@alexkras Sorry this comes from me in Nigeria using a second-hand MotoG (1.Gen). May be your website is not loading 23 trackers + unnecessary js. But many websites, load such crap. Please especially in third-world, we have so poor phones. Only google-CDN avoids all these. (yes, google does track me but we do not all have unlimited bandwidth).
I decided to disable AMP on my site
61–70 of 360 posts
Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site
#62Earlier quoted context omitted.
Re: two products, I realized this but never really thought about it. Can one self-host an AMP (framework) implementation? Does Google still promote such content, even if it isn't part of their CDN?
Sure. It's just a stricter subset of HTML and a JS library for custom components. Self host it. No, Google won't give you the special AMP-bolt - nor should they because they can't provide the instant load as they can for other AMP sites that they self-host on their CDN.
That's where I have trouble accepting AMP. I love the concept and Google's support would be huge, but Google doesn't seem to be truly promoting making the mobile web better with AMP. They are promoting making the mobile web better with their CDN (i.e. by centralizing/controlling the content).
Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
I only use Firefox for Android in my case, I like their UI personally.
I'm left-handed and I can't switch tabs without using a second hand with Fx for Android. The UI also lacks polish in many places and looks really outdated and alien.
Ah yes of course for left-handed people it's maybe a problem, I did not consider that...
Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site
#64Earlier 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…
The feature that defines a walled garden is the wall. AMP doesn't have that wall: it is perfectly usable by any other search engine/spider to replicate the experience. The website itself can link to the AMP version if that makes sense for users. Mobile browsers, or web servers, could check for and redirect to the AMP version. There's a slightly-higher wall for advertisers, I believe. But Google is rightfully afraid o…
AMP has the wall.
Can I get the same display in the Google Search with or without AMP? No.
That’s the wall.
Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site
#65In the 90s web pages loaded instantly. Now we have faster computers and faster networks, but apparently we need something like AMP to make the web fast. We have regressed.
Those are some extremely rose colored glasses you are wearing if you think web pages loaded instantly in the 90's
I remember using the web on a 56k modem (which was pretty damn fast!) and waiting 30+ seconds for pages to fully load.
Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
I fail to see what, in AMP, makes the web less free or open. I am usually among the first on the stockade on invasive tech, but I have a hard time to understand the fuss around AMP. Yes, the cache is problematic, as it may allow Google, in a possible future, to filter some content, censor some other or not refresh often some pages. The thing is, if it does that, people will start using Google's caching, that's as sim…
AMP is pretty much mandatory. If you don't do it you're "left behind."
Unless everybody drops it. These Google incited arms races in the end help nobody but Google, it's a web scale version of the prisoners dilemma.
Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site
#67Good! I stand firmly against AMP and the centralisation of the web, it's a predatory move to increase Google's prevalence online, and one I will not be supporting with any of my upcoming projects.
Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site
#68The fact that website content is stored on Google servers and being served from Google is just disgusting.
Not all of it is. Most i've seen recently have a /amp/ subdir on the correct domain, not Google.
That's just the publisher putting AMP versions on a different URL, Google's still going to cache it and serve it from its own.
Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
I only use Firefox for Android in my case, I like their UI personally.
I'm left-handed and I can't switch tabs without using a second hand with Fx for Android. The UI also lacks polish in many places and looks really outdated and alien.
We're working on refreshing the UI this November: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1355774
Re: I decided to disable AMP on my site
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
AMP is pretty much mandatory. If you don't do it you're "left behind."
Unless everybody drops it. These Google incited arms races in the end help nobody but Google, it's a web scale version of the prisoners dilemma.
100% – I think this is a shortsighted move predicated by fear and it will backfire (hopefully). Google probably wants/expects to remain dominate forever, and that's very hard to do in this space without becoming a problem yourself.