🔗 Fidinpamp • adactio
INP, FID, The web. And my contested belief that despite all its flaws, AMP was still good for the mobile web from a user experience perspective.
Jeremy writes about the introduction of a new web vital metric:
The big news in the web performance community this month is the arrival of a new initialism. INP sounds like one of those pseudo-scientific psychologic profiles but it’s meant to stand for Interaction to Next Paint (even if they were to swear off pointless initialisms, you’d still have to pry Pointless Capitalisation from Google’s cold dead hands).
https://adactio.com/journal/21006
However, I learned a little more about FID:
FID measures the time from when a user first interacts with a page (that is, when they click a link, tap on a button, or use a custom, JavaScript-powered control) to the time when the browser is actually able to begin processing event handlers in response to that interaction.
https://adactio.com/journal/21006
Turns out, AMP had a lot to do with introducing FID and I cannot believe that I didn't know this.
I was one of the few people who believed in the user value of AMP. I think the tie-in with Google Search should have been a scalpel but it ended up being used as a cudgel. However, the user value of improving mobile pages are very real. I also thought they were at least an honest attempt at an answer to the Performance Gap Inequality Index. Again to be fair, Alex always held the position that the closeness between Google Search and AMP was never good for the web.
Member discussion