26 ms·

Airbnb is putting AMP at the core of its digital strategy

115 points by cpeterso 9y ago

pavel_lishin 9y ago
"Boys, gather up the eggs, have I got a basket for us!"
- libria 9y ago
  AMP is just a subset of HTML/javascript so they're not out on a limb if AMP disappers.
  - aphextron 9y ago
    >AMP is just a subset of HTML/javascript so they're not out on a limb if AMP disappers. That's not all there is to it, though. There's a whole Polymer-esque AMP JS framework that Google is pushing people to use [0]. While it does some great things, it's still absolutely an attempt at vendor lockin. [0] https://www.ampproject.org/docs/reference/components https://www.ampproject.org/docs/reference/components
    - untog 9y ago
      In fairness, Polymer is a Web Components-esque JS framework, so it is, in the end, targeting an open standard. I'm still not a fan of it, but...
  - callahad 9y ago
    It really, really isn't. For one, your own JavaScript isn't allowed (though they just announced that they're working on that), for two, AMP is a not a subset of HTML, as it adds tons of Custom Elements in addition to the whitelist of standard HTML tags, and lastly, they're at least out on a small limb if it goes away, as you're not allowed to self-host the AMP framework and still be valid AMP. There are many redeeming qualities to AMP, including its significant technical merit, but the subset claim is neither accurate nor the strongest argument.
dmitriid 9y ago
Meanwhile in December AirBnB's HTML page weighed in at over 1MB. Of just HTML: https://twitter.com/nikitonsky/status/939097733260038144 https://twitter.com/nikitonsky/status/939097733260038144 They shouldn't put AMP at the core of their strategy. It's enough to just make proper pages (the page referenced in the link is now much slimmer)
- api 9y ago
  But marketing wants this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and ...
  - TurningCanadian 9y ago
    Give the marketing team a performance budget to work within?
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
- halfteatree 9y ago
  I mean, embedding data into html looks bad, but is it really worse than loading a script separately? This is basically the "bundling" on the HTML layer, i.e., what HTTP/2 should offer. For a website like Airbnb, 1.9M for total asset size doesn't seem bad...
  - treve 9y ago
    I got 8MB for the entire site (homepage, from empty cache). I don't think it's that bad either. The webapp does also 'feel' bloated to me, but it might not be due to total transferred bytes, but rather just the JS heavy frontend.
untog 9y ago
Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb. The reason to use AMP is SEO. If you want literally any benefit other than SEO, just improve the performance on your own mobile site. Then you won't have to jump through weird hoops and come up with entirely new "magic carpet" user flows, because you'll actually control your own content on your own site. The talk attached to this Medium piece was given at "TechSEO Boost", but the article itself dances around ever using the term. So we're left to wonder why AirBnb is very worried about being able to link users to their native app, while they apparently don't care at all about whether users are using their web site. It's because of SEO. > the Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP) project, which has some powerful backers including Google > It would be fair to say that Google has been a very vocal supporter of the initiative from day one. These are really weird ways of describing a Google-owned, Google-pushed initiative.
- toomuchtodo 9y ago
  > The reason to use AMP is SEO. If you want literally any benefit other than SEO, just improve the performance on your own mobile site. It's a growth hack to get better organic search traffic, with user experience performance improvements a secondary concern.
  - untog 9y ago
    My point is that you wouldn't know it from the article. It makes it sound like you should implement AMP for user experience and fast loading, despite then going on to detail the ways in which it compromises user experience. When a big company like Airbnb jumps on a technology bandwagon people notice, and write-ups like this influence the choices other organisations make. They could at least just be upfront about the reasons why they're doing it.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - ocdtrekkie 9y ago
      The reason Airbnb is not likely to be upfront about why they're doing it, is it's very unlikely that Airbnb wants to admit they're probably being paid for it or getting some other form of special consideration for writing this. The search benefit isn't even a long-term one: Either AMP will go away for some reason at some point, or, if the status quo is maintained, everyone will be forced to use AMP by Google's search monopoly, rendering it a null benefit to your rankings as everyone else transitions to it.
JoshMnem 9y ago
It's a terrible idea. AMP is a shameful attack on the open WWW. AMP is slower than hand-optimized HTML. AMP pages are often hosted on a 3rd party domain, even sending the wrong referrers to other sites. AMP is also extremely slow on desktop browsers that have certain ad-blockers installed. If 3rd party scripts don't load, the user gets a blank page for 8 seconds. (Try it if you don't believe me.)
- Spivak 9y ago
  * But it's faster than HTML that people use in practice. * Sure, but do you really care that users are using your physical servers or just that the content is out there? It's a trade that I think a lot of businesses would be happy to make. Who wouldn't want essentially free hosting complete with ad revenue? * Do you think ad funded sites care about people who have a worse user experience with an ad blocker. I don't disagree that AMP is bad for the open web, but it's not bad for the people publishing with it.
