I don't understand why AMP needs all the extra shenanigans. Why can't it just be an optional CDN by Google, transparent to the users?
The Problem with AMP
161–170 of 353 posts
Re: The Problem with AMP
#162Google is abusing its powers. The search rank is our currency and Google has pushed AMP sites to the top for some while. So, everybody is now building weird AMP layers for their sites. We went from a free to a proprietary mobile web in just a few weeks. And we can't do anything. It feels like the times when the Internet Explorer tried to rule except that more people were complaining.
The open solution to a faster mobile web would have been so easy: Just penalize large and slow web pages without defining a dedicated mobile specification. That's it. This wasn't done in the past, slow pages outperformed fast ones on the SERPs because of some weird Google voodoo ranking, heck sometimes even desktop sites outperformed responsive ones on smartphones. If they had just tweaked these odd ranking rules in way that speed and size got more impact on the overall ranking there wouldn't have been any reason for AMP—the market would have regulated itself.
I'm wondering who at Google is responsible for AMP. Who created AMP's random specs (no external CSS but external fonts files, preference for four selected font providers, no JS but their JS, probable ranking preference of Google cached AMP sites, etc.). Why did they decide on the spec themselves and not as a part of an industry group? Again why didn't they just tweaked their ranking algorithm and btw, they could have also made Android's Chrome faster, it's still significantly slower than iOS' Safari. I'd be happy if this person could comment on the abuse of power (Sundar Pichai?).
Re: The Problem with AMP
#163I don't like AMP, and I very glad there is now some push back against Google's implementation of it. Fast pages are great, but I suppose I'm missing the background on why it was necessary to do this, when anybody who can implement AMP could presumably have implemented "lightweight non bloated pages" without using it. It's bad enough that I've had to switch to using Bing on mobile, despite the worse results, and I'm a…
Yeah, I'm tired of not being able to load Reddit from Google SERPs on my phone. Really tired of it. Time to give DuckDuckGo another try I guess...
Have you checked your content blockers?
Re: The Problem with AMP
#164[deleted]
Re: The Problem with AMP
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting info, but whether or not it's true, it certainly benefits their strategy. I have no doubt that they want to push the narrative that Google (Search) is the 'platform' and the news from publishers they wrap is a tab or viewport that you can [x] (exit) out of, returning to the default 'blank' Google page. The problem with that is that the UX is inconsistent between AMP results and web results. AMP results pr…
Wow: that screenshot makes so much more sense; I wonder why they dropped it... maybe because "back" was confusing with their "swipe left/right to get other articles" hijack?
Ah, good point.
Re: The Problem with AMP
#166Possibly off-topic, but the article isn't displaying[0] for me on Chromium 55.0.2883.87 (64-bit), running on Arch Linux, unless I go in the dev tools and manually remove "Fira Sans" from the font-family list in .container[1]. Not sure whether the problem is with me or the site, I'm surprised it doesn't fall-back to sans-serif before I override manually. [0] http://i.imgur.com/qJKSvMC.png [1] http://i.imgur.com/zYDZrt…
That's weird. I'll look into a fix. Edit: I couldn't reproduce this with Chromium on Ubuntu 16.10. I might set up an Arch Linux box to see if that makes a difference.
It happens on my Firefox 52 on Debian. I also have ublock origin installed.
Maybe you use some strange fonts?
Re: The Problem with AMP
#167Earlier quoted context omitted.
That would likely confuse normal users more: "What do you mean I have to close the page to open the page properly?".
Why would clicking the x on a header lead anyone to believe that the entire page ('tab') would be closed? That's not how... any other page element works. The first time I encountered an AMP page I figured clicking the x would load the actual page. I was wrong.
Tech people think, x means get me out of this experience. Regular people think close this "pop up" displaying where I clicked to cause this "pop up" to appear.
Re: The Problem with AMP
#168I wrote a similar(although not as concise) article about 3 month ago: https://www.alexkras.com/google-may-be-stealing-your-mobile-... After which I was invited to meet Google AMP team and to express my concerns, you can read my Q&A here: https://www.alexkras.com/i-had-lunch-with-google-amp-team/ TLDR; A lot of concerns are getting addressed 1. Minor, but the bar at the top is now scrollable on all devices, including…
What I don't get is why a company like Google is moving with glacier style speed. When they will finally implement those long missing features their products already have failed the acceptance test of the users.
Re: The Problem with AMP
#169Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, I'm tired of not being able to load Reddit from Google SERPs on my phone. Really tired of it. Time to give DuckDuckGo another try I guess...
Have you checked your content blockers?
Disabling ad blocking makes it work, yes. That is part of the problem here...
Re: The Problem with AMP
#170I don't like AMP, and I very glad there is now some push back against Google's implementation of it. Fast pages are great, but I suppose I'm missing the background on why it was necessary to do this, when anybody who can implement AMP could presumably have implemented "lightweight non bloated pages" without using it. It's bad enough that I've had to switch to using Bing on mobile, despite the worse results, and I'm a…
Push back?
Where?
It seems there is no alternative for those who care about their rank and clicks.