Using page speed in mobile search ranking
webmasters.googleblog.com
Using page speed in mobile search ranking
1–10 of 40 posts
Re: Using page speed in mobile search ranking
#2Shouldn't Google have done this in the first place instead of AMP?
Re: Using page speed in mobile search ranking
#3Shouldn't Google have done this in the first place instead of AMP?
AMP makes it so Google can make speed happen versus this change puts responsibility on third parties to improve speed.
Re: Using page speed in mobile search ranking
#4The fact that I get different results based on what device I'm using really bothers me. Why does Google have to try to be so omniscient? Why not just ask me, "Prioritize fast-loading pages? (y/n)".
Concerns over Google-the-company aside, Google-the-search-platfrom really sucks IMO because it assumes it knows what I want, rather than just asking me. That mentality was Steve Jobs' worst legacy and I hate how it's wound up everywhere.
Re: Using page speed in mobile search ranking
#5The fact that I get different results based on what device I'm using really bothers me. Why does Google have to try to be so omniscient? Why not just ask me, "Prioritize fast-loading pages? (y/n)". Concerns over Google-the-company aside, Google-the-search-platfrom really sucks IMO because it assumes it knows what I want, rather than just asking me. That mentality was Steve Jobs' worst legacy and I hate how it's wound…
I feel like it's easy to frame the question that way, but really look at how many questions they would need to ask...
* Prioritize fast-loading pages?
* Prioritize mobile pages?
* Prioritize by pagesize?
* Prioritize your language? Prioritize local results first? Prioritize news sites? Prioritize blogging sites? Prioritize comment platforms? Prioritize "safe-for-work" websites? etc...
There's an almost unlimited number of questions that you could be asked, and the reality is that nobody wants to answer any of them.
At some point, they need to make some decisions for you, otherwise you are tasked with coming up with your own search algorithm yourself! The question becomes which decisions should they make for you, and which should they let you make.
Currently the answer looks like they are making most of them for you, while allowing you to make decisions on whether you want "web, videos, images, books, news, etc.." and what date range you are searching for.
I think that's a good choice for them, because at the end of the day if you want more control or choice in your searches, you can always use another search engine.
This isn't also unique to Google or their products. I've struggled with this in my own programs and products, even open source ones. An endless list of configuration options means that nobody will ever set them all correctly, and it increases the amount of testing you need to do almost exponentially. Choosing good defaults, or in many cases making the decision outright for your users is the best possible case, because there just isn't any other way which scales out to the entire piece of software in most cases.
Re: Using page speed in mobile search ranking
#6Shouldn't Google have done this in the first place instead of AMP?
They did, back in 2010 [0]. And suprisingly nobody really changed anything, which is why they eventually came up with the idea for and created AMP.
This change is more focused on mobile.
[0] https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2010/04/using-site-speed-i...
Re: Using page speed in mobile search ranking
#7I expect this should hit bad WordPress developers hardest, since the throw-another-plugin-on-the-fire philosophy has led to pages that load 15 javascript libraries for features not even present on that page.
Re: Using page speed in mobile search ranking
#8Without NN won't ranking pages by "page speed" simply enhance the benefits of purchasing "fast lanes" near end points (on previously dumb pipes ;-) to those willing to do so?
Re: Using page speed in mobile search ranking
#9The fact that I get different results based on what device I'm using really bothers me. Why does Google have to try to be so omniscient? Why not just ask me, "Prioritize fast-loading pages? (y/n)". Concerns over Google-the-company aside, Google-the-search-platfrom really sucks IMO because it assumes it knows what I want, rather than just asking me. That mentality was Steve Jobs' worst legacy and I hate how it's wound…
I feel like it's easy to frame the question that way, but really look at how many questions they would need to ask... * Prioritize fast-loading pages? * Prioritize mobile pages? * Prioritize by pagesize? * Prioritize your language? Prioritize local results first? Prioritize news sites? Prioritize blogging sites? Prioritize comment platforms? Prioritize "safe-for-work" websites? etc... There's an almost unlimited numb…
Agreed. Knobs to turn is a good thing. But only if they are super relevant knobs. Too much configurability leads to bloat. Good defaults are good, but even better is (often) not having a knob to turn at all.
Re: Using page speed in mobile search ranking
#10> Although speed has been used in ranking for some time, that signal was focused on desktop searches. Today we’re announcing that starting in July 2018, page speed will be a ranking factor for mobile searches.
> The “Speed Update,” as we’re calling it, will only affect pages that deliver the slowest experience to users and will only affect a small percentage of queries.
The desktop ranking signal had almost no effect; slow pages reliably turned up in search results. Maybe some pages that took 15s to paint were slightly diminished in results, if that.
If the mobile ranking signal is as weak as the desktop ranking signal, (and they seem to be indicating it's going to be a very small effect,) I would expect this change to have no measurable effect at all on the median performance of pages loaded from Google search results.