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

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

markosaric.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

561–570 of 570 posts

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

#561

Post by dwild »

rland wrote: post #443
dwild wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If websites use the Comcast AMP framework, Comcast will cache their sites and make them faster for users. They probably do it with Netflix, some ISP do it with Steam too... there's nothing wrong with multilevel cache (except cache invalidation).

mmmh, I don't think this really holds up. They do it with Netflix/Steam because they have to, because if they did not those services would choke bandwidth for everyone. With your Netflix example, there are maybe a dozen players with this type of arrangement -- it is the exception to the rule and has more to do with physical limitations of the network than political control. With AMP/non-amp websites, there are hundre…

> I believe there is a fundamental difference between the two -- google's play is about control, not physical limitations.

Control of what? The search result are from Google, they already have control over them. The existence of AMP doesn't make you go to Google (except if AMP is actually superior, but then any search provider can provide it too, just like Cloudflare does it now).

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

#562

Post by tobr »

privateSFacct wrote: post #523
tobr wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, this doesn’t say anything about sync vs async.

The parent / op literally says they will load AMP with ads and trackers "just as they do in their regular sites." So we are very clear, regular HTML websites allow sync javascript and cross site / full dom access etc by trackers and ad platforms. Sync is preferred for a few reasons by ad providers. Lots of regular sites have sync javascript. On AMP, total javascript size is limited, dom interactions are limited (ie,…

Sorry, none of this matters. You are still putting words in OPs mouth. You should apologize for doing that and simultaneously saying they made a false claim.

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

#563

Post by darkwater »

kuschku wrote: post #226
darkwater wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how on Earth is that a deal breaker? Selecting text from disabled fields?

a lot of websites assume that you’re using chrome and show content you have to copy in disabled text fields (with some styling applied)

Never found one and, if I did, I don't recall and that's a sign that, at least for me, is a non-issue.

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

#564

Post by kuschku »

darkwater wrote: post #563
kuschku wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

a lot of websites assume that you’re using chrome and show content you have to copy in disabled text fields (with some styling applied)

Never found one and, if I did, I don't recall and that's a sign that, at least for me, is a non-issue.

I had 3 websites in the last 2 weeks (admin UI of self-hosted tools) where this issue was present, but I patched it out.

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

#565

Post by lern_too_spel »

dmitriid wrote: post #557
lern_too_spel wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably, the people who work on the AMP spec are different from the people who work on Google search (or for that matter, Bing search, Yandex search, or any other search engine that consumes AMP). I doubt he has any control over how search results are ranked or presented.

That's the main problem with AMP. For any issue that AMP is the cause of the AMP team goes: "not our problem, ask the people who implement a specific feature". Plausible deniability and all that.

Do you have any examples? Also, in what way is search ranking a problem of the AMP team?

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

#566

Post by Fr0styMatt88 »

rpmisms wrote: post #466
Fr0styMatt88 wrote: post #404

The most annoying thing for me, as a vision-impaired user, is that AMP pages disable zoom. I know that can be overridden in Chrome's accessibility settings, but it's a shitty practice that something like AMP shouldn't be promoting.

I think the idea is that you'll either use a screen reader or use the system zoom tool. Not defending it, but I can see the logic they used.

I'll use the system zoom if I need to, but it's very awkward compared to the browser zoom. You're stuck panning around the magnified screen with one set of gestures, while also having to scroll through the page using the browser's gestures. It works but it's not pleasant.

The excuse I always hear about disabling zoom has to do with the multi-touch delay. I can somewhat see the sense of that for very particular applications, but definitely not for AMP, which as I understand it is meant for mostly static content (I'm only assuming though).

More often than not, what I find is that if I override zoom disable and then browser zoom on a site that doesn't allow it usually, it ends up breaking the layout as you zoom. This makes me wonder if they're just disabling zoom because they can't be bothered fixing their CSS to deal with it.

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

#567

Post by Fr0styMatt88 »

squiggleblaz wrote: post #506
rpmisms wrote: post #466

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the idea is that you'll either use a screen reader or use the system zoom tool. Not defending it, but I can see the logic they used.

But what's wrong with using the web browser's zoom tool? Why is it somehow worse to get reflowing zoom? This idea that I'm using a phone optimised site so all text should be 8pt is just bizarre. It's not like the UA author has removed support for zoom: they're just disabling it arbitrarily.

It's not even about reflowing text, it's just the usual two-finger zoom gesture that gets disabled. I'm very accustomed to moving the large text as I read it, so don't even need reflow.

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

#568

Post by JoshMnem »

stjohnswarts wrote: post #556
JoshMnem wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not seeing images is better than not seeing the page at all. People who block content know that things sometimes don't load. There is no reason to block loading of the pages for 8 seconds.

You're probably not their target audience anyway (read ad money stream) so they don't really care if you have to wait on content or don't see it at all. Google et. al. just see you as a parasite on the system.

It seems like the AMP delay is there to punish people who block that JavaScript loading from Google's servers. I can't think of another reason why there would be an 8-second delay for any user of a technology that (dubiously) is supposed to be about speed.

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

#569

Post by emodendroket »

pixl97 wrote: post #272
emodendroket wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I'm well aware that that's what it's "about," just like I'm well aware that the search engine is mainly about advertising. I just don't care what it's about so long as the results are beneficial to me -- which they definitely are. When I see the AMP icon I know the page is going to load much faster

Always question what long term loss you are taking for these short term gains.

I suspect I am not losing very much at all by preferring to click AMP links.

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

#570

Post by emodendroket »

AlexandrB wrote: post #453
emodendroket wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I'm well aware that that's what it's "about," just like I'm well aware that the search engine is mainly about advertising. I just don't care what it's about so long as the results are beneficial to me -- which they definitely are. When I see the AMP icon I know the page is going to load much faster

> I just don't care what it's about so long as the results are beneficial to me -- which they definitely are. Are they though? With the search engine example, how do you know that the engine is not biasing your opinion so that you act against your own self-interest and to the benefit of the advertisers? The AMP situation is a bit more complicated, but how are you sure that AMP is beneficial to you in the broad, long-…

It is quite simple. My calculation is: 1) an AMP page will load much faster 2) clicking on an AMP or non-AMP page will have nearly no effect on me in the "broad, long-term sense;" to the extent AMP more generally may adversely affect me, my own personal participation in it has pretty much no impact at all.
Post reply on HN