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

201–210 of 261 posts

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#201

Post by piyush_soni »

jacquesm wrote: post #141
piyush_soni wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my opinion, the problem is that your version of unbiased doesn't add much value to a user (and is actually biased for the website-owners). For example, SourceForge started adding a lot of misleading 'Download' buttons all over their page, and they might ask the same thing about 'an unbiased ranking' (Google's always been criticized for being the 'Web Police'). As a user however, I'd want Sourceforge's rankings go…

The best solution to combat bloat is less bloat, not faster ways to deliver bloat (all that will do is increase the budget for bloat).

Why not both?

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#202

Post by macNchz »

8ytecoder wrote: post #146
jacquesm wrote: post #93

I don't (and never will) use AMP and I feel that it is patently unfair to penalize pages for not using some non-standard tech. Google should index the web fairly, not make use of their tech a factor. Webpage speed is a fair measure (and I really wouldn't know what I could do to make my pages any faster, AMP will not make a measurable difference). I would expect an un-biased search engine to rate pages with and withou…

Does anyone know how to disable AMP?

As mentioned–you can't, but I noticed that if you have an iPhone with 3D touch (6S or 7) you can skip the AMP page and go directly to the real website by hard-pressing the link. That brings up the preview modal thing, which you can hard press again to make full screen.

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#203

Post by josho »

bitmapbrother wrote: post #172
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

As far as I can tell the amp-img tag doesn't add anything that img doesn't already support. The page simply mentions some vague statement about needing to understand the page layout, but uses the same attributes as img.

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#204

Post by josho »

Aissen wrote: post #37

Actually having the site served from the same, already-open, probably pre-fetched connection, already open browser is great for the user. It even has the advantage of loading inside the Google App, where no adblocking exists, so it might even be good for publishers. Yes, there's no discovery if you don't design for that, user will just bounce.

> having the site served from the same, already-open, probably pre-fetched connection

So, the bottleneck is really the connection setup time? Seems to me, that http2 largely solves that problem, while html already supports prefetch.

Don't kid yourself, the goal here is a better web locked into the google ecosystem.

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#206

Post by hanginghyena »

walshemj wrote: post #79
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…

Every time I look at a website its shocking how no one even does basic image optimisation using PS on the images. This is such a trivial optimisation it makes you wonder about the level of competency of the average web development company.

=> "makes you wonder about the level of competency of the average web development company"

Our competency on projects where we are being paid a full domestic consulting rate is quite high, thank you.

Now, if you're asking us to compete with cut-rate bids from some online freelancer exchange, we will reduce the level of service and QA to match our competitors in that space....

Eg. you may have Nordstrom's service for a Nordstrom's price. Wal-mart service for a Wal-mart price. But don't expect Nordstrom's service for a Wal-mart price; that usually isn't going to fly....

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#207

Post by Zyst »

mSparks wrote: post #145
fixermark wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I said "techies like me" A data point of one isn't particularly descriptive.

While i'll take the compliment that you think i am that unique. I'm pretty sure I'm not.

I'm pretty sure no one is implying any compliments.

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#208

Post by IanCal »

fixermark wrote: post #113
pcl wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that it's being served out of Google's servers changes the trust model for the content. End users have no good reason to trust Google with the cached data, but people assign trust to them when they click an AMP link. There's no real indication to an end user that that data is coming out of Google's caches rather than from the content provider. I find that misleading. Typically, cached web pages come out of e…

> End users have no good reason to trust Google with the cached data I'd imagine that end users who don't trust Google aren't using Google. > There's no real indication to an end user that that data is coming out of Google's caches rather than from the content provider. Users who care can see the URL and the domain for which the cert is signed. Most users do not care. > IMO this is very different than my company or I…

> That's a fair concern, but the day Google does that is the day a media firestorm blows AMP out of the water as a trustworthy tool.

And in particular, it looks (at a quick check) like the google hosted files are in a very predictable location, so it should be easy to write something to check both that version and the hosted version against each other to monitor for discrepancies.

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#209

Post by ocdtrekkie »

josho wrote: post #196
ocdtrekkie wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think if you're running a business there's any way to avoid optimizing for Google in the short-term. You simply have to do it, if you want to be seen. Not optimizing for Google won't hurt Google, it'll just hurt you. Because Google can always just promote someone else. But you should also support antitrust legislation and judicial action against Google. Don't vote for candidates next month receiving large don…

As an outsider observing the US election the statement of yours "Don't vote for candidates next month receiving large donations from Google" strikes me as ridiculous. Don't get me wrong, your logic is correct. But, in order for politicians to play the game they need large donors like Google. So, if they don't take money from Google they'll just take it from someone else with an agenda. The real solution is to vote fo…

Realistically, you will never get a majority of US legislators to agree that giving US legislators money is a bad idea. Unsurprisingly, when Congress moves to increase the salary of Congress, the bill tends to pass with flying colors. ;)

Therefore, your best bet is to get regulations against Google by electing people paid by someone else, then later get regulations against that someone else by electing people paid by someone entirely different. It's a juggling act of corruption!

Re: Google May Be Stealing Mobile Traffic

#210

Post by ryanobjc »

spiderfarmer wrote: post #73
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…

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…

The AMP Cache is an option that you can opt in to. The wordpress plugin by default opts in. The author said as much.

The problem isn't that Google "steals" traffic in the sense it's going against the wishes of the site publisher, but that the author didn't know what he was buying in to and thus was surprised.

There is the other thing which is the AMP Cache is probably more local and faster than your site. Small sites usually dont use CDNs so there it is.

Post reply on HN