5 ms·
There is zero reason for AMP to be hijacking URLs or embedding any additional elements into a page that are detectable by the average user. Beyond that, univer
by saycheese 10y ago
There is zero reason for AMP to be hijacking URLs or embedding any additional elements into a page that are detectable by the average user.
Beyond that, universal opt-out should be possible and stats on the percentage of users opting out should be published real-time.
As such, until this is addressed, I am against AMP.
- applejuicestand 10y agoLooking at this from the users perspective, the URL is becoming less noticeable anyway. On mobile you don't have the screen real estate for it. And I don't see the average user complaining about the sub-second loading times. If anything, this is a step in the right direction.
- seanp2k2 10y agoHey, just like they did with G+...and look how that went. Something something making the same mistakes over and over again.
- ClassyJacket 10y agoIt also sucks if you want to interact with the page, since, inanely, you can't click through to the real page.
- wmf 10y agoWhat can you do on the real page that you can't do on the AMP version?
- granshaw 10y agocomments, etc
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- unclebucknasty 10y agoNavigate the site, share the underlying page, etc.
- fixermark 10y agoContent providers have the option of offering a link that goes to their main content. However, it's not standardized how that's set up (in WaPo, for example, it's under the top-left menu as "Progressive Web App (BETA)" ).
- monochromatic 10y agoThe silliest part is that clicking the x in the AMP bar doesn't redirect you to the real page... it just takes you back to your search results.
- ParadoxOryx 10y agoSounds like Cloudflare is working on it [1]. "In the spirit of open source, we're working to help develop updates to the project to address some of publishers' and end users' concerns. Specifically, here are some features we're developing to address concerns that have been expressed about AMP: ... A way for end users who would prefer not to be redirected to the AMP version of content to opt out" [1] https://blog.cloudflare.com/accelerated-mobile/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/accelerated-mobile/
- d0vs 10y agoUX is still horrendous.
- angry-hacker 10y agoIndeed. We have pagespeed, use it as a higher signal. But no, Google wants to own your content and users. Only very naive person believes they do it in order to fast up the web. If they started punishing harshly slow websites with 10mb of js, believe me ,it would change over night.
- ec109685 10y agoGoogle can't offer the full amp experience where pages load instantly without controlling the domain. Otheriwse, none of the optimization they outline in the blog post would be possible since it is the proxy that performs them.
- Twirrim 10y agoThat's not entirely true. mod_pagespeed (https://modpagespeed.com/ https://modpagespeed.com/), a plugin from Google for Apache and Nginx, does a whole bunch of the stuff google is offering through AMP, and it's theoretically capable of doing almost everything there. It optimises content on the fly, and stores cached versions of them on the drive for later hosting, etc. etc. I think possibly the only thing that it can't offer that way is hosting the content through the Google CDN.
- CaptSpify 10y agoThat's kind of the point though. Instead of controlling other sites, they should be promoting sites that do the right thing.
- jwr 10y agoSame here. In addition, the reasoning in the article doesn't sound sincere. If Google really cared about site speed, they would already promote fast pages more in their search results. They said they would, but it seems the boost is almost negligible. I am worried by the attempts of several huge companies (Google & Facebook, mostly) to get more of the open internet under their control.
- blowski 10y agoWould you rather see a fast site with rubbish content, or a slow site with good content? My guess is that some altruistic folks at Google see AMP as a way of offering the best of both worlds. But most of us know that in big business, every good idea gets abused for short term profits.
- monochromatic 10y agoWhy is there any relation to the quality of the content?
- blowski 10y agoThe OP said Google aren't doing enough to promote fast sites. My point was that quality is more important than speed.
- monochromatic 10y agoQuality is orthogonal.
- wcbeard10 10y agoOn ios safari, holding down the refresh button in the url bar gives you the option to request the desktop site. As kludgy as that is, I've found it a worthwhile workaround until this is fixed.