
Performance Tracking – AMP comparisons - petethomas
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1c1zhkdvWE0WvG84TT3Czekj0N-0sRUEBKO3c0Aeflxw/edit#gid=1563359300
======
ocdtrekkie
I think it's been well-discussed that in general, AMP is actually slower, or
at least not a performance gain, but is solely built around allowing Google to
background download if you're coming from Google Search.

These numbers seem to largely reflect that, since I assume they were not
tested against a search results page.

~~~
jacksmith21006
That is NOT true. AMP is a lot faster in most cases.

"Why AMP is fast"

[https://medium.com/@cramforce/why-amp-is-
fast-7d2ff1f48597](https://medium.com/@cramforce/why-amp-is-fast-7d2ff1f48597)

But why the half truth? Can you share the back story?

~~~
dang
You've been over-posting about Google for a long long time, and we've gotten
complaints about it. When something becomes predictable it ceases to be
interesting, and single-purpose accounts are not allowed on HN for this
reason. So would you please roll this back? That means (a) way fewer Google
comments and (b) posting out of intellectual curiosity, not a predefined
agenda. That usually means a diversity of interests.

~~~
jacksmith21006
Can I reply to posts by "ocdtrekkie" that are not true about Google?

I mean basically every post he shares is something negative about Google and
in best case is a half truth.

I would just like to see things be accurate. I am an engineer by background
and maybe a bit OCD on things being factual.

Also is it allowed to have every post go after one company?

