5 ms·

Talk of robbing and forcing implies a level of coercion that simply isn't there. For the end user, AMP links are clearly marked, and non-AMP news results are r

Talk of robbing and forcing implies a level of coercion that simply isn't there. For the end user, AMP links are clearly marked, and non-AMP news results are readily available. For the content producer, Google only publishes their content via AMP if the content producer permits it. Indeed, it is up to the content producer to make the AMP version of their content.

jacquesm 10y ago
> For the content producer, Google only publishes their content via AMP if the content producer permits it. Indeed, it is up to the content producer to make the AMP version of their content. Content producers are being strong-armed into this by Google because AMP capable pages are being given preferential treatment in the SERPS.
- Kalium 10y ago
  Is it possible that AMP pages are preferred because they're a better user experience?
  - jacquesm 10y ago
    Google prefers them because they give Google more power. They also: - break the web - hijack content - reduce the value for the publisher - make it impossible for the publisher to monetize their content - are a step back from an open web Pretty soon you'll be 'certified information provider' to Google rather than web publisher. Why stop at mobile?
    - SquareWheel 10y ago
      >break the web Okay, how? AMP is built on HTML5 standards. >hijack content AMP Cache is different than AMP. Do CDNs also "hijack content", by serving them from faster servers? >reduce the value for the publisher By offering them an option to make pages load faster? >make it impossible for the publisher to monetize their content Incorrect. Read up on the allowed tags in AMP. Both ads and analytics are possible; they're just delayed until after the content is shown. >are a step back from an open web Built on open web standards.
      - reitanqild 10y ago
        >> break the web > Okay, how? AMP is built on HTML5 standards. Will only comment on this: it should be easy to figure out a way to break the open web using HTML5 standards: - browser sniffing - crazy javascript navigation etc. Just from the top of my head.

jacquesm 10y ago

> For the content producer, Google only publishes their content via AMP if the content producer permits it. Indeed, it is up to the content producer to make the AMP version of their content. Content producers are being strong-armed into this by Google because AMP capable pages are being given preferential treatment in the SERPS.

Kalium 10y ago
Is it possible that AMP pages are preferred because they're a better user experience?
- jacquesm 10y ago
  Google prefers them because they give Google more power. They also: - break the web - hijack content - reduce the value for the publisher - make it impossible for the publisher to monetize their content - are a step back from an open web Pretty soon you'll be 'certified information provider' to Google rather than web publisher. Why stop at mobile?
  - SquareWheel 10y ago
    >break the web Okay, how? AMP is built on HTML5 standards. >hijack content AMP Cache is different than AMP. Do CDNs also "hijack content", by serving them from faster servers? >reduce the value for the publisher By offering them an option to make pages load faster? >make it impossible for the publisher to monetize their content Incorrect. Read up on the allowed tags in AMP. Both ads and analytics are possible; they're just delayed until after the content is shown. >are a step back from an open web Built on open web standards.
    - reitanqild 10y ago
      >> break the web > Okay, how? AMP is built on HTML5 standards. Will only comment on this: it should be easy to figure out a way to break the open web using HTML5 standards: - browser sniffing - crazy javascript navigation etc. Just from the top of my head.