How to fight back against Google AMP as a web user and a web developer

Post by prophesi » Thu, Dec 05, 2019, 9:23 PM UTC

LoSboccacc wrote: post #329

prophesi wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Welppp, that's a sad chart. Though I really doubt Firefox's drop in market-share is that tied to performance. The story is more likely to be Chrome/Chromium as the default on Android, the release of Chromebooks, etc. Of course, this is just me interpreting facts with my feel good opinion. Back to the main point at hand, though, Firefox is obviously not doing well today either according to that chart. But its performa…

performance, yes, dev tools are lacking all the listed features historically speaking, Chrome got the share it got because Firefox was a memory hog and was running a purely interpreted JavaScript engine on top of a single threaded rendering engine in a time where core numbers and web app were becoming mainstream.

Post by sixstringtheory » Thu, Dec 05, 2019, 9:26 PM UTC

gregable wrote: post #348

jammygit wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m just annoyed at my links being hijacked. When I click a link, my intention is to visit someone’s page, not to view it through some sort of creepy iframe. When I go to share a link, why is it a google link instead of the newspaper? Why do I have to spend a minute or two hunting for the real one in the ugly ui?

Publishers who implement Signed Exchanges get AMP links directly to their site with no iframe viewer on browsers that support the technology: https://amp.dev/documentation/guides-and-tutorials/optimize-... https://github.com/WICG/webpackage/blob/master/explainer.md

Post by feanaro » Thu, Dec 05, 2019, 9:27 PM UTC

nvr219 wrote: post #349

kccqzy wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They load massively faster than normal sites, especially on poor mobile connections where main sites sometimes hang indefinitely trying to load javascript, ads, etc. Have you tried the normal mobile websites with an adblocker?

Normal people don’t know how to do that

Post by wolfgang42 » Thu, Dec 05, 2019, 9:30 PM UTC

stephenr wrote: post #317

joshuamorton wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a little more complex than that: If you disable all js, there is no delay. If you specifically block amp js, there is a delay. There could certainly be a shady reason for this, but the justification makes sense: one of the goals of AMP is to have, basically, a single, correct, initial paint. That's why images are statically sized and amp sticks placeholders there until the real images load. The js delay exists t…

The delay is css based not js based, so why would blocking all js affect it?

Post by munk-a » Thu, Dec 05, 2019, 9:31 PM UTC

gregable wrote: post #340

stephenr wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Install a content blocker, and the original site sans bullshit is the best experience. Ironically the amp page is artificially slow when blocking amp’s JS because they force an 8 second delay - via required boilerplate css - before content is visible.

You misunderstand the 8 second CSS animation in the AMP boilerplate. Here's the code (simplified): body { animation:-amp-start 8s steps(1,end) 0s 1 normal both} @keyframes -amp-start{from{visibility:hidden}to{visibility:visible}} body{animation:none} See the noscript section: if javascript is disabled, the CSS displays the body immediately. If Javascript is enabled, but for some reason the AMP javascript fails to loa…