11 ms·

I like that Google's pushing for simplified pages. This is a good hedge against FB Instant Articles and the like. What I don't understand is why they cache the

by e1ven 9y ago

I like that Google's pushing for simplified pages. This is a good hedge against FB Instant Articles and the like. What I don't understand is why they cache the page themselves, and make that the requested version. It would seem like any cached page from a CDN would be just as quick.

jacquesm 9y ago
Because it changes the relationship in a very important way. It makes Google the point of contact and the supplier of the page a mere 'information provider' rather than that Google is a source of traffic and the website a property with traffic of its own.
gregable 9y ago
The main reason Google caches the pages (when a user comes from Google search) is so that the page can be preloaded by the browser before the user even clicks. This preloading is part of the reason that the experience is so fast. If Google preloaded the page from a non-google server, there would be a few problems. The most important one is that it would violate the user's privacy. That server would have in it's logs a request from a user that didn't click on the article, and could intuit information about the user's searching behavior from that request. Less importantly, without the page being served from Google's cache, there is no way to guarantee it's actually a valid AMP page. The only thing Google knows is that it was valid AMP the last time it was crawled, which could be days ago.
- jacquesm 9y ago
  > This preloading is part of the reason that the experience is so fast. And a waste of bandwidth if the user never clicks.
  - JumpCrisscross 9y ago
    I'd bet users (in the America) who are (a) valuable to advertisers or (b) likely to purchase newspaper subscriptions don't care about bandwidth usage.
    - retox 9y ago
      That just leaves another 7.8 billion of us...
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- nailer 9y ago
  > If Google preloaded the page from a non-google server, there would be a few problems. The most important one is that it would violate the user's privacy. That's one problem. > without the page being served from Google's cache, there is no way to guarantee it's actually a valid AMP page Yes there is. You can validate pages as AMP on any CDN. You just can't have any benefit unless they're hosted on Google CDN.
manigandham 9y ago
The biggest unsaid reason is they now own all the data. The AMP website becomes just another page on google.com - giving them direct access to know who you are and what you're reading with 1st party data rights.

by e1ven 9y ago

jacquesm 9y ago

Because it changes the relationship in a very important way. It makes Google the point of contact and the supplier of the page a mere 'information provider' rather than that Google is a source of traffic and the website a property with traffic of its own.

gregable 9y ago

The main reason Google caches the pages (when a user comes from Google search) is so that the page can be preloaded by the browser before the user even clicks. This preloading is part of the reason that the experience is so fast. If Google preloaded the page from a non-google server, there would be a few problems. The most important one is that it would violate the user's privacy. That server would have in it's logs a request from a user that didn't click on the article, and could intuit information about the user's searching behavior from that request. Less importantly, without the page being served from Google's cache, there is no way to guarantee it's actually a valid AMP page. The only thing Google knows is that it was valid AMP the last time it was crawled, which could be days ago.

jacquesm 9y ago
> This preloading is part of the reason that the experience is so fast. And a waste of bandwidth if the user never clicks.
- JumpCrisscross 9y ago
  I'd bet users (in the America) who are (a) valuable to advertisers or (b) likely to purchase newspaper subscriptions don't care about bandwidth usage.
  - retox 9y ago
    That just leaves another 7.8 billion of us...
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
nailer 9y ago
> If Google preloaded the page from a non-google server, there would be a few problems. The most important one is that it would violate the user's privacy. That's one problem. > without the page being served from Google's cache, there is no way to guarantee it's actually a valid AMP page Yes there is. You can validate pages as AMP on any CDN. You just can't have any benefit unless they're hosted on Google CDN.

manigandham 9y ago

The biggest unsaid reason is they now own all the data. The AMP website becomes just another page on google.com - giving them direct access to know who you are and what you're reading with 1st party data rights.