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

131–140 of 247 posts

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

#131

Post by tracker1 »

bsimpson wrote: post #91
fragmede wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have a valid point about page bloat, but its a distraction and a poor excuse for hijacking the entire web. My hate for AMP is because Google is using its might to break a fundamental contract for how the web works - the URL bar shows what site you're on, and content is coming from that domain. No other site has gotten away with this. The last time I can recall someone attempting something similar was Digg (rememb…

If browsers detected AMP pages and treated the address bar accordingly: Cached from: nbcnews.com/some-article Would you feel better about it?

I would love that.. beyond that, a link that says "go to " for that article, or some such, that would help too.

I have mixed feelings about it myself, as it isn't always obvious you're seeing content from website.com not google.

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

#132

Post by wmf »

anilgulecha wrote: post #2

I've been critical of AMP in some previous posts, but an AMP like infrastructure has the impressive advantage of trying out such optimizations and solutions, without a large affect on the users. I'd still like to push for an open, standards based approach to tackling the issue of content delivery under resource constraints.

Here's an open version of AMP in the works: https://wicg.github.io/ContentPerformancePolicy/

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

#134

Post by tracker1 »

eeeeeeeeeeeee wrote: post #82
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…

Sure, but Google can offer tooling and best practices to push people in a certain way, like they do with everything. The best way to encourage people to move to new technology on their own is to change the search algorithms to provide positive incentives to implement those changes. Look at SSL. A lot of people don't care about encryption, but they care about SEO improvements more. Google's AMP policy has been aggress…

They could easily heavily penalize any website delivering over 1mb of html + css + js, and have a bonus for being under 500/100/50kb total as part of their pagerank.

That would be a huge driver... if nobody with over 1mb of html+css+js would be in the top 5 results, period.

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

#135

Post by granshaw »

wmf wrote: post #128
ClassyJacket wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It also sucks if you want to interact with the page, since, inanely, you can't click through to the real page.

What can you do on the real page that you can't do on the AMP version?

comments, etc

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

#136

Post by fixermark »

franze wrote: post #95

I implemented AMP on my own project and we implemented it at some clients ... all regret it. The bounce rate, time on site, average page views of AMP pages is always worse than on the responsive version. And as we now have responsive webpages + an AMP version to maintain the overall project costs got higher. Additional the AMP pages are already falling behind as devs and management just hate them. And outside of the…

Question: Why do you not then just switch off the AMP support and stick with responsive pages? It sounds like you just generated an A/B test with some pretty easy-to-interpret results.

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

#138

Post by fixermark »

ClassyJacket wrote: post #12
saycheese wrote: post #10

There is zero reason for AMP to be hijacking URLs or embedding any additional elements into a page that are detectable by the average user. Beyond that, universal opt-out should be possible and stats on the percentage of users opting out should be published real-time. As such, until this is addressed, I am against AMP.

It also sucks if you want to interact with the page, since, inanely, you can't click through to the real page.

Content providers have the option of offering a link that goes to their main content. However, it's not standardized how that's set up (in WaPo, for example, it's under the top-left menu as "Progressive Web App (BETA)" ).

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

#139

Post by discreditable »

Panino wrote: post #106

I think the root issue here is that most websites are now designed by people who don't even know HTML. ("You had one job!") From there, we get years of unoptimized, bloated websites made by people drawing pictures with HTML editors. They are exclusively focused on visual presentation and ignore any mechanics under the hood. Not everyone, but most. Finally Google can't take it anymore and creates AMP as an angry middl…

> I think the root issue here is that most websites are now designed by people who don't even know HTML. ("You had one job!")

Yes, I think the ease of publishing has led to a lot of people publishing who don't know what they're doing. I have an issue with our "webmaster" inserting full-resolution >4mb photos into our site pages to display at 200x400 boxes. I've told them several times that they need to keep image sizes down, but the person is never consistent. I wish I could disable caching on that user's PC so they could see how horrible our initial page loads are.

I try not to browse our website because I want to fix the bad pieces and it's futile because what I improve is eventually undone when new content is rotated in. I'm just the systems guy, and our website is run by marketing.

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

#140

Post by fixermark »

fragmede wrote: post #74
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…

You have a valid point about page bloat, but its a distraction and a poor excuse for hijacking the entire web. My hate for AMP is because Google is using its might to break a fundamental contract for how the web works - the URL bar shows what site you're on, and content is coming from that domain. No other site has gotten away with this. The last time I can recall someone attempting something similar was Digg (rememb…

Why do you need to get to the same article on www.nbcnews.com ?
Post reply on HN