6 ms·

Users: I like AMP pages, they're fast! HN: But the open Internet! Users: What's that? HN: Normal websites! Users: Like...the really slow ones? With all the

by ender7 9y ago

Users: I like AMP pages, they're fast! HN: But the open Internet! Users: What's that? HN: Normal websites! Users: Like...the really slow ones? With all the annoying popovers? And pages that take forever to load? And for some reason cause my fancy new phone to slow to a crawl? HN: Well, those websites should rewrite their entire codebase to be faster. Users: That doesn't help me, though. HN: Trust in the free market! The problem is you, the user, who just needs to exert more pressure on website purveyors so they'll make performant web sites. Users: You mean, like, preferring websites that offer faster experiences? Okay. Continues to use AMP.

akras14 9y ago
Hence the request to make it optional, with it being on by default. >It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.
cgag 9y ago
I hate them because they suck not because open internet.
cgag 9y ago
I hate them because they suck not because open internet.
baconner 9y ago
Your hypothetical there assumes that AMP actually works well. My experience is it's got painful usability issues at least on android chrome. The worst one I see all the time is scrolling down to actually read the AMP page frequently results in the page closing, returning you to results. Fast is good, but at least it ought to be a good user experience. I used to use google news a lot, but i totally abandoned it after constant frustrating experiences with AMP. Plus most of the amp-ified pages don't seem significantly faster than the original page. I'm not seeing the utility for users, just for google.
- imchillyb 9y ago
  Perhaps it's your device @baconner? I'm using an LG V20 device, with Chrome mobile, and I see a significant improvement with AMP'd pages over normal sites. So-much-so that I dread going to non-amped pages as they are slow and the ads are horrifically annoying. I guess this is why anecdotal evidence is not as heavily weighed as a thoroughly tested and evidenced study. YMMV I <3 AMP
  - baconner 9y ago
    To be fair I also use a VPN a lot of the time with adblocking. That does speed up a lot of high ad sites. Bugwise though I've had the same issues over a couple of different phones.
  - snovv_crash 9y ago
    I use Firefox mobile with uBlock Origin, and the internet is fast for me without using any AMP pages. YMMV.
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  Although AMP is not a performance beast by any measure, your experience is coloured because you're using Chrome on Android. Google news works pretty well on Samsung browser. It still annoys me that I can't see the link to the actual website but that's it.
  - freehunter 9y ago
    So you're saying that Google's official browser is slow on their official web technology on their official mobile platform? And Samsung, who is well known for their software quality issues, is a better choice?
    - jdironman 9y ago
      Well, he is speaking from experience. While this isn't the place for speaking from experience but more about enabling a better experience for all users he cannot deny what he has observed. However the user above us had the correct answer with filing a bug / legitimate issue with devs. That is the only way to increase usability for all users.
whoami_nr 9y ago
I personally don't see any major improvements in speed when using AMP. It might be marginal but too small to notice for a regular user. Another factor can be that AMP might work better on Chrome which is again Google sucking you into their ecosystem.
- Aaargh20318 9y ago
  I get the feeling it's aimed mainly at all the crappy bottom-of-the-barrel Android devices out there. As an iPhone user, why the hell would I care if a page is bit larger, I pull down over 500Mbit/s on wifi and over 100Mbit/s on LTE. The CPU in iPhone is so fast it's almost ridiculous. There is little difference in how fast AMP pages load compared to real web pages. Basically, Google re-invented WAP for exactly the same, dumb, reasons the original WAP was invented: their phones are too shit to use the real web.
  - xiphias 9y ago
    iPhone is no better...when I was developing a web site, I bought an iPhone 4 as a testing device, and it was quite painful to use compared to my Samsung S7 Edge (and quite slow). I bought it because it was still used heavily in the user base.
    - Aaargh20318 9y ago
      An iPhone 4 is an ancient and no longer supported device, it's 7 years old, an eternity in the mobile market. You're comparing a 2010 device to a 2016 one.
      - izacus 9y ago
        People who have perfectly functional iPhones 4 deserve to use the web too. Forcing people to pay huge premium just to keep the same functionality is messed up
        Aaargh20318 9y ago
rufius 9y ago
Lol no. AMP is a trash experience. I hate it so much.
fragmede 9y ago
Which is funny, because Google Amp was a piece of shit when it was called the Digg toolbar and users hated it, and it was even worse as the Alexa browser toolbar spyware, and users really hated it. Amp has some pretty dressing but amounts to the same thing.
- untog 9y ago
  Huh? How is AMP in any way similar to a browser toolbar? I think you've misunderstood what it does.
  - klfasdf77 9y ago
    The Digg toolbar hijacked the content and offered it via it's own short URL: digg.com/randomnonsense So even if one typed www.google.com and shared the page, it would be re-wrapped into a digg.com URL
int_19h 9y ago
As a user, I like the "fast" part, but I absolutely hate the user experience. I haven't quite figured out how Back works when you're in the "AMP experience", but it's definitely not how it's supposed to work in a browser.
- notatoad 9y ago
  it takes you back. it's the same thing the back button does in every website in every browser. what do you expect it to do?
  - int_19h 9y ago
    Not if you have opened the article from the carousel (when you can swipe left/right between articles related to the topic you searched for). In that case, Back doesn't bring you back to the previous article - it closes the current article, and brings back the search results page.
bernardlunn 9y ago
Tragedy of the commons. Like saying polluting is ok.

