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

341–350 of 489 posts

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#341

Post by ihsw2 »

ninkendo wrote: post #330
ihsw2 wrote: post #299

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's entirely opt-in -- how is this controversial?

Because users seeing AMP links as faster will pressure more sites to do it. Keep in mind, AMP pages on google aren't just fast because you're not using bloated javascript, they're fast because: - The JS that is used is CDN cached and shared with all other AMP sites - You're loading the content from the same origin (google.com) so no need to establish a new TLS connection, or look up DNS, etc - Google's servers/networ…

> What choice do sites have?

Offer better experiences on their websites and apps, the technology is available but publishers choose to shovel crap in with food and call it beef tenderloin. Now Google is offering something better.

What did you expect Google to do when Apple News Format and Facebook Instant Articles are creeping up? Both offer impressive experiences and this isn't even nearly as impossibly mind-boggling.

AMP is an open standard that any publisher and any search engine can implement and if all search engines get on board then users win so much -- pages load faster, they require much less network bandwidth, they're easier to read. Nobody, absolutely nobody, will have sympathy for publishers after all the bullshit we're being forced to experience both now and historically.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#342

Post by whyagaindavid »

MBCook wrote: post #63
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…

Why do you expect Google provide a good experience in iOS? Heck I can't even connect to my Apple calendar in Android. Does Apple care? Is there a apple mail app for Android? AMP is fine in all browsers except Safari. AMP is great for browsing with 100£ cheap phone when I was in Thailand.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#343

Post by Houshalter »

Pxtl wrote: post #273

Honestly? I've come to loathe the abysmal performance of the modern web so much that I'm ready to accept AMP. Half the reason I come to hacker News is that the site runs fast. And half the reason I comment before reading the article is because it doesn't.

I often comment without reading the articles because on an older device it's impossible. 90% of links will just crash the browser in 10 seconds. I can watch an hour long youtube video just fine, but trying to load a newspaper article will make it keel over and die.

Disabling javascript does fix a lot of it, but then I can't vote on HN, and I like doing that.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#344

Post by shados »

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…

The internet is going to be all AMP and PWA soon, so everything is served from google or on the app store. Enjoy! /barf.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#345

Post by emmelaich »

kazinator wrote: post #242

Are they serious with the following? AMP HTML uses some stupid Unicode emoji character: ^ HN filtered out the voltage symbol, bravo. Just, no, Google. You're not Ken fucking Iverson, and this is not APL. Just supporting one way of doing it, , is perfectly fine.

I suppose they do this because some html processors do stupid things with `amp` - because it might be part of the ampersand html entity.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#346

Post by raldi »

madeofpalk wrote: post #334
raldi wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't "fix" the "bug" that disables the "scroll to the top of the page when the user accidentally taps the top of the screen" behavior. I loathe this behavior, have never summoned it intentionally, and can't imagine why anyone would ever want it.

Really? I use that all the time. How else do you get back up to the top of a long list?

I'm not sure I've ever needed to do that in all my life. But about three times a day I accidentally lose my place on a long webpage and there's no Undo.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#347

Post by bikamonki »

AMP was born dead no need to kill it. As the webmaster of many websites, the last time I heard customers complain about rankings in SRPs was ten years ago. Their main concern nowadays is likes, follows and shares. I keep telling them: put some effort on your website, own your audience, you do not own your FB page much less the fans and likes there. They don't listen. Trapped in the hype.

In this light, how do I sell to them the idea that investing in AMP content (same trap different server) will help with rankings/performance where they do not care?

Sadly enough, the Internet is happening inside social networks, Amazon and mobile apps. AMP is late to the party, no?

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#348

Post by kuschku »

dragonwriter wrote: post #75
richdougherty wrote: post #3

In theory* I don't mind the idea of having a more standardised subset web page that has a consistent internal structure and that renders quickly. However, having Google load this structured content and host it on its own platform is a terrible idea. Content should remain on the publisher's site. Putting too much content in one place is dangerous for competition. * In practice there are implementation problems too, e.…

>However, having Google load this structured content and host it on its own platform is a terrible idea. Google isn't the only party running an AMP cache. > Content should remain on the publisher's site. It does. Its also cached by aggregators, and AMP is designed to take advantage of being accessed from a shared cache. >

That exact caching has to end.

They can offer to do a CDN like CloudFlare, but make it optional.

I want to ensure that not a single bit of my data ever runs through Google's infrastructure, while still getting all the same benefits as if it did.

If Google treats sites different just for using an AMP Cache, then I'll have to send another complaint to the EU Antitrust committee.

My pages actually increased their loadtime tenfold when I tried them with AMP — they're tested on a HUAWEI IDEOS X3 on 64kbps GPRS. AMP increases load time to over a minute. (On a modern phone, with a modern connection, my pages are obviously also faster — I'm also testing with a Nexus 5X on 100Mbps 4G)

I can't just massively increase load time for pages just for a better ranking in search results, this shouldn't even be a choice.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#349

Post by mabcat »

MBCook wrote: post #124
dyarosla wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to admit, I've been on iOS for years and only ever use Safari for browsing, and NEVER had I heard about this tap the top bar to scroll to the top behavior.

It's one of the standard iOS gestures and works nearly everywhere. iOS is FULL of handy little things like that, but I'm not sure many of them are ever explained . You just have to stumble across it or read about it somewhere like reviews of the new versions of iOS. Did you know in mail (and many other places) you can swipe table rows left or right for quick actions? Marco Arment recently changed Overcast to make fea…

> Marco Arment recently changed Overcast to make features more visible because it seems many people, including power users, weren't even aware that gesture existed.

So that's what that was all about. I noticed the changes because for me they reduced the usability of Overcast massively. The features I used the most were resuming the current podcast, playing a different podcast, and setting a sleep timer. All of these things now take double the taps they did before, with much smaller controls that are hard to hit in the car. You tap a podcast and some miscellaneous options jump out. Ugh, when I tap a podcast I want it to open and start playing! The sleep timer durations move around, so it takes 7 presses and some squinting to set a 25-minute timer. By this time my retinas are seared because the UI for that is white even in night mode.

I know full well about swiping in tables and I'd love the old behaviour to be an option. The author could probably make some good coin by making it available as an IAP.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#350

Post by snakeanus »

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…

Why not DDG? I switched to it recently and I am enjoying the !bang searches.
Post reply on HN