8 ms·

The X tested well with users, but we are reconsidering it, because of the feedback from the developer community!

tyingq 10y ago
Appreciate you sharing that, good to hear it's under consideration. More cynical me might say that rolling out the 'X' with that behavior, though, gets the conversation to be about fixing the banner...versus removing it altogether.
- wmf 10y ago
  Removing the bar is phishing and fake news paradise.
  - tyingq 10y ago
    Well, because the implementation uses google urls, right? I assume they could have asked users to create amp.theirdomain.com CNAME records and upload appropriate certificates, right? Or the solution that cloudflare is using, or?
    - cramforce 10y ago
      There is no navigation (only pushState) to enable pre-rendering, so the origin cannot be changed.
      - tyingq 10y ago
        Ahh, I finally get it. An intentional walled garden that's a little bit open for now. I'm in the pot, and it's not terrible yet, but you just barely turned on the heat. I assume it ends with everything in the serps being preloaded. And the only things in the serps being compliant content.
        cramforce 10y ago
        Nice derailing of a technical point! AMP is not a ranking factor and so the percentage of results it makes up is largely a factor of the percentage of publishers publishing AMP.
        tyingq 10y ago
        You're right in that I really shouldn't be directing that at you. I believe that you, personally, are trying to do the right thing. Apologies for the snark. However, I believe the Google devs behind Froogle also had good intentions. They provided a framework to make product pages easier to consume for Google. They provided a real incentive for publishers to conform to that standard. They got nice placement in a carousel, cached display of product images, and so forth. Then, later, well... Edit: And whatever the technical reason for the google urls, it does open up possibilities for the future that aren't desirable. It's a dangerous precedent.
        callahad 10y ago
        > AMP is not a ranking factor That language is misleading: only AMP articles are eligible for "Top Stories" placement, which means non-AMP results are completely excluded from the most prominent ranking on SERPs. AMP may not be used as a ranking factor within each class of results, but it absolutely creates two distinct classes of results, where AMP is given priority over the open Web.
  - mthoms 10y ago
    Removing the bar is phishing and fake news paradise. Umm, AMP itself is phishing paradise. https://motherboard-images.vice.com/content-images/contentimage/38680/1476913065736588.png https://motherboard-images.vice.com/content-images/contentim...
    - OkGoDoIt 10y ago
      What is the URL to the accompanying article? This screenshot seems disturbingly effective, I'd like to see the rest of the flow. I wonder if the scam breaks down once you click the link or if it would be very hard to tell it's fishing even to a trained eye.
      - kristianp 10y ago
        https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/how-hackers-broke-into-john-podesta-and-colin-powells-gmail-accounts https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/how-hackers-broke...
    - andy_ppp 10y ago
      This is terrifying! Is this a real email or a mockup?
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
mthoms 10y ago
The "press close to go back" idiom you've invented out of thin air is terrible. This is a solved problem. We already have a button for going back and it works swimmingly. Even my grandmother knows that the "X" gets rid of annoying overlays (usually ads) so she can properly view the content she was trying to get to in the first place. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12731580 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12731580
- cramforce 10y ago
  We did not invent this. It is the same UI as Chrome Custom Tabs uses for in-app browsers. This may not be familiar on iOS.
  - karmelapple 10y ago
    It is definitely not idiomatic on iOS. Did the team think eliminating a banner or frame that wraps enclosing content was not MVP material? I'm glad Google has now made this available, but I was shocked - and unhappy - when I first realized AMP did not originally have it.
    - cramforce 10y ago
      AMP had 2 multi month public developer previews. Unfortunately it did not come up as a big issue during that phase.
      - karmelapple 10y ago
        Since I do not stay up to date with the latest from Google all the time, and didn't even know AMP was a thing until I encountered it in a production google search one day, I had no chance to offer feedback. I imagine many iOS developers, who must be focused on native app things rather than Web-based things, would be in a similar boat; we would be happy to provide feedback, but I don't know how I would have even been asked for feedback, let alone have discovered that something like this was coming so I could proactively make a comment. Any ideas how this process could be improved?
inferiorhuman 10y ago
Please just exclude AMP results by default.

