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

Response from Google Tech Lead, Re: “Google May Be Stealing Your Mobile Traffic”

alexkras.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 204 posts

Re: Response from Google Tech Lead, Re: “Google May Be Stealing Your Mobile Traffic”

#81

Post by 50CNT »

StephenConnell wrote: post #75
50CNT wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speed also depends on where you are geographically. Amazon.com is probably faster than Taobao.com in the States, but I'd have the opposite experience over here in China. But then Google is the slowest this side of the GFW, so that might be redundant.

True, but Google knows where you are and could test the site from that general region. It would cause additional overhead for Google but may be worth it. Page render speed is just as important as server speed. A website bloated with ads is what I object to the most, or any type of pop over that obstructs the content.

I wonder whether they incorporate these things into their ranking metrics already, similar to how they do their Quality Scores for Adwords.

Re: Response from Google Tech Lead, Re: “Google May Be Stealing Your Mobile Traffic”

#82

Post by visarga »

chiefalchemist wrote: post #39

Google has their version of the internet. Facebook has their version of the internet. As time slides forward just think of how many users won't know the real internet from these rubber doll versions. Congrats humanity. Your best invention ever and it only 20 years or so to completely fuck it up. This is why we can't have nice things.

People need to own the means of production. In this case, it's the search engine and social network. We can't rely on companies, because they are greedy, nor on government, because it is corrupt. This is what happens when we don't own the tools we use - we are subject to exploitation, others making fortunes on our backs and abusing us by incessant tracking.

I'm amazed that there is no federated (not owned by a single entity), anonymous search engine to this day and we're still pouring our brains into Google. Google knows more about a person than his spouse, doctor and lawyer put together!

Re: Response from Google Tech Lead, Re: “Google May Be Stealing Your Mobile Traffic”

#83

Post by mr_luc »

cyrusshepard wrote: post #74
MarkMc wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This makes it ... much harder to navigate to the publisher that created the page in the first place What makes it hard? People click on links to navigate around the publisher's web site, and you can still have links in the AMP landing page.

All these navigation elements are secondary, and further down the page. You have a point that if the user wants to, they are free to click any link they want. The fact remains that the top-most, primary navigation element on an AMP page is an "X" that closes you out of the publisher's page to send you back to Google. After that, the second most prominent navigation element invites you to browse other publishers. By d…

Yeah - that's really, really shocking to me. I paid attention to the AMP project early on, felt like I had absorbed its value proposition, and made a mental note to check on it from time to time.

I wasn't expecting the examples of its usage to involve altering the UI on AMP pages!

Is it just part of the blessed AMP WordPress plugin? Or is google actually injecting their own UI into AMP pages by default?

If the latter, that would seem like a power grab. Sure, it's "just a toolbar." And search results and adwords ads are "just links."

Re: Response from Google Tech Lead, Re: “Google May Be Stealing Your Mobile Traffic”

#84

Post by ryanobjc »

criddell wrote: post #17
dingo_bat wrote: post #2

So basically this guy says all of the issues are by design and you can choose not to use amp if you don't like all of it. Google isn't going to penalize non amp pages in search ranking. They are just going to not show your page in the carousel. I think it's a pretty fair position to take. If you don't like amp don't use it. We'll see if amp catches on over a period of time.

Amp isn't ideal, but neither is Instant Articles on Facebook. I'm hoping that Amp is really just Google training publishers how to make web pages that aren't terrible for users.

well, AMP is open source. Instant Articles is not.

AMP works on many platforms, Bing just announced support of AMP.

So, what's the big deal?

Re: Response from Google Tech Lead, Re: “Google May Be Stealing Your Mobile Traffic”

#85

Post by MarkMc »

Sephr wrote: post #34

As positive as the response sounds, it is an empty promise. > We’re looking at ways to make the source link more discoverable and will update once that is done. If Google was actually going to fix the issue, they would have said "we will make the close button direct users to the original site and will update once that is done" OR "we are changing the x (close) button to a ← (back) button". "x" means "close" and "←" m…

> "we will make the close button direct users to the original site and will update once that is done" OR "we are changing the x (close) button to a ← (back) button".

As a user, I hope Google do not implement either of your suggestions.

When I click the 'X' I don't expect to get a copy of the page that loads a bit slower, and I'd be surprised less than 95% of Google's users agreed with me (but by all means do a test).

And I don't want the close button changed to a back button. When I click on a search result I might then click one or two links on the publisher's web site before wanting to check out the next result on the Google results page. I want a single button that takes me quickly back to that search page - I don't want to have to click a 'back' multiple times (and maybe overshoot or undershoot my desired history position).

Re: Response from Google Tech Lead, Re: “Google May Be Stealing Your Mobile Traffic”

#86

Post by bemmu »

cyrusshepard wrote: post #4
dingo_bat wrote: post #2

So basically this guy says all of the issues are by design and you can choose not to use amp if you don't like all of it. Google isn't going to penalize non amp pages in search ranking. They are just going to not show your page in the carousel. I think it's a pretty fair position to take. If you don't like amp don't use it. We'll see if amp catches on over a period of time.

Yes, accept our platform, design choices, and navigation framing or we won't put you in a competitive position with other search results. While AMP isn't a ranking factor (Google has stated this) AMP results are displayed more prominently. Arm twisting at it's finest.

Even if AMP isn't a ranking factor, clickthrough rates may be. If users click more on AMP links, then by improving CTR it could also indirectly improve ranking.

Re: Response from Google Tech Lead, Re: “Google May Be Stealing Your Mobile Traffic”

#87

Post by pmontra »

> “If Google cares so much about the mobile experience, why cover 15% of the small mobile screen with a fat bar at the top?”

> The Android users might have already noticed that it is now scrolling out of the way

It doesn't scroll away. Just checked on Google news with both Chrome and Opera. Android 6. Am I missing something?

Re: Response from Google Tech Lead, Re: “Google May Be Stealing Your Mobile Traffic”

#88

Post by bduerst »

cpeterso wrote: post #79
djur wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems more like UPS saying "hey, we'll ship whatever you want (within reason) but if you can fit it in one of our standard box sizes it'll get there faster and cheaper". What is the ulterior motive or side benefit Google gets from people adopting AMP? Honest question.

AMP articles keeps users browsing within Google's properties, with Google's tracking and ads. Non-AMP news pages are an exit out of Google's sphere, where users will get non-Google tracking and ads. That said, I find myself clicking AMP articles 5x more than non-AMP news links because I know the AMP articles will be fast and clean.

It's using the same libraries and third party pixels as publishers were before.

Re: Response from Google Tech Lead, Re: “Google May Be Stealing Your Mobile Traffic”

#89

Post by bduerst »

cpeterso wrote: post #79
djur wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems more like UPS saying "hey, we'll ship whatever you want (within reason) but if you can fit it in one of our standard box sizes it'll get there faster and cheaper". What is the ulterior motive or side benefit Google gets from people adopting AMP? Honest question.

AMP articles keeps users browsing within Google's properties, with Google's tracking and ads. Non-AMP news pages are an exit out of Google's sphere, where users will get non-Google tracking and ads. That said, I find myself clicking AMP articles 5x more than non-AMP news links because I know the AMP articles will be fast and clean.

It's using the same libraries and third party pixels as publishers were before.
Post reply on HN