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

Google AMP Is a Threat to the Open Web

socpub.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 83 posts

Re: Google AMP Is a Threat to the Open Web

#21

Post by microtonal »

Agebor wrote: post #20
MaxBarraclough wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The tragedy of it is that web browsers have never been faster - it's just that websites insist on bloating, and bloating, and bloating. It's not unusual for modern websites to have literally megabytes of pointless JavaScript. (Reminder: Super Mario 64 weighs in at 8MB. The whole game.) AMP strikes me as a clever technical solution to a problem that doesn't need a technical solution. It just needs restraint and better…

> It just needs restraint and better web development with existing standard technologies, and ideally a strong taboo on bloated web-sites. Restraint can't appear out of nowhere, especially when bloating the website frequently works - more ad revenue, more information about existing visitors and potential new customers. These needs won't just disappear, so yes, the problem needs a technical solution.

Restraint can't appear out of nowhere, especially when bloating the website frequently works - more ad revenue, more information about existing visitors and potential new customers.

Rather than pushing for AMP, Google, Bing, etc. could just penalize websites (more heavily) for size in search rankings.

Re: Google AMP Is a Threat to the Open Web

#22

Post by mrtksn »

microtonal wrote: post #21
Agebor wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It just needs restraint and better web development with existing standard technologies, and ideally a strong taboo on bloated web-sites. Restraint can't appear out of nowhere, especially when bloating the website frequently works - more ad revenue, more information about existing visitors and potential new customers. These needs won't just disappear, so yes, the problem needs a technical solution.

Restraint can't appear out of nowhere, especially when bloating the website frequently works - more ad revenue, more information about existing visitors and potential new customers. Rather than pushing for AMP, Google, Bing, etc. could just penalize websites (more heavily) for size in search rankings.

How this solves anything for the user? The better way is to provide the tech(AMP) so that content that is good for the user can be delivered properly instead of not delivered due to performance.

Remember, it's about providing a good experience to the users, it's not about choosing the losers and winners in the industry.

The taxi companies are making the same mistake against Uber, they assume that the users are an exploitable resource and want a solution that distributes this resource more "fairly to the businesses". From Uber's perspective, the users are the clientele and the resources are the cars and the drivers.

The web tech community is acting like the taxi drivers, angry that their user resource is being taken away.

Re: Google AMP Is a Threat to the Open Web

#23

Post by underwater »

mrtksn wrote: post #5

I think it's very important to address the reason why AMP is possible in the first place: Websites are so extremely slow these days. From users perspective, when I see the lightning icon on my search results I feel happy because it means that the page will show me it's contents as soon as I click it. It means that the website is not going to show me white page for 15 seconds then start jumping around, changing shape…

I work for a publisher that zero ads. We have fast pages with minimal JS. We rolled out AMP purely for the SEO win and saw a huge uptick in traffic.

If Google really cared about performance they’d reward publishers doing the right thing on their regular pages (which would benefit the web as a whole), not just those using AMP.

Re: Google AMP Is a Threat to the Open Web

#24

Post by MaxBarraclough »

mrtksn wrote: post #22
microtonal wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Restraint can't appear out of nowhere, especially when bloating the website frequently works - more ad revenue, more information about existing visitors and potential new customers. Rather than pushing for AMP, Google, Bing, etc. could just penalize websites (more heavily) for size in search rankings.

How this solves anything for the user? The better way is to provide the tech(AMP) so that content that is good for the user can be delivered properly instead of not delivered due to performance. Remember, it's about providing a good experience to the users, it's not about choosing the losers and winners in the industry. The taxi companies are making the same mistake against Uber, they assume that the users are an exp…

> How this solves anything for the user?

Is it not obvious? It would motivate major websites to clean up their act and sort out the bloat problem, with no need for yet another web technology.

