How fast is AMP really?

One detail which I feel must be mentioned: if you block `ampproject.org` by default -- directly or by blocking 3rd-party javascript by default, -- you will be "punished" with a 8-second delay before the page becomes visible.

This is an entirely artificial delay, implemented through an inlined style CSS animation in AMP-based pages:

    animation:-amp-start 8s steps(1,end) 0s 1 normal both}
    @keyframes -amp-start{from{visibility:hidden}to{visibility:visible}}

I can't see any good reason for such delay. If you are not aware of this 8s delay, you might be misled into thinking the page is broken and that `ampproject.org` is really needed, while the page renders just fine without it, except for the delay.

Example: https://ampbyexample.com/

Answer: not as fast as the D lang forums.

https://forum.dlang.org/

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 owners into making the internet a worse experience for people without 1GB+ data plan.

So basically Google could get 90% of what AMP provides without AMP itself, because the magic is in the caching and forcibly reducing the ad junk the page loads.

Does that about sum it up?

Heh. This reminds me of a recent pet peeve and observation of mine: progressive web apps are not faster.

The Twitter Lite PWA, arguably the 'flagship' PWA ("developed in partnership with Google"), takes longer to display tweets for me than regular desktop Twitter.com, and the old 'static' mobile twitter site (which loads INSTANTLY[1] you can only get with user agent trickery)

[1] Just did some testing. According to Chrome Dev Tools, old Twitter Mobile displays tweets in 124ms. PWA Twitter takes greater than 1.4s (it stopped recording screenshots), 2s according to a screen recording https://gfycat.com/PlushThornyIcefish

Worth noting that it would be insane to preload content that didn't pass a strict filter akin to that of AMP.

Each Google search would download dozens of MBs and produce a significant CPU workload, both resources being precious on mobile.

Perhaps it was a communication issue: AMP should have been named/marketed "preloadable pages" rather than "fast pages".

So nowadays 61 requests per page load is considered an "accelerated" page? Might not be so bad with http2 but still wow. Maybe publishers should start working on that number if they want actually faster web pages.

A very low quality article. The whole point of AMP is to define a restricted subset of HTML that is safe to prerender and still provide working analytics to the publisher. When you prerender, the advantage of AMP is substantial as it is impossible to beat a user experience of instant, which is why users prefer it and why publishers go through the trouble of implementing two web versions of their web pages (in addition to Facebook and Apple News non-web versions).

The point of the AMP cache is not for CDN speed, as the author mistakenly believed and measured, but for same-origin or CORS prerender, and Google is not the only implementer.

I think the point of AMP is it gives Google a simple and reliable way to detect fast rendering pages that render well on mobile in a way that can't be easily gamed. When you allow unrestricted usage of JavaScript that's changing page content, loading styles etc. for example, detecting pages like this is more difficult.

You can write performant pages without AMP but how would Google reliably detect pages like this?

I'm not saying AMP is the best solution and I can see why some developers have objections against it but I think I understand what it's trying to do.

You might not realise how much AMP you come across every day.

Your web browsing isn't it at all.

If you are on an Android phone go install NetGuard and take a look at the logs.

There are a few domains that come up for almost every app:

1. graph.facebook.com

2. graph.accountkit.com

3. .crashlytics.com

4. .ampproject.net

5. .segment.io

AMP Project is up there. The majority of the apps on my phone now do their content via WebView + AMP.

In this AMP have found their niche.

The most infuriating part of AMP for me is that I can't count the number of times I'd read an AMP version of an article, and graphics in it were just plain missing without any heads up. Why newspapers and the like would gimp their own work like that is beyond me.

If you want to test how fast are AMP pages compared to full pages, check out the AMP Browser Extension: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/amp-browser-extens...

Stopped using AMP.

Created a site in pure AMP. All competitors didn't use AMP then (1 yr ago). My site was the fastest, didn't have any ads, was the lightest, the most beautiful, had the best UX flow.

SEO-wise my site still doesn't list on the keywords which are in H1 and the page title but all the crappy, non-AMP, megabytes big slow-loading, ads-heavy competitor sites are still in the top ten SERP.

Guess that even Google stopped giving AMP sites any special rank power except they are news sites (then you will see them probably in the carousel but only if they are accepted with Google News).

