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

Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

theregister.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 489 posts

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#51

Post by ams6110 »

jwilcoxson wrote: post #37
rubyn00bie wrote: post #27

Ive forced myself to use Bing since google introduced AMP. Do I like it better than Google? No, I don't. But! I like not having google become my single source of content more than I dislike the slight drop in quality as a result of using Bing. I like the sites I go to, to have control over their content and being able to easily link to them. I think it's reprehensible for google to push this so relentlessly and beyon…

Checkout Duck Duck Go, still not Google-level results, but it's still pretty good, and not Bing.

It really is as good as google for most things, in my experience. I use it by default and when it can't find what I'm looking for, Google usually doesn't do much better.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#52

Post by tyingq »

SanPilot wrote: post #32

I do not understand the dislike this community harbors for AMP. I personally really enjoy the system; whenever I'm searching for any type of article on my phone (Android), I prefer AMP pages, because they load faster and are far more responsive than some of their more bloated counterparts.

Google did offer a carrot to go with the stick, yes. Those eating the carrots don't yet see the stick.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#53

Post by DamonHD »

skybrian wrote: post #47
DamonHD wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, yes, it's called WebpageTest + HTML5. I care about page weight and have mine render quickly without AMP and without being in Google's clutches. In particular I try to have the page sensibly renderable with the first 10kB or so of content down the wire. And I try not to have anything critical depend on JavaScript.

But without branding, it's not the same thing. To compete, someone would need to make an icon and popularize it to compete with the "AMP" icon.

I vote for a 1-pixel black-cat GIF logo. Well, any colour and format you like so long as it's black...

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#54

Post by MBCook »

izacus wrote: post #39
MBCook wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AMP does NOT outperform HTML5 unless the HTML5 page is horribly designed and ridiculously bloated. But that can be fixed without Google's help. I'm not sure why your dismissive of the scrolling thing. Having something breaks the feel of the web browser is a really bad idea. Additionally he's completely right that it breaks other platform conventions that users expect to use. You can't use the share button, you can't…

> AMP does NOT outperform HTML5 unless the HTML5 page is horribly designed and ridiculously bloated. But that can be fixed without Google's help. And yet, noone cared enough to fix it until now. It's really really hard to sympathize with publishers when they brought this upon themselves by turning their pages into giant autoplaying video infested places.

If that's all Google truly cared about they could've simply put a heavy penalty on Pages that rendered slow or presented garbage.

Instead they invented their own thing which caused you to stay on Google sites using Google services to read other peoples content… and said they did it to speed things up.

It feels like that was either justification after the fact or that was with the original engineer had in mind but was not the point of the project once it got approved.

All those horrible infested pages? That's why I run an ad blockers, use RSS, and stopped reading a lot of sites. As every publisher got more and more aggressive other people were going to start doing it too. Eventually, I think it would've had an effect.

This feels a lot more like when Birders (or was it B&N?) outsourced their web sales to Amazon. Remember how well that went? Outsourcing a key part of your experience to another company it's a bad idea, especially if they like being in control of everything.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#55

Post by dwighttk »

notgood wrote: post #7

"publication independence"? Really? The man who is famous among other things for supporting the most closed ecosystem there is around: iOS, where a single company decides what apps are worth publishing and wish ones doesn't. Or does newspaper publication independence is really that more important than software publication independence. The irony is so clear that it's weird that he didn't even mention it. That genie i…

Dismiss someone's position on one terrible thing because they hold a position you disagree about on a different topic.

Seems legit.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#56

Post by MBCook »

tambourine_man wrote: post #31
notgood wrote: post #7

"publication independence"? Really? The man who is famous among other things for supporting the most closed ecosystem there is around: iOS, where a single company decides what apps are worth publishing and wish ones doesn't. Or does newspaper publication independence is really that more important than software publication independence. The irony is so clear that it's weird that he didn't even mention it. That genie i…

I wish there was a big red “I know what I'm doing” button on iOS that allowed the user to download and install a binary from a simple web page. But technically, you can download the source and/or write your own code, compile and install on your iOS device without jailbreaking or going through the AppStore. It's a hassle, sure, but doable.

I understand the impulse, but so many security issues happen to people because they're tricked into running things… I can't help but think that this would cause a dramatic rise in the number of security issues on iOS.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#57

Post by eps »

jwilcoxson wrote: post #37
rubyn00bie wrote: post #27

Ive forced myself to use Bing since google introduced AMP. Do I like it better than Google? No, I don't. But! I like not having google become my single source of content more than I dislike the slight drop in quality as a result of using Bing. I like the sites I go to, to have control over their content and being able to easily link to them. I think it's reprehensible for google to push this so relentlessly and beyon…

Checkout Duck Duck Go, still not Google-level results, but it's still pretty good, and not Bing.

It is actually Bing, which DDG uses for the bulk of its results.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#58

Post by technimad »

tambourine_man wrote: post #40
teddyh wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I understand it, you can only do that by registering yourself to Apple, and paying them $100 for the privilege.

Nope, pretty sure you can do it with a free account

Correct, but your self compiled app will only work for 7 days on your own device. And than you have to recompile and reinstall. Unless you pay the $100

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#59

Post by hannob »

Here's your one step recipe to kill AMP:

* Build fast webpages.

The linked article says: "Yes, AMP pages load fast, but you don’t need AMP for fast-loading web pages." Well yes, but people don't build fast webpages without AMP. They could've done all the time, yet webpages got more sluggish over the years.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#60

Post by dwighttk »

ams6110 wrote: post #51
jwilcoxson wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Checkout Duck Duck Go, still not Google-level results, but it's still pretty good, and not Bing.

It really is as good as google for most things, in my experience. I use it by default and when it can't find what I'm looking for, Google usually doesn't do much better.

one of the last areas I've found myself going back to google is when I'm searching for a gif... Duck Duck Go will return them, but it is usually a very small subset of the available gifs out there.
Post reply on HN