Re: Google AMP Is a Threat to the Open Web

#25

Post by tankenmate »

mrtksn wrote: post #19
MaxBarraclough wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The tragedy of it is that web browsers have never been faster - it's just that websites insist on bloating, and bloating, and bloating. It's not unusual for modern websites to have literally megabytes of pointless JavaScript. (Reminder: Super Mario 64 weighs in at 8MB. The whole game.) AMP strikes me as a clever technical solution to a problem that doesn't need a technical solution. It just needs restraint and better…

What people do when a website that goes popular on HN or Reddit is too slow or can't respond at all? Someone on the comments links to Google Cache and more often than not this js-less basic HTML snapshot is good enough. AMP is just a way to do this properly and automatically. The Webdev community chooses to ignore the speed of the content delivery and Google seized the opportunity. What can a modern webpage do for th…

"AMP is just a way to do this properly and automatically." I don't automatically dispute the second part of that statement, but the "properly" bit requires more than a handwave to prove its point.

Re: Google AMP Is a Threat to the Open Web

#26

Post by mrtksn »

MaxBarraclough wrote: post #24
mrtksn wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How this solves anything for the user? The better way is to provide the tech(AMP) so that content that is good for the user can be delivered properly instead of not delivered due to performance. Remember, it's about providing a good experience to the users, it's not about choosing the losers and winners in the industry. The taxi companies are making the same mistake against Uber, they assume that the users are an exp…

> How this solves anything for the user? Is it not obvious? It would motivate major websites to clean up their act and sort out the bloat problem, with no need for yet another web technology.

That's a hypothesis that assumes that the major websites will get motivated until the users get frustrated by the low quality of search results.

With AMP it's cheap and quick to implement, how long will it take for the websites to re-implement their codebase and all the tooling to match the performance criteria?

Anyway, you're missing the point that I'm trying to make here: It's about the user's experience, it's not about the user's distribution to businesses.

It's not your god given right to have users and make money.

Re: Google AMP Is a Threat to the Open Web

#27

Post by Kiro »

tyler_larson wrote: post #11
Kiro wrote: post #6

How can I see that someone visited my site if it's served by Google's cache?

There are multiple analytics options supported with amp. It's a well-addressed problem space. But honestly, if you're so far behind the curve that this is even a question, then amp is not for you. You've got a lot of bigger problems to solve first.

What do you mean by that? What bigger problems?

Re: Google AMP Is a Threat to the Open Web

#28

Post by MaxBarraclough »

mrtksn wrote: post #26
MaxBarraclough wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How this solves anything for the user? Is it not obvious? It would motivate major websites to clean up their act and sort out the bloat problem, with no need for yet another web technology.

That's a hypothesis that assumes that the major websites will get motivated until the users get frustrated by the low quality of search results. With AMP it's cheap and quick to implement, how long will it take for the websites to re-implement their codebase and all the tooling to match the performance criteria? Anyway, you're missing the point that I'm trying to make here: It's about the user's experience, it's not…

> assumes that the major websites will get motivated until the users get frustrated by the low quality of search results.

Fair point - changes to Google's rankings apply more pressure to small websites than to established ones.

> it's not about the user's distribution to businesses. It's not your god given right to have users and make money.

What?

Re: Google AMP Is a Threat to the Open Web

#29

Post by codedokode »

mrtksn wrote: post #5

I think it's very important to address the reason why AMP is possible in the first place: Websites are so extremely slow these days. From users perspective, when I see the lightning icon on my search results I feel happy because it means that the page will show me it's contents as soon as I click it. It means that the website is not going to show me white page for 15 seconds then start jumping around, changing shape…

I have JS disabled and websites are not that slow for me.

Re: Google AMP Is a Threat to the Open Web

#30

Post by whyagaindavid »

jorvi wrote: post #15
whyagaindavid wrote: post #8

Genuine question: Why do people view AMP as a threat, whereas many Apple's formats/compatibility are non-standard? Is it because many accept privacy over openness? Example: Apple news or iTunes or Messages

Google controls ~80% of online search and ads. Apple controls ~30% of the smartphone market and 10% of the laptop/PC market. Its the same reason why Apple never gets slapped with monopoly charges. You have the option of using Android for your phone (ignoring the fact that if you value your privacy you don’t) and Windows/Linux.

  You have the option of using Android for your phone
Does the user have the option of changing to DuckDuckGo? Yes. And moreover AMP can also be hosted totally by your own servers. See Guardian.com AMP servers
Post reply on HN