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

431–440 of 489 posts

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#431

Post by alanh »

dTal wrote: post #414
bambax wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At least it's honest about not having results whereas Google presents 5 billion, all of which are missing one of the three keywords (which it notes in a small, light grey text, which you only notice after the first three results were completely unrelated and you were wondering what went wrong). Yes, that's really bad; it's what killed Altavista and could really be Google's undoing. Still, Google is miles ahead of t…

>crazy religious fanatic site FYI, Landover Baptist Church (which that article is from) is a very old, very well known spoof site.

And a canonical example of Poe’s Law in action.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#432

Post by kaoD »

Sir_Cmpwn wrote: post #426
kaoD wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How else can they profile me in a brand new job, in a brand new Windows installation, in Firefox, if I'm not logged in? The organization I work for has a lot of different job types and we're all proxied through the same external IP so they couldn't even profile my job type. I got relevant results in my first day there. I didn't notice a drop in result quality. Google is just that good even if I hate to admit it.

There's still a limited number of job types at your workplace. If you search for "django" odds are none of your non-technical colleagues have been searching for anything other than the Python framework at work.

Fair enough.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#433

Post by alanh »

om2 wrote: post #392
askafriend wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that really Apple's stance? I find the scrolling to be the #1 reason why I bounce from AMP pages. I would hate for them to make this a system wide behavior.

In current iOS Safari, webpage scrolling is inconsistent from all other scrolling on the system. This was an intentional decision made long ago. In addition, overflow areas are consistent with the rest of the system, and thus inconsistent with top-level webpage scrolling. This is semi-accidental. In reviewing scroll rates, we concluded that the original reason was no longer a good tradeoff. Thus this change, which re…

Thank you for sharing this information!

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#434

Post by limeblack »

I'm not sure when there is going to end up but because google amp is hosted on google servers you can actually read such articles on GoGo plane flights with out paying for Internet. It was kinda nice although I'm not sure how long until this will be fixed.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#435

Post by ec109685 »

pmlnr wrote: post #367
archagon wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could be wrong, but from what I've seen, it's not possible to create a non-AMP page that loads faster than AMP, on account of Google's JS hot-loading and caching. AMP always loads faster for me.

Really? Push HTML without bload to a CDN or gihub pages.

Google can only pre-cach and pre-render content it hosts, so it has to go through their cdn servers.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#436

Post by mthoms »

adyavanapalli wrote: post #80
mthoms wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> more $ for publishers I'm curious... What are you basing this on? Is this proven? Besides, do you really think short term cash is the only thing that publishers should optimize for?

I think google, which you can google ;), published a study showing that users are more likely to stay on a webpage if it loads under some threshold time. And if this is the case, users are more likely read the content and see the ads on said webpage. Hence, more $$$ for publishers.

But AMP doesn't allow traditional ads right? Only Google-approved ones. So, how are you going to monetize?

Google ads of course.

Don't you think it's a funny coincidence that this project to "speed up the web" also results in giving more ad revenue to Google?

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#437

Post by qb45 »

Houshalter wrote: post #343
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.

There are extensions which add buttons to quickly enable/disable JS on per-site basis like NoScript for Firefox.

Also, Firefox reader view fixes many websites which otherwise render empty with JS disabled for reasons I didn't bother investigating.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#438

Post by grzm »

makecheck wrote: post #312
grzm wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe you mean "!g". DuckDuckGo "macros" start with bang. https://duckduckgo.com/bang

They both work.

Indeed they do! Thanks for the pointer. Looking a bit deeper, it looks like that's a special case for g! rather than something that works across all DuckDuckGo bangs.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#439

Post by pdimitar »

protomyth wrote: post #326
pdimitar wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am on your side -- just chiming in to share my observations. To 99% of the businesses I worked with, software development is a singular expense . It's treated like buying a tractor for the farm. Hell, even farming equipment is more generously funded by the buyers for possible future expenses (compared to most software development) -- maintenance, repairs, parts that periodically need replacement, fuel. For one reas…

A farmer understands a tractor, but most business people don't understand software development.

Very true. The farmer is also aware it's not a maintenance-free machine, unlike businessmen who think software never needs another penny of investment.

Re: Kill Google AMP before it kills the web

#440

Post by pdimitar »

manigandham wrote: post #307
pdimitar wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am on your side -- just chiming in to share my observations. To 99% of the businesses I worked with, software development is a singular expense . It's treated like buying a tractor for the farm. Hell, even farming equipment is more generously funded by the buyers for possible future expenses (compared to most software development) -- maintenance, repairs, parts that periodically need replacement, fuel. For one reas…

That only makes AMP worse. Many publishers are already squeezed with dev resources, the last thing they need is yet another standard to support instead of putting that time towards the original HTML that is universally available to all users and devices.

Absolutely. You know, in a perverse way of seeing at it, I kind of feel good that Google forces AMP; they are like "Hah, you all stupid motherduckers couldn't get your own crap together for 15 years, guess it's time for you to be ruled, if you can't make use of your freedom". If you look at it that way, it makes sense.

Still, maybe it's time the web development in general gets its crap together indeed. One can dream, right?

Post reply on HN