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

Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

developers.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 247 posts

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#51

Post by tdkl »

maverick_iceman wrote: post #25

I think HN crowd doesn't fully appreciate the benefits of AMP to people having slow connections. In third world countries still on 2G networks AMP has been an absolute boon. Additionally, lot of these users have limited data packs so they're better served by pages which are light in data consumption. This is true even for a lot of low income neighborhoods in the US. Making AMP opt-in would defeat the purpose as a lot…

That's the same argument as giving up privacy for security.

Fuck Google and their eagerness to govern the World Wide Web.

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#52

Post by pmlnr »

adtac wrote: post #26

To everyone who's against AMP - try opening any article on an extremely slow 2G connection when you're travelling and try the same with AMP. The difference is night and day. You may be against some principles, but it's an absolute life-saver sometimes.

Nonsense. Let it be bloated. Let people wait and pay. They won't go back, and that would be the point.

This way, google "saves" those sites by essentially stealing content, since from now on, visitors won't even hit your site.

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#53

Post by wandernotlost »

adtac wrote: post #26

To everyone who's against AMP - try opening any article on an extremely slow 2G connection when you're travelling and try the same with AMP. The difference is night and day. You may be against some principles, but it's an absolute life-saver sometimes.

This has absolutely nothing to do with AMP. May I remind you that slow Internet connections are not a new phenomenon. Try browsing the web on a 9600 baud modem. The means for solving this problem (content negotiation, carefully crafted pages, CSS media selectors) have existed since the dawn of the web, and AMP is a terrible solution that carries the collateral damage of obscuring the URL/source of the original resource and hijacking the presentation of the page.

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#54

Post by makmanalp »

greenspot wrote: post #50
tiffanyh wrote: post #42

There's a lot of hate going on in this thread towards Google ... maybe unfairly. Keep in mind, a huge reason why Google created AMP is because website bloat has gotten out of control. It's not uncommon for a simply Wordpress blog to be 4MB in size and have 70 requested objects to fetch. I live in a geography that has LTE and web site are painfully slow to load on mobile devices. I can't even imagine what the Internet…

> 5 different JavaScript frameworks This is not the problem. You can easily use i.e. React and some related libs on mobile without slowing down the experience at all. Everything will be fast and responsive, loading times and the mobile site itself (if done right). The problem Google tries to address (and this is a real problem) are the cascaded ad networks on webpages which load hundreds of JS libs once a page is loa…

Would this theoretically be solved by some HTTP 2 stuff?

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#55

Post by mikeash »

adtac wrote: post #26

To everyone who's against AMP - try opening any article on an extremely slow 2G connection when you're travelling and try the same with AMP. The difference is night and day. You may be against some principles, but it's an absolute life-saver sometimes.

I dislike AMP because sometimes it just fails to load, it screws with scrolling, blocks off part of the screen, and causes me extra effort when I want to share URLs.

What's really annoying is that your problem could be solved without causing all of mine.

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#56

Post by MBCook »

artimaeis wrote: post #32
MrVitaliy wrote: post #14

I'm against AMP simply because it doesn't work with Safari on iOS. In fact, I switched to DuckDuckGo as a default search engine because less accurate search is still better than a list of accurate results that simply don't open.

Can you detail the issues you've had with AMP pages? I use Safari on iOS 10.2 daily and have never noticed an issue loading AMP pages.

They load fine (and FAST) for me, that's never been an issue.

But because they have a completely different scroll weight the feel wrong. I can't easily share them, and the stupid bar at the top of the page takes up 15-20% of my screen.

They're obnoxious to interact with. If they fixed just two of those issues (make the bar tiny, don't mess with scroll feel) I'd be a lot happier. As it is I find myself actively avoiding AMP links in Google, but as the become more prevalent I wonder if I'll have to switch to some other search engine on iOS.

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#57

Post by MBCook »

mathw wrote: post #15
pmlnr wrote: post #4

"We remove image data that is invisible to users, such as thumbnail and geolocation metadata. For JPEG images, we also reduce quality and color samples if they are higher than necessary." Great. Except that that information might be deliberately a part of the image. These things should be opt-in.

They are. You don't have to publish an AMP version.

What about me as a user? I have NO WAY to control it, I just get it shoved down my throat. I don't like it and don't want it, but get no choice in the matter.

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#58

Post by pmlnr »

tiffanyh wrote: post #42

There's a lot of hate going on in this thread towards Google ... maybe unfairly. Keep in mind, a huge reason why Google created AMP is because website bloat has gotten out of control. It's not uncommon for a simply Wordpress blog to be 4MB in size and have 70 requested objects to fetch. I live in a geography that has LTE and web site are painfully slow to load on mobile devices. I can't even imagine what the Internet…

It's not Google's responsibility to fix the bloat. If something is painful, let it be painful; when they start losing visitors, they'll see something is off.

This is _not_ a solution and google should not be doing anything with this.

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#59

Post by MBCook »

adtac wrote: post #26

To everyone who's against AMP - try opening any article on an extremely slow 2G connection when you're travelling and try the same with AMP. The difference is night and day. You may be against some principles, but it's an absolute life-saver sometimes.

Hacker News loads very fast without AMP. Daring Fireball loads very fast without AMP. Lots of sites do. That's up to the people making the sites to fix.

He's the thing: I CAN'T OPT OUT. If I don't like it or don't want it my only option is to ditch Google.

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#60

Post by adtac »

wandernotlost wrote: post #53
adtac wrote: post #26

To everyone who's against AMP - try opening any article on an extremely slow 2G connection when you're travelling and try the same with AMP. The difference is night and day. You may be against some principles, but it's an absolute life-saver sometimes.

This has absolutely nothing to do with AMP. May I remind you that slow Internet connections are not a new phenomenon. Try browsing the web on a 9600 baud modem. The means for solving this problem (content negotiation, carefully crafted pages, CSS media selectors) have existed since the dawn of the web, and AMP is a terrible solution that carries the collateral damage of obscuring the URL/source of the original resour…

Slow internet connections have existed for quite a while, indeed. But websites were smaller back then - they didn't load a 300 kB JS file just to hide a few elements.

A slow connection combined with huge websites are practically unusable.

>carefully crafted pages

Yes, this is the ideal solution - people adopt saner (and smaller) web development. But that is uncontrollable and, frankly, I don't see it happening.

Post reply on HN