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

I decided to disable AMP on my site

alexkras.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 360 posts

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#351

Post by kuschku »

dragonwriter wrote: post #216
michaelt wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sites that are traditionally called walled gardens (facebook, AOL, compuserve...) often combine four features; (a) all the content is hosted under the walled garden's domain; (b) the walled garden designs key parts of the navigation and layout, understandably acting in their own interests; (c) the walled garden has content policies and declines to host certain content; and (d) users must have accounts and be logged i…

But it doesn't do (a), either. Google hosts a cache of the content, but the original is hosted by the publisher, and Google's cache isn't exclusive. Microsoft, Facebook, and Twitter, IIRC, operate their own caches, and so can anyone else who wants to (and there's a fairly strong incentive too if you host something that functions as a high-volume portal.) AMP makes it harder for real walled gardens to provide an attra…

So, how do I get my page into the carousel without using Google’s cache?

How do I get my page into the carousel when using a fork of AMP that reduces the JS load?

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#352

Post by kuschku »

mthoms wrote: post #335
w33ble wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hadn't realized it, but yes, this is exactly the experience I expect. The AMP page is like a modal I front of the actual site. Or that's how I think of it anyway.

Search engines have never worked like this (up until now that is). It's just not what the average user expects. It's also a dangerous precedent IMHO.

Why? It’s exactly what the average user expects. They see a site, with some message on top. Be it a cookie warning, the AMP header, etc.

They click the X or OK on the message, the message disappears, the site stays.

If you can find a website where the cookie warning’s X button redirects to your last Google search, please do so.

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#353

Post by kuschku »

athenot wrote: post #147

Maybe I don't understand AMP, but what value does it bring over having a very lean CSS and keep JS to the strict minimum? Last time I checked, a plain vanilla HTML page with a bit of embedded CSS (and perhaps a few async JS functions for stats) is lightning fast even on mobile.

(a) people stay longer on google.com

(b) Google can track users better

(c) Google gives AMP pages an advantage in the search, often even catapulting page 13 results to before the top #1 result – due to the AMP carousel.

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#354

Post by kuschku »

ehsankia wrote: post #249
int_19h wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because such centralization gives Google immense power. The sheer potential censorship implications alone are very concerning, for example.

By that logic, does AWS have huge amount of power? Why does it matter what server the content is hosted on? Aren't almost all websites hosted on a remote server? The only difference is Google gets to choose what shows up on their search, and they always had that control anyway.

Yes, AWS has a huge amount of power, and no, they shouldn’t have it. You need an economy of small businesses to allow innovation and startups. No startup can compete in an economy full of big players.

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#355

Post by kuschku »

aeromusek wrote: post #289

> I am really surprised that big publishers are not bothered by this fact as much as I am. I suspect they are just as bothered, but don't really have a choice about this either. Placement on the search results page is so valuable that Google holds a really big stick when introducing new 'standards' like this. Just look how little of a typical mobile SERP is real 'organic' content now: http://imgur.com/UhNZvL2

I did the same: Content that is NOT organic search results is marked on the right side in Google’s colors: https://s3.kuschku.de/public/serp_annotated_web.png

Notice how 2/3rds of the page is taken by the app’s own UX, and of the shown results, another 40% is taken by embedded content.

The page shows only 9 search results, and zero above the fold.

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#356

Post by mthoms »

kuschku wrote: post #352
mthoms wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Search engines have never worked like this (up until now that is). It's just not what the average user expects. It's also a dangerous precedent IMHO.

Why? It’s exactly what the average user expects. They see a site, with some message on top. Be it a cookie warning, the AMP header, etc. They click the X or OK on the message, the message disappears, the site stays. If you can find a website where the cookie warning’s X button redirects to your last Google search, please do so.

Either you replied to the wrong comment or I wasn't clear in my comment. We are totally in agreement.

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#357

Post by edent »

niutech wrote: post #215
edent wrote: post #126

> Do you own a WordPress site? Turn AMP off or don’t enable it in the first place. A warning - I turned off the AMP plug in and it effectively removed my site from Google for a week or so. https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2016/11/removing-your-site-from-amp... The Google cache takes ages to clear away all the now-dead links and will serve 404s to your users. A nice incentive to stay trapped in their monoculture.

You can redirect users to the full-blown pages, using e.g. mod_rewrite.

If you'd like to set that up for me on a few thousand pages - that'd be swell :-)

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#358

Post by edent »

mthoms wrote: post #277
edent wrote: post #126

> Do you own a WordPress site? Turn AMP off or don’t enable it in the first place. A warning - I turned off the AMP plug in and it effectively removed my site from Google for a week or so. https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2016/11/removing-your-site-from-amp... The Google cache takes ages to clear away all the now-dead links and will serve 404s to your users. A nice incentive to stay trapped in their monoculture.

I'm curious, besides the short term problem, how was your ranking affected overall?

Hard to say. The 404s have dropped off, and I still appear in the results. But I'm not sure of any way to tell definitively.

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#359

Post by tytso »

Chris2048 wrote: post #346
tytso wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I actually think suppressing comments (sometimes called "the sewer of the internet") is a feature, not a bug. I block Facebook comments using a Chrome extension mainly because I don't want to send huge amounts of information to Facebook when browsing random web pages, but not having to see the comments is also a bonus.

Just calling them names doesn't change anything. You are assuming the article is more truthful than the average comment. FB posts are often not about anything, unlike news articles. FB and YT are entirely different.

The average article posted via a web page (or AMP) is definitely more well written, and generally more truthful, than the average Facebook comment. I would think this is pretty self-evidently obvious.

Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site

#360

Post by quadrangle »

abritinthebay wrote: post #339
quadrangle wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

~~consumers~~ (nay, citizens) prefer to have no ads or subscription costs etc. The fact is: ad-based model just puts the burden on those most susceptible to advertising. It's similar enough to funding schools through state lotteries in that the money comes from somewhere or the results go underfunded, and if you accept state-run lotteries or anything that looks even slightly like today's ad-based internet, you are ta…

You say that, but time after time user behavior shows they'll go to the ad supported version. See also: mobile. You have to totally gameify things to get micropayments to work. I mean, if you want that for websites, sure... but if you think clickbait is bad now ...

"but" is not appropriate. You aren't contradicting anything I said. I'd agree with you completely, but your points are only "and" from my post, not "but".
Post reply on HN