5 ms·

Here's a bit more info on the design process: https://design.google.com/articles/evolving-the-google-identity/ https://design.google.com/articles/evolving-the-

• abalos 11y ago
  > including building a special variant of our full-color logo that is only 305 bytes, compared to our existing logo at ~14,000 bytes. That's huge for low-bandwidth users.
  • robryk 11y ago
    Why? This is one of the most cacheable resources. Also, it's displayed reasonably often, so I'd expect it to be rarely evicted from the device-local cache.
    • mehta 11y ago
      Even if it isn't evicted very often, the first time it is loaded, it will be ~3 times faster, it will take up less storage thus better for others and (probably) easier to render.
      • sondr3 11y ago
        And on the scale Google operates on it'll save quite a bit for them as well to serve it.
    • kllrnohj 11y ago
      First impressions matter, and caches do not help with that in the slightest.
  • deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  • ozmbie 11y ago
    It doesn't really matter, because most of the top search results you click on will probably include 1MB of ad tracking javascript anyway.
    • 72deluxe 11y ago
      Sad but true! Here, the sad response to slow web page load times on mobile is normally "just get a modern internet connection!" or "use 4G" etc. but if we had desktop apps that took forever to load, you'd hear complaints pretty soon. A response of "get a faster computer" isn't accepted there, and accepting all this boatload of javascript isn't good either. I can't remember the link but the average page size has been skyrocketing the past few years, which I think is sad. All that network traffic, electricity usage and CPU processing just for the same jQuery code to be flung across the Internet a billion times.