Google Page speed, punishment for some

[Page]

Google at it again, changing things to away that makes most of us to work out butts off. Yet to my mind that there are way to many sites that are not going to make it.

Read more here: https://techcrunch.com/2018/01/17/g...or-in-mobile-search-ranking-starting-in-july/

 

[mav3n]

I fail to see how this is a bad thing? Page speed is everything, so why wouldn't it weigh more in ranking? Work to streamline your content so it loads quicker and you have nothing to worry about.

 

[Page]

I'm not worried, I'm safe! what about FP 😛

but ou know what google is like they test every little darn thing and if the site doesn't pass an percentage then RIPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP

 

[mav3n]

I'm not worried, I'm safe! what about FP 😛

but ou know what google is like they test every little darn thing and if the site doesn't pass an percentage then RIPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP

When you are the size of Google and there is so much information to display but only so many search pages, they have to weed out the weak. It makes sense.

 

[Azareal]

I don't think Google is that harsh, I believe they do it based on when you can actually interact with the site, etc. but I may be mistaken, at-least that's how one of their speed testers work.

To be honest, they probably should have done this years ago, so many people have ridiculously slow sites and while it might not be that bad on desktop, it can be really bad on mobile.

 

[Page]

To be honest, they probably should have done this years ago, so many people have ridiculously slow sites and while it might not be that bad on desktop, it can be really bad on mobile.

glad they didn't! years ago I had poor rating

 

[Azareal]

Ouch, that would hurt then, but hey, look at the bright side, it would motivate you to speed things up. Two birds with one stone, happy users and happy Google.

But yeah, it can be a bit annoying to optimise JS in particular, especially if you're trying to make it non-blocking.

 

[Jason76]

That's the problem with SEO. It's too difficult. In that case, it's tempting to simply buy traffic or use free social media traffic (which can be tough, though).

Anyway, even if you hire someone, the whole SEO thing limits a site's freedom. I mean, who wants to bossed around on every little detail like, keeping unique content (practically impossible), page speed etc.?

 

[Azareal]

I think it makes sense from Google's standpoint, if you click onto a result and it takes nine seconds to load, then not only are you annoyed at the site, but partly at Google for referring that site.

The others stuff on the other-hand stems from how algorithmic the search engines are about finding quality content, while filtering out the spam. It's a tricky one, because there are only so many things you can do with user provided content and it's not like you can manually type a meta description for every topic.