291–300 of 457 posts
I suggest stop using google search altogether. https://duckduckgo.com/ is an excellent search engine and its trivial to make a google search via `!g` prefix when you are not finding what you are looking for.
DDG is a wrapper on top of Bing. Maybe just skip the middleman and use Bing instead?
AMP has been created for product managers. Everybody in a project knows that slow and bloated pages hurt users, but business requirements are making it impossible to do otherwise. Google AMP solves this problem, in an authoritarian way (hence the outrage), by defining what's good and bad for the Internet. Marketing has taken the lead in corporate websites projects to the detriment of the end-users, AMP puts the user…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I mean, it's a closed source algorithm. Google provides guidance directly and indirectly but no one knows how the rank weights work outside of Google. Amp obviously ranks higher it is the top hit in search for me. Results appear under it...
Google said that they prioritise fast pages, not AMP pages. You can use some other way to make your pages load fast, and it won't make a difference. Unless you have solid evidence to the contrary, I see no reason to believe you over believing Google.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get the feeling it's aimed mainly at all the crappy bottom-of-the-barrel Android devices out there. As an iPhone user, why the hell would I care if a page is bit larger, I pull down over 500Mbit/s on wifi and over 100Mbit/s on LTE. The CPU in iPhone is so fast it's almost ridiculous. There is little difference in how fast AMP pages load compared to real web pages. Basically, Google re-invented WAP for exactly the s…
iPhone is no better...when I was developing a web site, I bought an iPhone 4 as a testing device, and it was quite painful to use compared to my Samsung S7 Edge (and quite slow). I bought it because it was still used heavily in the user base.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thus far it is purportedly not a ranking factor. https://moz.com/blog/google-amp-search-results https://searchenginewatch.com/2016/07/06/is-google-amp-a-ran... [just to be clear, just because you read it in some HN thread doesn't make it true. Let's see a single citation that it actually influences ranking]
I'm yet to see a single page in the carousel at the top of a search page not be an AMP page.
https://webmasters.googleblog.com/2010/04/using-site-speed-i...
There was a vicious spiral at work related to advertisers not caring enough about page load, and adding that signal was not enough. AMP shifted the game by placing the burden on Google of specifying a way to hit advertisers' goals while offering a faster experience.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If Google blacklisted non-AMP content, sure there's an argument, but as of yet this notion that it's some content theft is quite strange. Doesn't Google already admit to prioritising AMP pages in search results?
They do. They seem to be a little quiet about the idea that a right/left swipe on your content switches to a competitors page though.
What did happen though, is that i found google results a lot worse on mobile, and ended up not searching for stuff on my mobile. Google results really look like a mess on mobile now...
They really went from minimalist zen to baroque indian arabesque over the year...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>This is certainly not true. Oh but it's entirely true. If you buy the conspiracies and allusions of the anti-AMP crowd, there should be some sort of citation you can leverage. As is, the primary real concern among those who denounce AMP is that users will prefer it. Which is a pretty bizarre thing to fight against.
Agreed, I like AMP for many of the same reasons I liked Google Reader and RSS feeds: I'd rather consume my content in a form that's optimized for reading.
I'd have a lot less problems with it if it didn't break my zoom functionality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your hypothetical there assumes that AMP actually works well. My experience is it's got painful usability issues at least on android chrome. The worst one I see all the time is scrolling down to actually read the AMP page frequently results in the page closing, returning you to results. Fast is good, but at least it ought to be a good user experience. I used to use google news a lot, but i totally abandoned it after…
[I work for Google, opinions my own] If you have specific issues you can spell out, consider filing a bug on it[0]? The AMP team is tracking most of their work via Github as far as I'm aware. As an iOS user, one bug that bothered me for a long time with AMP was scroll inertia, which seems to be an issue with Webkit rather than AMP[1]. If you poke around the tracker, you can see the team does what it can to fix issues…
What are the chances that Google would listen to big reports, supposing that anybody could find those links? Google is notorious for being inaccessible unless you happen to know an employee personally or have enough juice on twitter. They do not have a reputation as an open or accessible company.
google amp pages
google amp annoying
google amp sucks
google amp conference
test
cache
disable
maps
This simple test is therefore inconclusive, but my hypothesis is that his search autocomplete hints are, ironically, colored by his search history. The only negative word I got (disabled) is much more neutral.
Now that I think about it, duckduckgo's "no tracking" isn't just valuable for privacy. It's also valuable for consistent search results across computers without yielding even more information (logging in etc). A few times I made a query and found something useful and surprising, and then I wasn't able to replicate the query on another computer to show someone else. In any case I'd hate to miss a rare interesting page because Google thought that extra 10 pages about Linux might interest me more.