Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

alexkras.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 261 posts

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#171

Post by dkersten »

catshirt wrote: post #116
dkersten wrote: post #100

> Google was injecting a large toolbar at the top of the snapshot encouraging users to get back to Google search results (a functionality already provided by the back button) I learned, through a series of usability tests my (former) startup ran amongst its users, that most non-tech people do not click the back button and get very confused if your pages don't have their own back/forward/close/menu navigation. We move…

i question the validity of your test and/or it's application in the current context. what I am hearing is "the average non-technical person incapable of using Google."

These people weren't incapable of using Google or computers. Some users were business-types who are used to using a lot of web-based SaaS tools and quite capable and comfortable using computers.

By non-technical I really meant they weren't developers; they were sales, marketing and management type people.

When asked, it simply didn't occur to most of them to simply press the back button.

Now, its not apples to apples, of course, and since this was in a web app where there may well have been a fear that pressing back would lose the page like you do in some (badly designed) single page applications, its possible that this skewed the results somewhat. Either way, we found that adding in-page navigation improved the workflow for almost everyone.

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#172

Post by bitmapbrother »

wtbob wrote: post #152

I still can't get over the fact that AMP breaks the img tag and requires JavaScript. My long-running browsers instances are bogged down by JavaScript (and I have NoScript on whitelist mode, with it only allowed where necessary!). Requiring it on any fast-page standard seems counterproductive. And why, why would they break the img tag‽

AMP doesn't "break" the img tag. It's more optimal to use the amp-img tag for AMP pages, but if you use img instead it's not going to break your page.

>And why, why would they break the img tag‽

https://www.ampproject.org/docs/guides/amp_replacements

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#174

Post by bitmapbrother »

romanovcode wrote: post #55

I think that this whole AMP thing is horrible for the web. It's like Google is not dictating how one should build/style their websites. Thanks, but no thanks. Stay evil, Google.

Ah yes, let's continue down the path of bloated web sites loading MB's of JavaScript. If you don't like it then just simply switch to a search engine that doesn't support it.

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#175

Post by JustSomeNobody »

emilssolmanis wrote: post #117

So you installed a WP plugin without doing any research and hoped it would make your pages faster by using unicorns and magic, or to quote > Most importantly, I was surprised to find out that instead of redirecting users to an optimized version hosted on my server, Google was actually serving a snapshot of the page from their own cache. and now you're upset that they really only made it faster via caching it, not act…

Your comment is very similar to victim blaming.

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#176

Post by geofft »

leereeves wrote: post #148
TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also have near-monopoly status on search, so they must not be anticompetitive.

But it will take years for the government to do anything about it. Longer, perhaps, if Hillary is elected with Eric Schmidt's help.[1] 1: http://qz.com/520652/groundwork-eric-schmidt-startup-working...

Why do you think that "person X supports candidate Y" implies "candidate Y will help person X commit more crimes without penalty"? Is that true of all people and all candidates, or only some?

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#177

Post by leereeves »

geofft wrote: post #176
leereeves wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it will take years for the government to do anything about it. Longer, perhaps, if Hillary is elected with Eric Schmidt's help.[1] 1: http://qz.com/520652/groundwork-eric-schmidt-startup-working...

Why do you think that "person X supports candidate Y" implies "candidate Y will help person X commit more crimes without penalty"? Is that true of all people and all candidates, or only some?

I don't like the word "supports" for providing services at a high level in the campaign, but yes, I do think that in general, politicians attack their enemies and protect their friends.

An admittedly cynical view I've developed after years of watching partisan prosecutions, impeachment votes, and pardons.

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#178

Post by bitmapbrother »

tinus_hn wrote: post #38
visarga wrote: post #3

Well, considering that said traffic originated from Google, and that Google was under no obligation to send it to OP's page, it's a little more nuanced than "stealing". It just means they sent different behaving traffic than usual - traffic that only touches one article and returns to Google. It might discourage webmasters from adopting AMP though, if they have the expectation to lead the visitor to the homepage or o…

Google is not stealing traffic but it is stealing content by displaying it out of the original servers control. The real cost of a website is not hosting it but filling it with things people want to read. Content creators will want to get benefits such as ad revenue to compensate for their effort.

If Google is "stealing" content by displaying it out of the original servers control then we should stop all of the major search providers from caching content. Obviously this isn't going to happen because it's considerably more efficient to serve the cached page from Google's fast servers and network.

>The real cost of a website is not hosting it but filling it with things people want to read. Content creators will want to get benefits such as ad revenue to compensate for their effort.

Google doesn't create AMP pages for you - the content creator does. If the content creator wants to insert ads then they can do so via AMP.

https://www.ampproject.org/docs/reference/components/amp-ad

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#179

Post by mthoms »

criley2 wrote: post #166
lmm wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't have to though. If there's a symbol and sites with that symbol are faster, they'll learn to look for the symbol, perhaps not even consciously.

>They don't have to though. If there's a symbol and sites with that symbol are faster, they'll learn to look for the symbol, perhaps not even consciously. Totally disagree. I didn't know what AMP is and I keep seeing it. I avoided it thinking it was yet-another Google adware property like DoubleClick, another cleverly named way to trick users. For the vast majority of users on 4G connections, AMP loads aren't that mu…

I'm pretty sure Google has extensively tested the CTR's of SERP pages with and without the AMP logo. There's absolutely no way they would have implemented it if it resulted in a lower click-through rate. That would run counter to their own stated goals with AMP.

Google tests and re-tests the crap out of things like this.

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#180

Post by bitmapbrother »

mehmetkose wrote: post #41

My website is already fast on mobile. Because I am using gulp, and compressing the UI. I have added AMP because of seo. But wtf is this? FUK yourself google! I'll delete amp on my site.

That'll show them. Cut your nose off to spite your face.
Post reply on HN