Appreciate you sharing that, good to hear it's under consideration. More cynical me might say that rolling out the 'X' with that behavior, though, gets the conversation to be about fixing the banner...versus removing it altogether.

wmf 10y ago
Removing the bar is phishing and fake news paradise.
- tyingq 10y ago
  Well, because the implementation uses google urls, right? I assume they could have asked users to create amp.theirdomain.com CNAME records and upload appropriate certificates, right? Or the solution that cloudflare is using, or?
  - cramforce 10y ago
    There is no navigation (only pushState) to enable pre-rendering, so the origin cannot be changed.
    - tyingq 10y ago
      Ahh, I finally get it. An intentional walled garden that's a little bit open for now. I'm in the pot, and it's not terrible yet, but you just barely turned on the heat. I assume it ends with everything in the serps being preloaded. And the only things in the serps being compliant content.
      - cramforce 10y ago
        Nice derailing of a technical point! AMP is not a ranking factor and so the percentage of results it makes up is largely a factor of the percentage of publishers publishing AMP.
        tyingq 10y ago
        You're right in that I really shouldn't be directing that at you. I believe that you, personally, are trying to do the right thing. Apologies for the snark. However, I believe the Google devs behind Froogle also had good intentions. They provided a framework to make product pages easier to consume for Google. They provided a real incentive for publishers to conform to that standard. They got nice placement in a carousel, cached display of product images, and so forth. Then, later, well... Edit: And whatever the technical reason for the google urls, it does open up possibilities for the future that aren't desirable. It's a dangerous precedent.
        callahad 10y ago
        > AMP is not a ranking factor That language is misleading: only AMP articles are eligible for "Top Stories" placement, which means non-AMP results are completely excluded from the most prominent ranking on SERPs. AMP may not be used as a ranking factor within each class of results, but it absolutely creates two distinct classes of results, where AMP is given priority over the open Web.
- mthoms 10y ago
  Removing the bar is phishing and fake news paradise. Umm, AMP itself is phishing paradise. https://motherboard-images.vice.com/content-images/contentimage/38680/1476913065736588.png https://motherboard-images.vice.com/content-images/contentim...
  - OkGoDoIt 10y ago
    What is the URL to the accompanying article? This screenshot seems disturbingly effective, I'd like to see the rest of the flow. I wonder if the scam breaks down once you click the link or if it would be very hard to tell it's fishing even to a trained eye.
    - kristianp 10y ago
      https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/how-hackers-broke-into-john-podesta-and-colin-powells-gmail-accounts https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/how-hackers-broke...
  - andy_ppp 10y ago
    This is terrifying! Is this a real email or a mockup?
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

mthoms 10y ago

The "press close to go back" idiom you've invented out of thin air is terrible. This is a solved problem. We already have a button for going back and it works swimmingly. Even my grandmother knows that the "X" gets rid of annoying overlays (usually ads) so she can properly view the content she was trying to get to in the first place. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12731580 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12731580

cramforce 10y ago
We did not invent this. It is the same UI as Chrome Custom Tabs uses for in-app browsers. This may not be familiar on iOS.
- karmelapple 10y ago
  It is definitely not idiomatic on iOS. Did the team think eliminating a banner or frame that wraps enclosing content was not MVP material? I'm glad Google has now made this available, but I was shocked - and unhappy - when I first realized AMP did not originally have it.
  - cramforce 10y ago
    AMP had 2 multi month public developer previews. Unfortunately it did not come up as a big issue during that phase.
    - karmelapple 10y ago
      Since I do not stay up to date with the latest from Google all the time, and didn't even know AMP was a thing until I encountered it in a production google search one day, I had no chance to offer feedback. I imagine many iOS developers, who must be focused on native app things rather than Web-based things, would be in a similar boat; we would be happy to provide feedback, but I don't know how I would have even been asked for feedback, let alone have discovered that something like this was coming so I could proactively make a comment. Any ideas how this process could be improved?

inferiorhuman 10y ago

Please just exclude AMP results by default.