4 ms·
Good! I stand firmly against AMP and the centralisation of the web, it's a predatory move to increase Google's prevalence online, and one I will not be supporti
by ilmiont 9y ago
Good! I stand firmly against AMP and the centralisation of the web, it's a predatory move to increase Google's prevalence online, and one I will not be supporting with any of my upcoming projects.
- mondoshawan 9y agoYou remember Akamai, right? AMP is just another CDN. Back in the 90s, when Akamai was fighting to establish themselves, you'd see tons of fetches from hosts like a123.d.akamai.com on big name properties like CNN. Nowadays it's pretty much hidden, and pervasive. Google is attempting to entrench a reverse proxy cache the same way Akamai has for years. AMP is nothing new. The only difference here is that they make it obvious you're using a CDN, whereas Akamai is almost completely transparent and runs close to 80-90% of the traffic of the "open" web -- you just don't know about it.
- mkj 9y agoNo, akamai didn't change page layout/content.
- brians 9y agohttps://www.akamai.com/us/en/resources/front-end-optimization-feo.jsp https://www.akamai.com/us/en/resources/front-end-optimizatio... Opt-in by the publisher, of course.
- LunaSea 9y agoYeah but Akamai is optional. Google's CDN / cache in AMP isn't. Big difference.
- Gigablah 9y agoHow is Akamai optional for a user? If you're saying that it's optional for publishers, then your argument doesn't make sense since AMP is optional for publishers as well (I mean, the author disabled it and all).
- LunaSea 9y agoIt's not when the technology gives you an advantage in search ranking through the AMP green square in the search results and the quick answer tiles.