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

The Problem with AMP

80x24.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 353 posts

Re: The Problem with AMP

#221

Post by sfifs »

joelthelion wrote: post #175
wheelerwj wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google is abusing its powers. They are a business, doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing. It's up to us to find a way to kill google and take back our internet. Edit, i love the downvotes for this. Google is legally required to act in their shareholders best interests. You all should understand fiduciary duty. They are building long term value for a massive (and growing) customer segment at the expense o…

> They are a business, doing exactly what they are supposed to be doing. Violating anti-trust laws?

Anti trust prosecutions work only if harm to consumer is proven - harm to other companies doesn't really work for successfully anti trust prosecutions.

There's a reason no US attorneys bring anti trust lawsuits against Google and that's because Google would very likely be able to show their choices benefitted consumers (eg. say saved 10 mins and 50MB data a day across 200 million consumers without charge)

Re: The Problem with AMP

#222

Post by lambada »

coldtea wrote: post #210
nailer wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.). A bunch of people, but Malte Ubl is one of the main people and has the best tech talks on why they picked the techniques and hacks they did. https://www.youtube.com…

> I use AMP on CertSimple but appreciate that AMP favors 'speed achieved using specific techniques' rather than speed per se. Why on god's name anybody would appreciate that?

I believe the poster means appreciate as in 'I recognise that' or 'I understand that' rather than 'I approve of'.

Re: The Problem with AMP

#223

Post by ionforce »

sametmax wrote: post #201
nothrabannosir wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're right, but that point isn't relevant. What you're giving is an explanation, not an excuse. Nobody is incredulous at Google's motivations (money). We're just not satisfied with it. Before you can solve a problem, you must identify it clearly. That's what we're doing here. Saying "yeah but it's only logical" isn't the point. Look: > It's up to us to find a way to kill google and take back our internet. You mean,…

But we don't need an excuse. However the explanation seems necessary given that: - we saw it happen once; - we said it would happened again; - we said how; - we said why; - and it happened again. And apparently nobody gives a damn. People are still trying to get short term gains by adapting to Google's will and wrecking our industry, efficiently sawing the branch we are all seating on. So yeah, we need to give the ex…

You are making an assumption (an incorrect one, I think) that providing explanations causes people's behavior to change.

Re: The Problem with AMP

#224

Post by coldtea »

wheelerwj wrote: post #216
coldtea wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have to be convicted to be violating, because: 1) Not all violators will necessarily be convicted. 2) Even for those eventually convicted, there's always a period when they are violating, but not yet convicted.

Guilt before innocence, got it.

Being guilty before proven guilty is a thing in the real world.

As is being guilty and getting away with it. People do that all the time too.

And courthouses and judges don't have some monopoly into assessment of guilt. Just into its official identification and punishment.

(If the legal system had the monopoly, or some moral monopoly, of only it determining guilt, then how would we, as a society, judge the effectiveness or not of the legal system itself?)

Re: The Problem with AMP

#225

Post by NTripleOne »

wheelerwj wrote: post #218
Fnoord wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI: Although I suppose everyone every once in a while is surprised about the way their posts are moderated on HN and other websites (if they notice, that is) it is annoying when people complain about downvoting. I just automatically downvote that. Sometimes what you state just isn't popular for the crowd who reads it and/or moderates it. Doesn't mean you are right or wrong. Just take a deep breath and give it a rest…

> I just automatically downvote that. We can both agree that one of us needs to change. The guidelines are fine, the part you should change is automatically downvoting anything. Just jumping on a bandwagon makes for pretty boring reading too.

hint: it's you

Re: The Problem with AMP

#226

Post by NTripleOne »

lmm wrote: post #206
rashkov wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get the frustration, but mobile sites in general also have this problem. "Request desktop site" should be a more prominent feature, at least in safari which is what I'm familiar with. It's quite buried unfortunately and I think that more non-techies would benefit from knowing about it.

Mobile web browsers should just never allow a site to disable zoom. That would fix the main thing I end up requesting desktop site for.

That's an option in android chrome.

Re: The Problem with AMP

#227

Post by NTripleOne »

samat wrote: post #188
m-p-3 wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And websites should honor the "Request desktop version" at all time. It's frustrating when you enable the option and it still bring up the mobile version.

That is responsive layout! Something people love

A poorly made responsive layout*

If it was any good, it would be showing the desktop scaling/layout/whatever instead of the mobile when 'show desktop version' is on.

It's also not always about being on a responsive sites, a lot of places still do a m.website.com redirect when visiting the main site from a mobile device, but with no backwards redirect when visiting the mobile site (which is almost certainly non-responsive, otherwise there'd be essentially no need for the m.* site) as a desktop client - so you hit 'show desktop version', the m.* page refreshes and you just get the mobile site with funny scaling.

Re: The Problem with AMP

#228

Post by jakub_g »

mcintyre1994 wrote: post #150
ejcx wrote: post #29

One thing I love about AMP, that seems to never be mentioned when people discuss it, is viewing AMP-HTML pages on my laptop. I wrote a small chrome extension that always forwards my page to the equivalent AMP page (if one exists) and the experience of reading the news is so much better. AMP pages off mobile are really really amazing. Compare Non-AMP[0] vs AMP[1] [0] http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Trump-on-the-…

This just seems to make up for Google never implementing a reading mode for Chrome. I wonder if they plan to use AMP to provide one only for AMP sites.

In fact Chrome has a reading mode but only on mobile and only if page is detected to have large desktop layout, and only sometimes - you get a "mobile view" button on the bottom. Byt there is no way to have it enabled on your own from some menu

Re: The Problem with AMP

#229

Post by wheelerwj »

coldtea wrote: post #224
wheelerwj wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Guilt before innocence, got it.

Being guilty before proven guilty is a thing in the real world. As is being guilty and getting away with it. People do that all the time too. And courthouses and judges don't have some monopoly into assessment of guilt. Just into its official identification and punishment. (If the legal system had the monopoly, or some moral monopoly, of only it determining guilt, then how would we, as a society, judge the effectiven…

> we, as a society

yes, we (the united states where google is head quartered) as a society, have agreed to at least pretend to allow the legal system to define guilt and innocence. But this isn't a philosophical debate. This is a discussion of what can be done to fix the AMP dilemma.

Post reply on HN