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

AMP for email is a terrible idea

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 483 posts

Re: AMP for email is a terrible idea

#161

Post by LoSboccacc »

jjeaff wrote: post #137
y03a wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't that kill the possibility that a visitor will already have common content cached when visiting your site for the first time? I know that's not the only reason to use a CDN, but it's a pretty big one.

IF you have some stuff you think some visitors will have cached, well then you can use the standard google or jquery CDN or whatever (they're free anyway). For everything else you would run from your own CDN url.

I thought that too but even for the most common stuff like font awesome cdn cannot be trusted - just too many silent outages that were only discovered from user complaining because they impacted different geographical areas differently..

Re: AMP for email is a terrible idea

#162

Post by lern_too_spel »

falcolas wrote: post #60
mikeytown2 wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm waiting for AMP chat; I hear it's fast. /s

And you can run it on any platform, so long as it's Google's. The best user choice since the color of your Model T.

AMP runs in any web browser. Bing serves AMP search results to Firefox.

Re: AMP for email is a terrible idea

#163

Post by wowamit »

mikeytown2 wrote: post #47
makecheck wrote: post #31

Nothing says “we’re listening to your concerns about AMP” like rolling it out further to interfere with a function that is even less suited for AMP. Also, technology companies have a real problem assigning appropriate value to maintenance tasks that just keep things stable and usable. I’ve had infrastructure responsibilities over the years and the hardest thing about it was that nobody really knows or cares how much…

I'm waiting for AMP chat; I hear it's fast. /s

And the offers the assistant delivers as ads will be extremely light-weight, signed off by Google-headed committee.

Re: AMP for email is a terrible idea

#164

Post by lern_too_spel »

bdhess wrote: post #133
kyrra wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know the scrolling issues we're bugs in webkit. Google (I believe) started to employ a webkit dev to fix the problems.

I’ve heard that before. It’s still fair to blame Google for the whole fiasco. Especially since the non-AMP versions had always worked fine.

Why not blame Apple for building a buggy browser that you have no choice but to use? Stop buying buggy user-hostile phones. AMP pages work perfectly fine in Firefox for Android.

Re: AMP for email is a terrible idea

#165

Post by kuschku »

xivzgrev wrote: post #76

I, for one, welcome our new AMP overlords. As a marketer emails are really limited. This opens up possibility of higher engagement and less friction for what you want Gmail customers to do. I work for a loan company - get a rate quote IN YOUR EMAIL! Customer saves time and I just cut 2 steps out of our funnel. The required coding and browser compatibility scare me a bit though. Nothing to piss off consumers than an e…

Cool, and as a user, I want every marketeer to be hanged and quartered But really, marketing as a whole is broken.

Do you actually like watching advertising, and getting hundreds of spam and impossible-to-unsubscribe marketing emails every day?

If not, why do you think your users will?

There's nothing good in marketing. It doesn't help the ability of users to buy products (if the goal is that the user buys the best product for the lowest price, the best tool for that would be providing more independent comparable reviews, and better price comparison search), and it certainly doesn't help the user get to the content they want (which is not the ad).

The only reason users ever subscribe to marketing content are (a) to figure out when sales are, snd (b) coupons. Actually sell everything at a better price all year round, improve price comparison engines, and you won't need any of that anymore. The net benefit for society is negative.

Re: AMP for email is a terrible idea

#167

Post by rsync »

david-cako wrote: post #119
gerdesj wrote: post #29

Thank goodness that a bunch of clever kids are going to replace boring old SMTP n MTAs n MUAs and stuff with this bollocks: https://www.ampproject.org/ 8) email works and doesn't need fixing. It (nearly) transports more messages every day than is countable and just works. SNR - now that needs fixing and a good start would be enforcing plain text.

Email “works” but it’s ass for consistently displaying anything more than text. Marketers want to make money, and right now stuffing emails with images in favor of proper layout is the only easy way to do it. Of course google also wants all of your email googling its way through their servers.

"Email “works” but it’s ass for consistently displaying anything more than text."

That is by design. Email is not an image viewer nor is it an HTML browser. It is a plain text medium.

Re: AMP for email is a terrible idea

#168

Post by davepeck »

lern_too_spel wrote: post #164
bdhess wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ve heard that before. It’s still fair to blame Google for the whole fiasco. Especially since the non-AMP versions had always worked fine.

Why not blame Apple for building a buggy browser that you have no choice but to use? Stop buying buggy user-hostile phones. AMP pages work perfectly fine in Firefox for Android.

Let’s say you’re an engineer about to roll out a feature to (literally) a billion users. Through testing, you know your feature is busted for the ~14.5% of your users who use Safari. But it’s not your fault! Apple should fix it.

Quick quiz: do you release a feature that is broken for 145M users, which brokenness they might plausibly encounter multiple times a day?

In a typical organization, the answer would probably be an unambiguous “no”.

Without passing judgment, I find the fact that Google decided to ship anyway to be a useful indicator of their beliefs, culture, and priorities.

Re: AMP for email is a terrible idea

#170

Post by lern_too_spel »

shostack wrote: post #149
xivzgrev wrote: post #76

I, for one, welcome our new AMP overlords. As a marketer emails are really limited. This opens up possibility of higher engagement and less friction for what you want Gmail customers to do. I work for a loan company - get a rate quote IN YOUR EMAIL! Customer saves time and I just cut 2 steps out of our funnel. The required coding and browser compatibility scare me a bit though. Nothing to piss off consumers than an e…

As a fellow marketer, how will you feel if email, an incredibly high performing and cost effective (essentially free) channel, turns into a auction where you have to pay a dynamic price to get any reach similar to FB? My fear is this is where this is heading.

What does AMP have to do with your fear?
Post reply on HN