by ender7 9y ago

akras14 9y ago

Hence the request to make it optional, with it being on by default. >It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.

cgag 9y ago

I hate them because they suck not because open internet.

cgag 9y ago

I hate them because they suck not because open internet.

baconner 9y ago

Your hypothetical there assumes that AMP actually works well. My experience is it's got painful usability issues at least on android chrome. The worst one I see all the time is scrolling down to actually read the AMP page frequently results in the page closing, returning you to results. Fast is good, but at least it ought to be a good user experience. I used to use google news a lot, but i totally abandoned it after constant frustrating experiences with AMP. Plus most of the amp-ified pages don't seem significantly faster than the original page. I'm not seeing the utility for users, just for google.

imchillyb 9y ago
Perhaps it's your device @baconner? I'm using an LG V20 device, with Chrome mobile, and I see a significant improvement with AMP'd pages over normal sites. So-much-so that I dread going to non-amped pages as they are slow and the ads are horrifically annoying. I guess this is why anecdotal evidence is not as heavily weighed as a thoroughly tested and evidenced study. YMMV I <3 AMP
- baconner 9y ago
  To be fair I also use a VPN a lot of the time with adblocking. That does speed up a lot of high ad sites. Bugwise though I've had the same issues over a couple of different phones.
- snovv_crash 9y ago
  I use Firefox mobile with uBlock Origin, and the internet is fast for me without using any AMP pages. YMMV.
dingo_bat 9y ago
Although AMP is not a performance beast by any measure, your experience is coloured because you're using Chrome on Android. Google news works pretty well on Samsung browser. It still annoys me that I can't see the link to the actual website but that's it.
- freehunter 9y ago
  So you're saying that Google's official browser is slow on their official web technology on their official mobile platform? And Samsung, who is well known for their software quality issues, is a better choice?
  - jdironman 9y ago
    Well, he is speaking from experience. While this isn't the place for speaking from experience but more about enabling a better experience for all users he cannot deny what he has observed. However the user above us had the correct answer with filing a bug / legitimate issue with devs. That is the only way to increase usability for all users.

whoami_nr 9y ago

I personally don't see any major improvements in speed when using AMP. It might be marginal but too small to notice for a regular user. Another factor can be that AMP might work better on Chrome which is again Google sucking you into their ecosystem.

Aaargh20318 9y ago
I get the feeling it's aimed mainly at all the crappy bottom-of-the-barrel Android devices out there. As an iPhone user, why the hell would I care if a page is bit larger, I pull down over 500Mbit/s on wifi and over 100Mbit/s on LTE. The CPU in iPhone is so fast it's almost ridiculous. There is little difference in how fast AMP pages load compared to real web pages. Basically, Google re-invented WAP for exactly the same, dumb, reasons the original WAP was invented: their phones are too shit to use the real web.
- xiphias 9y ago
  iPhone is no better...when I was developing a web site, I bought an iPhone 4 as a testing device, and it was quite painful to use compared to my Samsung S7 Edge (and quite slow). I bought it because it was still used heavily in the user base.
  - Aaargh20318 9y ago
    An iPhone 4 is an ancient and no longer supported device, it's 7 years old, an eternity in the mobile market. You're comparing a 2010 device to a 2016 one.
    - izacus 9y ago
      People who have perfectly functional iPhones 4 deserve to use the web too. Forcing people to pay huge premium just to keep the same functionality is messed up
      - Aaargh20318 9y ago

rufius 9y ago

Lol no. AMP is a trash experience. I hate it so much.

fragmede 9y ago

Which is funny, because Google Amp was a piece of shit when it was called the Digg toolbar and users hated it, and it was even worse as the Alexa browser toolbar spyware, and users really hated it. Amp has some pretty dressing but amounts to the same thing.

untog 9y ago
Huh? How is AMP in any way similar to a browser toolbar? I think you've misunderstood what it does.
- klfasdf77 9y ago
  The Digg toolbar hijacked the content and offered it via it's own short URL: digg.com/randomnonsense So even if one typed www.google.com and shared the page, it would be re-wrapped into a digg.com URL

int_19h 9y ago

As a user, I like the "fast" part, but I absolutely hate the user experience. I haven't quite figured out how Back works when you're in the "AMP experience", but it's definitely not how it's supposed to work in a browser.

notatoad 9y ago
it takes you back. it's the same thing the back button does in every website in every browser. what do you expect it to do?
- int_19h 9y ago
  Not if you have opened the article from the carousel (when you can swipe left/right between articles related to the topic you searched for). In that case, Back doesn't bring you back to the previous article - it closes the current article, and brings back the search results page.

bernardlunn 9y ago

Tragedy of the commons. Like saying polluting is ok.