Kill Google AMP before it kills the web • Hacker News Board

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#61

Post by Deimorz » Sat, May 20, 2017, 9:42 PM UTC

MBCook wrote: post #28

blinkingled wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, it is Gruber we are talking about. He believes in openness when it suits Apple - AMP outputs standard HTML5 which Safari renders - it does its own scrolling but he doesn't quite like it. Google doesn't 'respect' that closed platform. On that 'crime' Gruber has this to say - "If I had my way, Mobile Safari would refuse to render AMP pages." You might have valid reasons not to use AMP but Gruber's are merely that…

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…

They said AMP outputs HTML5, not outperforms it.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#62

Post by hellcow » Sat, May 20, 2017, 9:42 PM UTC

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…

I've become a pretty big fan of StartPage. Same Google search but without all the tracking.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#63

Post by MBCook » Sat, May 20, 2017, 9:43 PM UTC

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.

The fact that you say android explains everything to me. I'm sure Google made sure it was a decent experience on their operating system. But it's clear they didn't give two seconds thought to iOS, and haven't bothered to improve it since it was released.

It really does make google search feel broken. Many of the top results no longer "work right".

Ignoring all the other issues of who is in control and whether it's a walled garden and all that other stuff… On iOS it's a terrible user experience. That ALONE would make me hate it.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#64

Post by MBCook » Sat, May 20, 2017, 9:43 PM UTC

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.

The fact that you say android explains everything to me. I'm sure Google made sure it was a decent experience on their operating system. But it's clear they didn't give two seconds thought to iOS, and haven't bothered to improve it since it was released.

It really does make google search feel broken. Many of the top results no longer "work right".

Ignoring all the other issues of who is in control and whether it's a walled garden and all that other stuff… On iOS it's a terrible user experience. That ALONE would make me hate it.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#65

Post by tambourine_man » Sat, May 20, 2017, 9:44 PM UTC

technimad wrote: post #58

tambourine_man wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Didn't know the 7 days thing, thanks. Even more of a hassle then.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#66

Post by Semaphor » Sat, May 20, 2017, 9:44 PM UTC

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.

Can only second ddg. It's not perfect but I usually only have to use "!g" (ddg syntax for search on Google) every two days.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#67

Post by ehsankia » Sat, May 20, 2017, 9:44 PM UTC

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.

Exactly... Saying that it's "technically possible to fix all performance issues" is like saying that it's "technically possible to write your script in C instead of Python".

Sure it is, but no one has been doing it and if it wasn't for AMP, it would've stayed a slow hell for users, if not getting even worse. If you've got a better suggestion to motivate all these news sites to spend thousands rewriting their website from scratch and optimizing it, go for it. But right now, this is the best we've got.

It's not perfect, but it has actually been making huge strides in solving common issues over the past year.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#68

Post by polishTar » Sat, May 20, 2017, 9:45 PM UTC

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…

Just as a FYI, Bing is a really large supporter of the AMP project.

“We started experimenting with AMP in our Bing App last May and have noticed that AMP pages load, on average, approximately 80% faster than non-AMP pages” says Marcelo De Barros, Group Engineering Manager in charge of the AMP integration at Bing.

https://blogs.bing.com/search/September-2016/bing-app-joins-...

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#69

Post by MBCook » Sat, May 20, 2017, 9:46 PM UTC

0003 wrote: post #34

So AMP benefits google because faster page loads = more DFP views (and also more $ for publishers); AMP benefits consumers because JS is not murdering their memory and dataplans. It seems like web developers are the ones that hate it.

Have you been to Daring Fireball? It's one of the fastest loading pages on the whole Internet because it's not crapped up with lots of stuff. Gruber's site is proof you don't need AMP to have fast loads.

I honestly don't know this: how exactly are AMP pages monetized? Weren't there articles recently that publishers who went with AMP or Facebook's version saw steep declines in revenue?

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#70

Post by exergy » Sat, May 20, 2017, 9:46 PM UTC

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.

Duckduckgo is a lovely idea with abhorrent search results. Like, unusably bad results, at least to the extent that I'm a reasonably tech savvy user. I'm often searching for papers as a grad student, or typing things "close enough" and hoping Google figures it out for me etc. Duckduckgo cannot keep up. I love Bangs, I love the idea, but the search is nigh-useless.

That said, I use StartPage, who have a contract I believe with Google. It's Google's search results, minus the tracking. It's as much as I am willing to compromise on something as fundamental as search.