by adamhearn on 12/21/20, 7:09 PM with 156 comments
by peanut_worm on 12/21/20, 8:08 PM
The speed boost is negligible if it even exists and all it serves to do is add an additional stupid pop up I have to click out of to read a web page.
I really wish I could switch to DDG but queries related to anything technical, like biology or programming, usually fail to turn up any relevant results.
by random5634 on 12/21/20, 11:30 PM
Web developers deliver crap, ad laden slow websites - with HORRIBLE users experiences.
Content jumps around as the web page loads, sometimes even 5 - 10 seconds later!
Autoplaying content is hell - but they seem to love it.
Popovers, unders and sliders gallore.
And for some reasons the GIANT mess of analytics trackers and CSS and dynamic content means the thing is
a) slow b) nightmare on a phone
Google has basically FORCED a bunch of these idiots to actually make a page usable and pleasant. It loads fast.
What I don't get - all these high and mighty web devs can't seem to deliver clean websites that work without Google beating them over the heads with AMP. Is it that they cower in front of management with demands for YET ANOTHER tracker (seriously, websites ship with like 10 trackers - why?) They feel the need to show off their lazy loading dynamic content skills that jank the page?
So thank goodness for AMP, perhaps developers will actually try to compete with it a bit by building usable non-amp websites.
And trust me, users are getting trained that the lighting bolt actually does mean FAST.
Anyways - when I read another rant from a web developer about AMP - a small request. How about de-jankifying and de-scamifying the web first a bit more? Then we won't need to turn to google for all this stuff.
by lwansbrough on 12/21/20, 8:52 PM
I have spent countless hours doing real optimizations on a website with real traffic, without submitting to AMP (which I view as a disgusting move by Google and everyone involved with it.) (Traffic which, by the way, does not reflect the device profiles of what Google considers the "average" user, based on real vs. lab results in Lighthouse -- which is forcing us to work on issues that are not proportionally relevant to our business, though I will concede it's a positive improvement for us overall. But still an unwanted Google influence, like most SEO.. but moreso.)
Core Web Vitals should render AMP irrelevant, and thus seeing as both projects are being pushed by Google, it's time Google takes AMP behind the barn. Unfortunately Core Web Vitals takes a pretty hard stance against bleeding edge technology like (Vue/React) server side rendering with client hydration. Anything beyond a todo app starts to see considerable main thread time during hydration which obliterates the Core Web Vitals scores. I predict with continued focus on CWV we will see: much greater focus on startup times for client side apps (including better hydration strategies), and maybe even some server-side only JS front end frameworks -- more aligned with the JAMstack idea (everything old is new again, yay.)
As much grief as CWV has caused me, it is the correct solution to the problem of slow websites and its impending inclusion in Google's page rankings should have a positive impact on the overall health of the web.
Why people who aren't being paid by Google continue to defend AMP absolutely baffles me.
by 1vuio0pswjnm7 on 12/21/20, 8:49 PM
Bias disclosure: I use a text-only browser and AMP pages look great in links. For a links user, the AMP version can be useful on some sites that have a large amount of cruft, e.g., excessive number of same site URLs, at the top of the page, with the content buried below it, and yet more cruft at the bottom. AMP eliminates the necessary scrolling on such sites.
by jimmar on 12/21/20, 8:37 PM
by jbman223 on 12/21/20, 8:31 PM
There will need to be a bigger driving force to get amp out of popularity. As long as AMP pages unlock preferential treatment in search results (mobile carousels), sites that want to compete will be forced to use them.
by bjt2n3904 on 12/21/20, 8:05 PM
What an excellent, mediocre, and/or bad recommendation!
by jez on 12/21/20, 8:18 PM
by franze on 12/21/20, 8:15 PM
A website I consult in a popular sports niche and has a slow, broken, ad-infested main website grew its traffic 500% with AMP.
On the main website, it's still broken. On AMP it's... AMP. So Google thinks it's fast enough/good enough.
On AMP we implemented a lot of annoying CTAs to go to the main website. ”Read Full Article here” ”Read more” ”Details at...”
In the past this website would have needed to optimize its real website to gain this much visibility in the search engines. Now they just AMP, then they optimize their AMP to real-world-website CTR, and can continue to have a... sub ideal.... website.
AMP is whitelisted cloaking for slow websites. And a burden on webmasters and developers.
I always say AMP is the internet if germans (most AMP leads were at one point germans) would have invented it (I am Austrian, we always joke about Germans ): Efficient, mostly boring and long term innovation harmful.
I am rooting for AMP to die. Sadly it will still be around for about 5 years until the ”what a great journey” blogpost.
by mateus1 on 12/21/20, 7:50 PM
It's Google throwing its weight to force websites into dubious practices all in favor of an alleged performance. Users also get the short end by being served low quality pages instead of the full experiences they expect.
I have this extension [1] to make sure I never visit an AMP page again.
[1] https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/amp2html/
by digdigdag on 12/21/20, 9:18 PM
- can't share articles using android's builtin share widgets because it points to the amp pages
- Navigating away using "Open in $BROWSER" option from the Google app in Android opens up the amp page again instead of the source page.
- can't see embedded article widgets like tweet blocks, maps, overlays, animations
- Attempting to do things like Comment on an article triggers navigation away from the AMP page to the actual site, forcing you to then scroll down once more
I've become accustomed to opening AMP pages and looking for "View article on actual site" link as a matter of course. It's just so horrible.
by dmix on 12/21/20, 8:37 PM
https://yandex.com/dev/turbo/doc/concepts/index.html/
They seem to work on similar principles.
China and Russia will still have this issue as well.
by sombremesa on 1/4/21, 5:49 AM
by jaredcwhite on 12/21/20, 10:53 PM
by nojvek on 12/22/20, 4:12 PM
Google needs an anti-trust slap for Amp. Until it gets it, it’s here to stay.
by evanb on 12/21/20, 8:25 PM
User coldpie recommended [ https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25467438 ] the firefox extension https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/amp2html/
by coolg54321 on 12/22/20, 10:30 AM
by f6v on 12/21/20, 7:38 PM
by z3t4 on 12/21/20, 9:06 PM
by AstroJetson on 12/21/20, 9:27 PM
text.npr.org and lite.cnn.com
Just plain text, if I want more, then I go look at the ad revenue site and I'm good to go. More news should be available to the public. And since you asked, I do send an annual donation to NPR to cover the usage of the text site.
by Triv888 on 12/21/20, 9:03 PM
by darepublic on 12/21/20, 8:19 PM
by amelius on 12/21/20, 9:10 PM
by earthboundkid on 12/22/20, 12:16 AM
by kevmo on 12/21/20, 8:18 PM
Google (Alphabet) needs to be broken up.
by bitcurious on 12/21/20, 8:21 PM
by 1propionyl on 12/21/20, 9:11 PM
- google.com/amp
- ampproject.org
I've been including AMP in my blocklist for quite a while now, and while I've occasionally felt like I'm tilting at windmills, it's honestly not much more inconvenient.
Before blocking AMP, I would get confused for a few seconds by a broken page that looked like a real page. Now I just see an empty page immediately, prompting me to get to the real page more quickly.