Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How fast is AMP really?

timkadlec.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–167 of 167 posts

Re: How fast is AMP really?

#161

Post by tscs37 »

niutech wrote: post #153
tscs37 wrote: post #92

The first point in the article is the dead killer of AMP for me. My mobile provider gives me very little monthly data, I've stopped using AMP because preloading the AMP results is eating through my cap, with images disabled. Without preloading, AMP is slower than the non-AMP version of the same webpage with a simple script blocker. And usually causing more traffic too. I hope Google refrains from bullying website own…

No. AMP is much faster even without preloading. Here is an example of a random article on CNN: https://www.webpagetest.org/video/view.php?id=180402_4583919...

This is not my experience. AMP is consistently slower than normal desktop pages or mobile pages when offered. I've measured this myself on my own phone countless times.

CNN is also probably one of the worst offenders, so the example is rather cherry picked nor does it represent my usual browsing in any way.

Re: How fast is AMP really?

#162

Post by flooq »

rolae wrote: post #106
Shorel wrote: post #10

Answer: not as fast as the D lang forums. https://forum.dlang.org/

Truly impressive is https://www.gov.uk/ A government site, lightning fast, try the search! No bullshit design.

Not just a site too. Almost every significant government service is being migrated to that domain, linked from that site and designed to the same standards.

Re: How fast is AMP really?

#163

Post by johnhenry »

Sylos wrote: post #77
johnhenry wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really appreciate commas a separators within numbers. One man's trash, I guess...

The problem is that many countries don't use the comma as thousands separator and rather use it as decimal separator. (And then the dot as thousands separator.) So, "1,234,567.890" becomes "1.234.567,890". If all you have is "7.890" or "7,890", you need to know what system the author uses. What the guy proposes is always using spaces as thousands separators, independent of the system you're in. So, then it would be w…

All good points.

The proposal, however, does make the think about this: https://xkcd.com/927/, so I don't know if we'll ever come to a good solution :/.

Re: How fast is AMP really?

#166

Post by Sylos »

johnhenry wrote: post #163
Sylos wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that many countries don't use the comma as thousands separator and rather use it as decimal separator. (And then the dot as thousands separator.) So, "1,234,567.890" becomes "1.234.567,890". If all you have is "7.890" or "7,890", you need to know what system the author uses. What the guy proposes is always using spaces as thousands separators, independent of the system you're in. So, then it would be w…

All good points. The proposal, however, does make the think about this: https://xkcd.com/927/ , so I don't know if we'll ever come to a good solution :/.

Well, this new standard is backwards-compatible to the old standards, as in people will understand it, regardless of what they've learned beforehand. So, I don't think this new standard is really competing with the others.

Re: How fast is AMP really?

#167

Post by gregoryjenny100 »

Do you want to hack into your spouse's phone remotely without touching his or her phone You can hack into any devices to access facebook , whastapp , text mssg , call logs etc to know who they have been talking to and if they're cheating on you remotecyberhacker@ gmail com he's the fastest,reliable and cost-effective you can ever come across cos his name has never been SOILED , in shrot....he's the best working for me . text/call ; + 1 3 4 7 89 93 01 7 whatsapp ; +1 267 52 6 53 4 6
Post reply on HN