Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Not pleased. It can cost a lot of money to have a fast site.

If you're a neighborhood blog trying to make a go of it, you can't afford a developer to optimize your site and cache the crap out of it. Meanwhile, the local newspaper site, running a tag archive page for your neighborhood powered by Outside.in or some other McLocal scraper app, can do that. You lose every time on the speed front, despite having original content.



Not disagreeing, but I think it's often a matter of setting up or tweaking your caching strategy, not throwing hardware at the solution.


Not too many writers can "set up and tweak their caching strategy."


Sounds like a business opportunity to me. If only there were a site where...


Exactly. Now it's more expensive to show up in search.


If your end users want a fast site (I would imagine most do), then the faster sites are going to win anyway, with everything else being equal.

At worst, Google is just reflecting that reality (in ~1% of searches where it changes the results).

Personally, I would prefer to compete in a world where everything relevant is "up for competition". You can compete on content, speed, price, or a myriad of other factors. If your complaint is that you want to compete on all of those things EXCEPT speed because that metric is unfair in your opinion, I don't have sympathy for that point of view.


Many blog engines, even WordPress with the right plugin, serve your pages as static files. Plenty of speed that way.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: