Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

Post by OJFord » Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 3:30 PM UTC

interpol_p wrote: post #111

OJFord wrote: post #72

> I was expecting it to cause a redirect to the original > article. Instead it redirects back to Google search > results. Say What? Well, what it does is exactly what I would expect; if clicking 'X' redirected to the author's site I would be thoroughly confused. If I click on a link and it opens in a new tab, I don't close the tab ('X') expecting to go to the home page - I expect to go back to the page from which I o…

I agree with your expectation of clicking the 'X' going back to the results. But it's a bit strange, why have the 'X' there at all when the browser back button will do exactly the same thing more naturally?

Post by untog » Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 3:38 PM UTC

hannob wrote: post #70

AMP is essentially Google's answer to people creating terrible web experiences. It's been discussed and documented a lot. Common webpages today load content from dozens of different ad, tracking and whatever hosts, take several megabytes to load. All well known, but people don't stop doing it. Now Google comes along and says: You can't do it, let us do it. Which is perfectly reasonable from their point of view. And w…

Post by mbesto » Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 3:54 PM UTC

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…

Post by jonknee » Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 3:55 PM UTC

rebelde wrote: post #83

hannob wrote: post #70

AMP is essentially Google's answer to people creating terrible web experiences. It's been discussed and documented a lot. Common webpages today load content from dozens of different ad, tracking and whatever hosts, take several megabytes to load. All well known, but people don't stop doing it. Now Google comes along and says: You can't do it, let us do it. Which is perfectly reasonable from their point of view. And w…

> If you don't like AMP nobody stops you from doing the same thing. The AMP symbol tells users that the site loads quickly. Google doesn't indicate the same thing about non-AMP sites that still load quickly. Guess which site the user will tend to choose. I am not sure AMP will be optional for sites that want to get chosen.

Post by jonknee » Mon, Oct 17, 2016, 3:56 PM UTC

jasoncartwright wrote: post #82

spiderfarmer wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's stopping Google from promoting fast webpages without AMP? I have spent weeks improving load times for my websites, with A A A A A ratings op webpagetest.org as a result. AMP is just a fraction faster, why should I have to create a seperate AMP version? Also, my websites are essentially all dynamic content. People come for the comments, like on HN. I gues I'll have to use some cache-busting javascript if Google…

They do promote fast pages: https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2010/04/using-site-speed-i... "we've decided to take site speed into account in our search rankings"