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

Google’s AMP Poised to Take the Lead from Facebook’s and Apple’s Walled Gardens

mondaynote.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–57 of 57 posts

Re: Google’s AMP Poised to Take the Lead from Facebook’s and Apple’s Walled Gardens

#51

Post by Lawtonfogle »

zaphar wrote: post #31
hackercomplex wrote: post #27

Keep in mind that the AMP caching infrastructure will also be able to serve as a tracking platform because it records every single IP address. This effectively grants Google and associates a defacto monopoly in terms of an unblockable mobile tracking platform in a world where ad-blockers are becoming ubiquitous. I think it's a smart move on their part actually, but what I assume will eventually happen is other provid…

but ultimately people on the web prefer not to be tracked. It's curious because most people on the web pay lip service to this preference but their actions typically indicate that they don't really care all that much. The folks on Hacker News are in the minority of users whose actions indicate they truly care.

Or it is even worse, in that not being tracked is now a negative so some of us allow ourselves to be tracked enough so that we don't fall foul of not being tracked. Kinda like jobs that look at your social media presence before hiring and consider no such presence to now be a negative.

Re: Google’s AMP Poised to Take the Lead from Facebook’s and Apple’s Walled Gardens

#52

Post by shostack »

hackercomplex wrote: post #27

Keep in mind that the AMP caching infrastructure will also be able to serve as a tracking platform because it records every single IP address. This effectively grants Google and associates a defacto monopoly in terms of an unblockable mobile tracking platform in a world where ad-blockers are becoming ubiquitous. I think it's a smart move on their part actually, but what I assume will eventually happen is other provid…

This is the bigger story around AMP for me at least. I wonder if this would give them the ability to provide impression-level data in Universal Analytics for display ads not run through DCM if a given placement/site uses AMP. If they log the ad loading, and can parse the metadata from it, they can in theory use that to populate impression data and view-through conversions in UA.

Talk about a brilliant strategic move if this pans out since they'll be speeding up the web, gaining a massive dataset they didn't have access to before, and building a nice moat along with it.

Re: Google’s AMP Poised to Take the Lead from Facebook’s and Apple’s Walled Gardens

#53

Post by shostack »

tombrossman wrote: post #22

From the article: "...most ad servers (not just Google-owned DFP) will be able to send ads in AMP pages. Some work remains to be done on the formats that will be deemed acceptable in AMP pages." Deemed acceptable by who, and doesn't this indicate it will become another walled garden?

Not sure why you were down-voted as it is a legit question.

I'd honestly be pretty surprised if they didn't just opt to support all IAB-approved ad formats. The one format I could see being a big question mark is "native ads." Outside of their increased Gmail ad presence, Google has been curiously absent from the native advertising landscape.

Re: Google’s AMP Poised to Take the Lead from Facebook’s and Apple’s Walled Gardens

#54

Post by franze »

Arnavion wrote: post #47
acdha wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The second point is a restatement of the first: * a responsive website * with views for desktop, mobile and tablet #3 and #4 are similarly redundant #1 makes all of the apps unnecessary, along with AMP and Facebook Instant. See also the dismal return on the sunk cost for developing apps: http://techcrunch.com/2015/07/23/i-dont-want-your-app/ The real omission, however, should have been #0: “high-quality content”. Sur…

franze probably intended "responsive" to have its dictionary meaning - "not sluggish".

Nope. Responsive as in "Resppnsive website". But instead of views I should have written "breakpoints". Said that: breakpoints get misused as device dependent views regularly, implementing complex .hidden CSS mambo jumbo. So yes, for me breakpoints are views (even if the should not be)

Re: Google’s AMP Poised to Take the Lead from Facebook’s and Apple’s Walled Gardens

#55

Post by x1024 »

everfree wrote: post #44
x1024 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should "be optimized for mobile". 4MB per page is anything but. If you visit 100 pages per day, you'd need a 12GB data plan.

That assumes that you clear your browser cache after you view every page, or that you visit 100 separate sites every day that each weigh 4MB.

Every page weighs 4+MB, because the page-specific content on the page weighs more than 4MB. There's almost 1MB of "CSS + JS + HTML", but about 4MB of video.

Re: Google’s AMP Poised to Take the Lead from Facebook’s and Apple’s Walled Gardens

#56

Post by alexschleber »

shostack wrote: post #53
tombrossman wrote: post #22

From the article: "...most ad servers (not just Google-owned DFP) will be able to send ads in AMP pages. Some work remains to be done on the formats that will be deemed acceptable in AMP pages." Deemed acceptable by who, and doesn't this indicate it will become another walled garden?

Not sure why you were down-voted as it is a legit question. I'd honestly be pretty surprised if they didn't just opt to support all IAB-approved ad formats. The one format I could see being a big question mark is "native ads." Outside of their increased Gmail ad presence, Google has been curiously absent from the native advertising landscape.

> Google has been curiously absent from the native advertising landscape. Compare: https://stratechery.com/2014/peak-google/

Re: Google’s AMP Poised to Take the Lead from Facebook’s and Apple’s Walled Gardens

#57

Post by shostack »

alexschleber wrote: post #56
shostack wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why you were down-voted as it is a legit question. I'd honestly be pretty surprised if they didn't just opt to support all IAB-approved ad formats. The one format I could see being a big question mark is "native ads." Outside of their increased Gmail ad presence, Google has been curiously absent from the native advertising landscape.

> Google has been curiously absent from the native advertising landscape. Compare: https://stratechery.com/2014/peak-google/

Ah--love Ben's blog and podcast (listen to it several times a week during my commute).

His point is a good one. In terms of feeds of potential branding interest, beyond Youtube, Google's big (and mostly untapped) opportunity is in Gmail.

They made a stride to first assert control and doing users a favor by moving things to the Promotions tab. Now they have their ads in the email "feed" in that tab. The Inbox product, IMHO, was their attempt at redefining email into an fully algorithmically-curated feed ala FB, Twitter and Reddit.

My personal bet is that Inbox was a proof of concept and they will force Gmail to shift to that approach in the not too distant future. If users don't leave en masse, I would not be surprised at all to see Google forcing advertisers to pay to get into the inboxes of Gmail users--even users who have explicitly asked for promotional emails. That was FB's brilliant gambit (that somewhat blew up in their face). They convinced advertisers to invest in building an audience on the FB platform (so FB owned the audience), let them see revenue from it, and then switched from a "communicate all you like to everyone who Likes you for free!" model to a "pay us on an auction model if you want to reach anyone" model. Many advertisers consider it a huge bait-and-switch play, but I can't deny that it seems to have been successful. And that is why I won't be surprised to see Google follow suit there.

Post reply on HN