Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing
danielmiessler.com
Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing
1–10 of 169 posts
Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing
#2I don't think this post really articulated any concrete reasons why AMP is good or bad. It just said it is.
Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing
#3If you share an AMP page it will indeed link to Google's CDN but if you click it it immediately redirects to the full article on desktop:
http://i.imgur.com/43i9X4e.png
The full URL is still part of the shared link, so not much of a value has been lost, but the gain (speed boost) still outperforms this "inconvenience".
I don't really feel the hatred against AMP, it works as intended and for me as an end user that's all that matters.
Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing
#4Out of interest, is there anyone who wants to defend the current Google AMP (not the concept of lighter webpages, but how google has gone about it?) I haven't found anyone yet personally.
Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing
#5And another thing: it breaks the iOS reader feature, so it's frankly worse than the full fat page.
Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing
#6Google should reward fast / jank-free websites instead of rewarding websites that use one particular technology (AMP).
On SERPs, both the "flash" icon and the AMP carousel are AMP-exclusive which suggests that Google is abusing its market power.
Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing
#7AMP specifications allow for other cache servers, of which CloudFlare[0] has recently implemented one. You could implement your own if you like.
AMP also specifies that the canonical page URL should be used when sharing, though the cached URL is currently what's shown in the browser. Their last developer update[1] said they're working to address this, however for all relevant purposes Google's own systems already currently consider AMP traffic and results to be attributed to the original source.
[0] http://www.businessinsider.com/cloudflare-adopts-google-amp-...
[1] https://amphtml.wordpress.com/2017/01/13/why-amp-caches-exis...
> Google amends its cached AMP search results with Schema.org and OpenGraph metadata, so posting the link to any platform that honors these should result in the canonical URL being shared.
Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing
#8And another thing: it breaks the iOS reader feature, so it's frankly worse than the full fat page.
Ugh, "mobile" pages that break the reader are worse than suck. I use the reader all day long to make the mobile web bearable.
Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing
#9Out of interest, is there anyone who wants to defend the current Google AMP (not the concept of lighter webpages, but how google has gone about it?) I haven't found anyone yet personally.
Just noticed a few days ago one of the major Australian newspapers started using AMP.
I do understand the negativities around Google's AMP, but the speed was.. blazing fast.
I can't help to think that for a user who may not be familiar with all the underlying issues, it is a pretty good user experience in terms of the speed alone.
Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing
#10[deleted]