% for every 100ms. So that means if we decrease page load time by 1ms, then we should expect to to see .02% increase in sales? So if we do $10m annually, 1ms decrease in sales should boost sales by $2,000! We would all probably agree that 1ms will make no statistical difference. The problem with these studies is that most are dealing with much longer load times. Like 3 secon…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you taken a look at the Cloudflare Keyless SSL tech?
Just did and I think it furthers my point. Cloudflare now owns your key and the edge is now their network. My concern is cert/key management where the edge is somewhere you have very little control over, like a cell tower, random building network, or a users house. Even with keyless, once that device is in my home, Im pretty sure that entire thing can be reverse engineered. Not easy, like probes and oscilloscopes on…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>No, this absolutely checks with my experience - I chase 5 and 10ms improvements all the time because we've measured and know it increases conversion. You've measured and know that a user seeing a 905ms load time converts more than one seeing 915ms?
The latencies stack up for any web page. It's not like "oh this file was served 5ms sooner", it's an accumulation of latencies over all assets, and the interactions, that are required to present an experience to a user. Also, latency measured at the server is amplified once its received by the browser. And when the user's connection isn't great, all this is worsened. It quickly adds up. In fact, it doesn't "adds" up,…
/* Work for a Media Company */ We're looking to move one of our sites off Akamai mostly for costs reasons. Fastly configuration in Varnish VCL - Senior Engineers from my company highly rate Varnish as a cache software so Fastly was an easy choice. I believe Akamai have been our CDN from the start. The amount of reconfiguration we'd need to do to get everything off would create a huge number of tickets in our work que…
Fastly’s major advantage is near instant CDN config changes, where Akamai can take an hour to push a new cdn config.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The latencies stack up for any web page. It's not like "oh this file was served 5ms sooner", it's an accumulation of latencies over all assets, and the interactions, that are required to present an experience to a user. Also, latency measured at the server is amplified once its received by the browser. And when the user's connection isn't great, all this is worsened. It quickly adds up. In fact, it doesn't "adds" up,…
If you’re serving so many elements that 5-msec-per improvements really accumulate, your problem is page complexity, not marginal latency.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
CDNPerf is an okay way to get an overview, but not a great way to actually compare CDNs. That said, it’s not 10x or whatever. Maybe like 5-10% depending on location.
There are a number of features Fastly has which others (excluding eg Akmai) don't which make head-to-head comparisons more difficult. I have no doubt that Cloudflare is very fast in perfect conditions, but there were a much higher number of cache misses because there's less flexible configuration which did literally make the difference between 20ms vs 200ms in production.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fastly’s major advantage is near instant CDN config changes, where Akamai can take an hour to push a new cdn config.
This is dated. Akamai pushes configs out in minutes now
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait. What? 147 paying customers? I was personally one of those customers, paying like $100 a month, mostly just as a test. They really only added 147 paying customers? How many of them were just paying $100 a month for the base price?
I highly doubt if they counted you as an enterprise customer. Enterprise customers have significantly large multi-year contracts. I have worked in sales org before and we reported only contracts which fetched ~ 100k/year as enterprise customer. 10k to 100k were reported as SMB customers. These numbers may be different for Fastly but I doubt $100/month customers are called Enterprise customers.
The market has been commoditized by CloudFlare. CloudFlare is charging $200/month for the business plan, or $2000/month for the enterprise plan with everything.
There can be banks or government paying 10 times more for custom plans (extensive support and long cycle cycles). These would never adopt Fastly.
Akamai can get away with charging millions of dollars to some historic customers who really don't need the service. If they ever migrate away, that's explicitly to take a zero off the bill.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's part of why I don't get it. Large companies have multiple competitors to negotiate with, driving down prices (and this does not look to change anytime soon, it's dropping 40%/year for transit). We're talking about an S-1 here. Where's that growth going to come from? Cannibalizing Akamai is not a long term IPO strategy.
At my previous job, we had Fastly as a potential new CDN provider set up against our existing CDN provider and two other new potentials. After a few rounds of calls for bids, Fastly won out. Based on my experience with the other providers they were also, by a large margin, the most modern - it felt like moving from a 2008 integration to a modern, fully RESTful API with great documentation and decent UI. This is all a…