Google AMP Issue: Links to visit the site currently not working

Post by mattmanser » Wed, Jun 12, 2019, 3:57 PM UTC

eclipxe wrote: post #184

mattmanser wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Browsers, mobile operating systems, ad networks, comparison sites, video hosting sites, image search, map services, etc., etc., etc. All of Google myriad of properties benefit from being able to limit competitors web page size, limit their technology use, restrict advertising and gating them behind your own servers. Plus on top, Google doesn't have to do any of that shit themselves and can gleefully put themselves at…

>Google doesn't have to do any of that shit themselves and can gleefully put themselves at the top of every search (and are doing with an ever expanding array of search terms). Why shouldn't a company be able to decide what they feature on their search results and how they rank things? If every result was a Google owned site, so what? Nothing is stopping you from using a different search engine.

Post by austinshea » Wed, Jun 12, 2019, 6:47 PM UTC

dcbadacd wrote: post #171

austinshea wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it your only option? AMP sucks, and I don't see why any user would feel like they need it. AMP is about getting into the carousel search results, and if AMP wasn't the only way to do that, we wouldn't feel forced to use it. To just download text and images I use www.outline.com, but there are lots of ways to accomplish this.

How is using an external service to debloat pages okay but AMP isn't? Feels ass-backwards to me.

Post by dwild » Wed, Jun 12, 2019, 9:07 PM UTC

luckylion wrote: post #121

dwild wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll rephrase what he said. AMP was only ever needed because so many made their pages so artificiality heavy in the first place and had no incentive to make them lighter. AMP SEO advantage is a great incentive to make them lighter. The thing is, Google could have pushed their algorithm toward performance more and make it clear on their page too and have the same effect. They just found a way to get more control from…

> had no incentive to make them lighter Didn't they? I mean, I figure everybody read the case studies about page load time and user abandonment. My experience is that those who built a leaner mobile version of their desktop site were also mostly the ones that built an AMP version (WP + "I'll just install a plugin and see what happens" left aside), while those that never cared about mobile users still don't. Does AMP…

Post by qtplatypus » Wed, Jun 12, 2019, 10:46 PM UTC

r3bl wrote: post #186

dcbadacd wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is using an external service to debloat pages okay but AMP isn't? Feels ass-backwards to me.

Maybe because that's not the only thing it does? It is what Google likes to pretend that AMP is all about, but you're also handing over the control of your traffic directly to Google, and being awarded with the SEO boost. That's significantly different than debloating your website and remaining in control of the traffic, but you don't receive the SEO boost as a consequence. Even if you make your website faster than i…

Post by tyingq » Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 1:13 AM UTC

qtplatypus wrote: post #248

tyingq wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On Chrome only. While still retaining mandatory Google controlled JavaScript in the page (which is what's broken in this story). Not sure why real url is in airquotes. It's an actual issue.

So on chrome you will have the option of getting to the real url, on firefox and other browsers you can use plugins.