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

Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

developers.googleblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–247 of 247 posts

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#241

Post by mikecb »

saurik wrote: post #240
mikecb wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may take from the story what you wish, but afaik, the collaboration you're referring to was informal engineering discussion, not required permission. I can't charitably get to your interpretation from the blog posts or public comments by those at CF.

http://www.businessinsider.com/cloudflare-adopts-google-amp-... > So while Google means well here, Prince says, AMP hasn't been as open as publishers were perhaps hoping it would be. You still have to give your content over to Google to take advantage, which is suboptimal for publishers. > This is where Cloudflare swoops back into the picture. By working with Google as the first AMP partner, Cloudflare is contributin…

I think the amp partner term is silly. If akamai wanted to, they could host their own cache. There is no evidence that Google is doing anything but encouraging cdns to do so.

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#242

Post by dandv »

saurik wrote: post #236
mikecb wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cloudflare just launched their own amp cache. Nothing proprietary about this.

As far as I can tell, to do this they had to partner with Google, who are the arbiters of what is and is not AMP compatible. This is absolutely "proprietary" and honestly pisses me off even more than if it were only Google's servers in charge of this stuff as now they are screwing with the CDN market as well :/. An open standard is something anyone can implement and be compatible with, without permission.

I agree that having access to the original source is valuable. For that reason I went to Cloudflare's original post (as opposed to the Business Insider article you've linked to). Their original post (https://blog.cloudflare.com/accelerated-mobile/) links to the AMP cache guidelines on the AMP GitHub repo. The guidelines start like this:

> In the AMP ecosystem, the platform that links to content may freely choose which AMP Cache (if any) to use. It is an inversion of the typical model where content delivery is the responsibility of the publisher.

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#243

Post by dandv »

ino wrote: post #214
petre wrote: post #23

Is there a way to block AMP and load the real page instead?

yes, use https://encrypted.google.com

Or Request Desktop Site from your browser.

Or edit the URL to remove the beginning from "http" to "/amp/s".

Or View Source and go to the link in "link rel='canonical'".

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#244

Post by dandv »

malchow wrote: post #238
fixermark wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, they're separate. PageSpeed is still here: https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/

They were one and the same. AMP looked more profitable, so PageSpeed Service was deprecated. Only the documentation remains.

No, they weren't. Apache mod-pagespeed is and has been a completely different effort.

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#245

Post by dandv »

donohoe wrote: post #220
grezql wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AMP is horrible and I wish European Union or someone would hit hard on google. They are essentially forcing websites to format the sites in exactly the way Google wants, then they steal the content. All these google SEO guidelines inevitable end up helping google becoming even more powerful abusing their almost monopoly in search engine market. When power is too concentrated in one area, its never a good sign for the…

They are not stealing content - the user is served a page on a publisher site and/or CDN and the publisher gets their ads, analytics etc

Furthermore, all the traffic is clearly attributed to publisher, and lets you measure that.

https://medium.com/@pbakaus/why-amp-caches-exist-cd7938da245...

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#246

Post by dandv »

rocqua wrote: post #231
donohoe wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hang on, I'm not a big AMP fan but it does not steal publishers traffic at all.

If I recall, the page is actually served from a google.com domain.

It is, but for good reasons - https://medium.com/@pbakaus/why-amp-caches-exist-cd7938da245...

Re: Google AMP Cache, AMP Lite, and the Need for Speed

#247

Post by dandv »

detaro wrote: post #235
davewasthere wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not really a fairer comparison, because their non-AMP view is what they currently think is appropriate to serve. It's not. The web has bloated out of control - and while I'm not a fan-boy, I at least think AMP encourages the right things and is a progressive step forward in the right direction. I _like_ viewing AMP pages from an end-user perspective. And I don't think they're terribly onerous from a publisher/de…

Google could easily "motivate" them to provide AMP pages (as they have successfully done) without adding their own caching layer, which the complaints above mostly seemed to be about.

This post explains very well the #1 benefit of AMP caches (yes, there can be more than Google's, and Cloudflare has just released their own cache): pre-rendering:

https://medium.com/@pbakaus/why-amp-caches-exist-cd7938da245...

Post reply on HN