5 ms·
If by full experience do they mean locking my browser up with JavaScript? A lot of these sites really deserve AMP, the normal viewing experience is awful.
by amiga-workbench 9y ago
If by full experience do they mean locking my browser up with JavaScript?
A lot of these sites really deserve AMP, the normal viewing experience is awful.
- m-p-3 9y agoSome do, but it should nonetheless be easy for the reader to go back to the non-AMP version of they wish.
- jacquesm 9y agoIf there is one thing that is reliant on JS it is AMP.
- maxencecornet 9y ago>If there is one thing that is reliant on JS it is AMP. ...? AMP literally remove JS scripts from the served page..
- TeMPOraL 9y agoBy replacing them with AMP-specific scripts that are required for the page to show.
- amiga-workbench 9y agoYes, but its lightweight enough to not have my browser stutter while scrolling, and continue scrolling for several seconds after I stop. I cannot say the same for most news websites.
- CaptSpify 9y agoThe problem that AMP is solving is very real. The issue is that AMP is solving it in the worst way possible. Instead of using this as a ploy to force traffic to stay within Google's ecosystem, Google should encourage sites to just slim down their excessive pages.
- ttctciyf 9y agoIt's real for some, but not an issue for others. Google's ill-intent is evident from their continued lack of interest in providing a user-controllable setting to turn it on or off, despite strenuous multiple complaints going back to almost the inception of the technology.
- matz1 9y agoThat is publisher problem, as reader I don't care if traffic has to stay within Google's ecosystem.
- CaptSpify 9y agoYou should. Google already has too much control, and they are already abusing it. Additionally, they are the ones encouraging sites to become what they are today.