How fast could google.com be if they trimmed the JS fat?

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

i tried to turn these tables into graphs because charts of numbers weren't doing much for me. but i suck at spreadsheets, so i don't know how to label these: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZFWiqXesq8SlOZ3uW9Om...

(the bars are raw/cached/canonical, and the groups on the X axis are min/max/median/90th)

Alternate answer : not as fast as Dan Luu website.

https://danluu.com/

Is it really hard to use the whole of my screen? I'm well aware that modern websites have to scale to lots of different screen sizes. My laptop is a 17" job so why the blazes do I only get to see a block of text using the middle third of it? It looks shit. I'd probably have to peek under the lenses of my specs on a smaller screen. I spend far too much time using CTRL + these days.

it's funny how so many people use to ridiculed ColdFusion and Asp.Net WebForms for "re-inventing" and "polluting" HTML with their custom tags and server components respectively. This is exactly what AMP is.

Don't use AMP... Aweful for everyone involved, except Google.

Maybe just once tell the readers what AMP stands for.

As someone with limited mobile data, not cool, Google. This after Google created a cell carrier for people who use less data (Project Fi) and want per-gb billing.

Please stop saying "performant" when you mean "fast". If you just mean "fast", say "fast".

I built a simple bash/javascript to get the AMP URL for a given URL, did reduce my data usage by tons. Look here:

https://developers.google.com/apis-explorer/?hl=en_US#p/acce...

   curl -X POST -H "Content-Type: application/json"  -d "{urls: ['$1'] }" 
   https://content-acceleratedmobilepageurl.googleapis.com
   /v1/ampUrls:batchGet?key=YOUR_AMP_API_KEY

For android app use:

       public static String GET(String url){
        String result = "";
        String ampString = "https://content-acceleratedmobilepageurl.googleapis.com/v1/ampUrls:batchGet?key=YOUR_AMP_API_KEY";
        HttpURLConnection conn = null;
        try {
            URL ampurl = new URL(ampString);
            conn = (HttpURLConnection) ampurl.openConnection();
            conn.setReadTimeout(10000);
            conn.setConnectTimeout(15000);
            conn.setRequestProperty("Content-Type", "application/json");
            conn.setRequestMethod("POST");
            conn.setDoInput(true);
            conn.setDoOutput(true);

            JSONObject jsonObject = new JSONObject();
            jsonObject.accumulate("urls", url);

            OutputStream os = conn.getOutputStream();
            os.write(jsonObject.toString().getBytes("UTF-8"));
            os.close();

            InputStream istream = null;
            istream = conn.getInputStream();
            InputStream in = new BufferedInputStream(istream);
            if(in != null){
                result = convertInputStreamToString(in);
            }
        }
        catch (Exception e) {
            Log.d("News exception", result);
        }finally {
            // Close Stream TODO
            // and disconnect HTTPS connection.
            if (conn != null) {
                conn.disconnect();
            }
        }

    private static String convertInputStreamToString(InputStream inputStream) throws IOException {
        BufferedReader bufferedReader = new BufferedReader( new InputStreamReader(inputStream));
        String line = "";
        String result = "";
        String id = "";
        String ampUrls = "";

        while((line = bufferedReader.readLine()) != null){
            result += line;
        }
        inputStream.close();
        try {
            JSONObject jsonObj = new JSONObject(result);
            // check if jsonObj has ampUrls string - how to do it?

                if (!jsonObj.isNull("ampUrls")){
                    JSONArray contacts = jsonObj.getJSONArray("ampUrls");
                        for (int i = 0; i < contacts.length(); i++) {
                            JSONObject c = contacts.getJSONObject(i);
                            id = c.getString("cdnAmpUrl");
                            }
                    }

            } catch (JSONException e) {
                // TODO Auto-generated catch block
                e.printStackTrace();
            }
        return id;

    } //end of convertInputStreamToString

A suggestion for the author: Please avoid commas (or dots) as thousands separators. My brain parses "4,604ms" as "about four milliseconds", which would be amazing, but is very much not what you mean.

ISO recommends half-width spaces as thousands separators to avoid this kind of confusion. Also, I think thousands separators can just be skipped if your numbers are only four or five digits wide.