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

I decided to disable AMP on my site

alexkras.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 360 posts

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#211

Post by IshKebab »

dayjah wrote: post #72

There's a deep irony in AMP also, purely anecdotally it doesn't seem to help with slow connections. I'm traveling and as such my US carrier restricts me to 2G speeds while roaming somehow, which is resulting in me seeing a lot of butchered pages. As the author mentions: > AMP tries to load an image only when it becomes visible to the user, rendering a white square instead of the image. In my experience I’ve seen it f…

Purely anecdotally it works about 20-30 times better for me. Non-anecdotally there are plenty of large scale results showing it is much faster. If you find it equal or slower you are probably an extreme exception.

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#212

Post by acdha »

vorpalhex wrote: post #172
acdha wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an over-simplification: 1. Users have no control: if you want real URLs or the full experience, you have to work around AMP or stop using Google. 2. It's technically true that publishers can choose whether to use AMP but Google rank is a make-or-break issue for many publishers and that means the decisions is made under the threat of losing out to competitors who use AMP even if your site is already just as fas…

1. Correct, I mean opt-in from the publishers, who seem to be the exclusive people complaining 2. Yes. As a user who really enjoys amp and really hates that every single text-based news source takes over a minute to load on a 100Mb/s+ connection, I feel not bad at all. Not even the tiniest bit. Publishers entirely brought this upon themselves. Internet speeds are faster than they've ever been, and websites are the sl…

I find AMP only a marginal improvement over using an ad blocker. I see a far more noticeable speed boost leaving JavaScript disabled by default — that quick per-domain toggle is 80% of why I use Brave on iOS.

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#213

Post by myth_buster »

sturmen wrote: post #201

There's a lot of backlash against AMP on principle, which I agree with and support. However, as a non-principled web consumer, I think AMP pages are 10x better than the ad-filled, slow as molasses, jump-around-as-JavaSript-loads, video autoplaying, 'stories you might like' suggested bullshit, auto-loading 20MB heaps of steaming garbage that current news sites are. I think that AMP is a stepping stone that shows the u…

> 10x better than the ad-filled, [...] 'stories you might like' suggested bullshit

Actually I see these on an AMP page too.

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#214

Post by kavok »

sturmen wrote: post #201

There's a lot of backlash against AMP on principle, which I agree with and support. However, as a non-principled web consumer, I think AMP pages are 10x better than the ad-filled, slow as molasses, jump-around-as-JavaSript-loads, video autoplaying, 'stories you might like' suggested bullshit, auto-loading 20MB heaps of steaming garbage that current news sites are. I think that AMP is a stepping stone that shows the u…

On iOS I usually find AMP pages to be less usable. It forces a bar at the top and I can't easily share the link. Sometimes sites don't seem to work at all. For a long time any Reddit link on the Google Search results just didn't load on iOS for me.

I run an adblocker and use reading mode frequently. I do not usually suffer any issues with ads even without AMP. It is solving a problem I do not have and creating more problems in the process.

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#215

Post by niutech »

edent wrote: post #126

> Do you own a WordPress site? Turn AMP off or don’t enable it in the first place. A warning - I turned off the AMP plug in and it effectively removed my site from Google for a week or so. https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2016/11/removing-your-site-from-amp... The Google cache takes ages to clear away all the now-dead links and will serve 404s to your users. A nice incentive to stay trapped in their monoculture.

You can redirect users to the full-blown pages, using e.g. mod_rewrite.

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#216

Post by dragonwriter »

michaelt wrote: post #41
AznHisoka wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AMP does not seem like a walled garden tech. any crawler can find and use the AMP version of a page through this tag: " rel="nofollow">https://www.example.com/url/to/amp/document.html"> Thus all google is doing is rewarding sites that have implemented this and as a result load fast, no? imo, its drastically different to Instant Articles because you can never ever find the Instant Articles version of a web page. its p…

Sites that are traditionally called walled gardens (facebook, AOL, compuserve...) often combine four features; (a) all the content is hosted under the walled garden's domain; (b) the walled garden designs key parts of the navigation and layout, understandably acting in their own interests; (c) the walled garden has content policies and declines to host certain content; and (d) users must have accounts and be logged i…

But it doesn't do (a), either. Google hosts a cache of the content, but the original is hosted by the publisher, and Google's cache isn't exclusive. Microsoft, Facebook, and Twitter, IIRC, operate their own caches, and so can anyone else who wants to (and there's a fairly strong incentive too if you host something that functions as a high-volume portal.)

AMP makes it harder for real walled gardens to provide an attractive performance advantage to end-users, making it not only not a walled garden, but also a potent weapons against walled gardens.

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#217

Post by xiaoma »

comex wrote: post #204
xiaoma wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's the wall: could any competitor to Google itself ever be on AMP? (E.g., a competitor to search, Gmail, YouTube, or adsense/adwords.) Or would it have to be something on the open web? And if only AMP pages get ranked well on Google in the future, how much harder would it be for such competitors to ever get noticed in the first place?

> And if only AMP pages get ranked well on Google in the future Currently, the only thing on Google results explicitly limited to AMP is the mobile news carousel. Presumably AMP pages also do well on the "loads fast" evaluation that affects normal rankings, but in theory it should be possible to do equally well without AMP. If this is changed, or turns out to not hold up in practice, then there is cause for concern,…

Unless I'm mistaken, they did experiment with various attempts to highlight their own video offerings beyond what popularity dictated before finally giving in and buying YouTube.

And we all remember the kinds of crap Google did to try to foist Plus on users who had no interest in it. At one point 1/4 of the annual bonus of everyone at the company was tied to it.

http://www.businessinsider.com/larry-page-just-tied-employee...

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#218

Post by niutech »

Chris2048 wrote: post #107

AMP news articles lack comments. This is often were most of my interest lies. I want to see if anything in the article is called out in the comments.

It's up to publishers, but Disqus works fine in AMP pages: https://github.com/disqus/disqus-install-examples/tree/maste...

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#219

Post by niutech »

landave wrote: post #140

I've read quite a lot about AMP, but I still don't really understand for what technical reason a new markup language (AMP HTML) and an additional javascript library is required to achieve the (claimed) effect. More specifically: Is there any evidence that AMP is able to provide a better result (at least in terms of performance) than just using a small subset of standard HTML, a little bit of CSS, getting rid of any j…

AMP JS library enables lazy loading of images/videos, so if you have a page with tens of them, you will notice the difference.

> getting rid of any javascript

Try to find a popular website without JS. Even HN uses it, so this is a moot point.

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#220

Post by zero_shift »

omnifischer wrote: post #185
zero_shift wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Low-power phones in developing nations were exactly the platform we targeted when implementing _The Guardian_, and I would advise every seriously global publisher to do the same.

even amp.guardian page has 33 requests (677kB) whereas cdn.ampproject.org has 4 requests (124kB). Try this: https://amp-theguardian-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/amp.thegu... or https://amp.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/jun/22/brexit-... Are you from Guardian?

I was. It's been a few years since, though, and I've never seen their AMP page implementation. They are quite strict about never blocking the render, though. Most of the requests you'll see are adverts.
Post reply on HN