Live data from Hacker News

Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing

danielmiessler.com

151–160 of 169 posts

Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing

#151
post #150

Google started stealing content a long time ago on their search page... sometime displaying almost whole pages of content as the first "search result" so that the user doesn't even need to visit the source.

Does it count as stealing if websites opt into it?

Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing

#152
post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIRC Google already does this. But it doesn't solve the same problem as AMP does. With your solution, site A can load at 2s and site B at 3s, and site A will win. With AMP, sites A and B can both load in 200ms by easily integrating with an open standard. Also: all this talk of "lock-in" and "centralization". With the approach you proposed, the publisher with the most money to spend on dev resources wins the highest s…

really? cause I don't see any discrete indicator that this page loads blazing fast. just rankings. meanwhile, people itt are claiming that they deliberately seek out the little thunderbolt as proof of quality. why can't the little thunderbolt be awarded to HackerNews too, even outside the AMP ecosystem?

That's a fair argument. Since this page loads as fast as AMP it should get the same nice thunder bolt.

But that's different from the argument being made in the article, which is that AMP as a performance booster is "bad" because it "breaks links".

Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing

#153
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The spec for amp specifically has an "amp-ad" tag for displaying ads. There are multiple ways they can be shown in an AMP page. The nice thing about AMP ads is they will not cause the page to change layout/flow as they load. I believe a size must be declared for ads to prevent bad behavior. https://www.ampproject.org/docs/reference/components/amp-ad

I didn't say they couldn't show ads, but basic ads aren't the only way that these places monetize. Trackers, 'you might also like' panels, etc all feed in to the overall monetization strategy. A couple of amp-approved ads on an amp-page don't necessarily make up for all that...

Trackers work in amp too.

Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing

#154

Do we really need Instant Articles (Facebook) and AMP (Google) when we can accomplish fast loading pages with plain, uncomplicated HTML and CSS? I feel that many web developers don't realise that simple HTML and CSS is often all you need to make clear, fast loading pages. No complicated tricks or techniques required. You can make the page reasonably pleasant in appearance too. Think of the sites you often visit: news…

Version A was excruciatingly slow. Version B was very quick.

I wonder if original dns resolution wasn't to blame... or either load or lack of a recent one on your server. I know I'm a little late to the party in this thread.

Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing

#155

Cloudflare is doing this AMP crap too. If a cloudflare user enables AMP on his site then links from their domain to yours will trigger a visit of Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Cloudflare-AMP/1.0; + https://amp.cloudflare.com/bot ) AppleWebKit/534.34" which then mirrors the content from your domain and re-hosts it on Cloudflare servers. Then whenever someone goes to the Cloudflare user's website and clicks a link to your w…

Publisher's see AMP traffic since they are in control of ads and analytics used in amp page.

Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing

#156
post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the part that I don't understand. Why are publishers so eager to give away control of their meal-ticket?

They can always turn AMP off if Google does something evil.

And lose their ranking? It won't be as simple as "just turn it off"

Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing

#157
AMP is a terrible idea. HTML is already very fast, if it's just kept lean and clean.

Creating a new fork of HTML only means less resources for publishers to spend on their existing sites, creating an ever-increasing divergence in experience. Google already had a great way to enforce better performance by taking it into account for search rankings - which it already uses as we've seen just a few days ago to discourage popup modals.

Another issue is that Google's adtech software is the most popular across the web and one of the primary reasons ads are slow in the first place. They've made improvements to speed up ads but they again hold an incredible amount of leverage to force better practices like smaller assets, less JS, async loading, https, no flash, etc and yet still havent don't anything about it.

It seems like AMP was some small side project that's easy to praise and get attention without actually fixing any of the root causes for the web cruft issue, ultimately hurting everyone in the long run.

Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing

#158
post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't say they couldn't show ads, but basic ads aren't the only way that these places monetize. Trackers, 'you might also like' panels, etc all feed in to the overall monetization strategy. A couple of amp-approved ads on an amp-page don't necessarily make up for all that...

I'm pretty sure 'all that' is what users are trying to avoid with AMP.

I'm not trying to avoid anything. As a user I don't even get a choice for AMP or no AMP. In fact, I changed my search engine on my phone to DuckDuckGo specifically to get rid of AMP pages.

Re: Google AMP Is Not a Good Thing

#160
AMP is not good thing says the guy making money off ads on his personal website and wants the ability to track users.

What about the value of seconds amd bandwidth saved for millions of people who get pages a bit faster due to a project like AMP?

Post reply on HN