  - JoshMnem 9y ago
    If someone is going to implement AMP templates they have the ability to implement better HTML in the templates instead. It does matter that users are on your physical servers. It affects referrers and copied/pasted links, which affect brand recognition and SEO. Using AMP also puts a giant back button on your site that takes users back to the search engine results rather than deeper into your site. Many people do not want that. I don't think that airbnb is an ad-funded site. Even if it were, do ad-funded sites really want a 3rd party dictating how they monetize their sites? If so, I doubt that they are thinking through it all the way and considering the long-term effects.
    - canadianwriter 9y ago
      "If someone is going to implement AMP templates they have the ability to implement better HTML in the templates instead." Not someone. A corporation. Think bigger companies, not tiny one person sites. Just because it's possible doesn't mean they can win the sprint cycle.
dzink 9y ago
Step 1. AirBnB, VRBO and others list inventory for free. Step 2. Google starts offering rentals straight from search and forgets you have a site. Remember Facebook News anyone?
- vthallam 9y ago
  Exactly this! Google Flights is already a thing and the hotel search works great too. Once they have enough people directly searching from Google, they can either charge Airbnb or hotels to send traffic or build its own Airbnb backend and roll it as Google product.
- tomascot 9y ago
  Google is doing this with everything. In the end they will answer almost every query directly, except when you are looking for a site. Even then, they could try to identify what do you want from that site (if you use chrome or the site has google analytics) and show you the info you are lloking for.
gaius 9y ago
Two dodgy companies, made for each other. Maybe Uber could get involved somehow .
sitkack 9y ago
Airbnb doesn't know how to make a front-end that can talk to a back-end w/o breaking. Seriously, use it on a connection with packet loss and it will corrupt your application state so hard you will have to switch browsers to resolve it.
- guitarbill 9y ago
  Not to mention their website just plainly sucks, and was clearly an afterthought. Maybe nobody there could believe people wouldn’t want to install yet another app?
  - rafi_kamal 9y ago
    Interesting, I use AirBnB quite a lot and like their UI (I primarily use the desktop version, though). Why do you think their website sucks?
    - _red 9y ago
      Its an all around bad design. Not really a UI problem, its more of a state / workflow problem. Its levels upon levels. You keep having to drill 2 or 3 levels down, but then lose the context of the higher levels when you do. For instance, when you finally click on a property, this now opens a new tab. But now this property tab doesn't show a map...so if you are looking at 4 properties, you now need to keep the "main map" page open so you can manually cross-reference what properties are where. Effectively its impossible to get anything done with having 3 or 4 tabs open all dedicated to Airbnb. Love the service and the places I wind up finding, but their website really needs a re-think.
- kilroy123 9y ago
  It's very buggy on a desktop for sure.
- asveikau 9y ago
  Some time ago I was surprised that https://airbnb.com https://airbnb.com was serving me a revoked certificate. Then still when I checked a few months later. I furrowed a brow and thought to myself, "this, from a company with lots of hype and accolades". But OK, certificate revocation is not very well implemented around the industry, so maybe just an honest mistake.
jstewartmobile 9y ago
And that great race-to-the-bottom we call the web gently accelerates. Its trajectory, unchanged.
pablo-massa 9y ago
I have mixed feelings about AMP. One thing that always I feel on discussions about AMP is that is something that is going to happen, and is not, is happening right now, regular users are already having better and great experiences on mobile. That is the good side that I see of the project, Google was capable of do that in about 2 years. Pushing development best practices seems that was not enough, companies stills doing awful job on the performance side of their websites. AMP was like force companies to do other version of their websites with limitations that prevent doing stupid development and design decisions like js/css/html bloat, repeat components and more. You like that beautiful readable and organized Medium post?, is a good experience right?, well, it happens that the editor has a lot of limitations like only let you choose 3 text hierarchies, 3 image sizes, one font family, no colors, etc. For me AMP is something like that but in the development side instead on the visual design side. The terrifying part is that Google has created a parallel version of the web who fill their needs, a stripped down version[1] that feels like an authoritarian power blocks the freedom that the "native" web always has, also happens that this parallel version has some advantages and people are loving it. I see AMP as a temporary patch of the web. [1] https://ampbyexample.com https://ampbyexample.com
pg_bot 9y ago
I'm still shocked that anyone treats AMP with anything other than contempt. Is it really that difficult to make your site faster? Blaming your crappy html/js/css on marketing demands doesn't pass the smell test for me. IMO too many engineers pass the buck instead of owning up to bad decisions and correcting them.
- lazyjones 9y ago
  > I'm still shocked that anyone treats AMP with anything other than contempt. The more people treat it with contempt, the higher its value becomes for the others due to its only advantage, getting a SEO boost from Google. Also, marketing people (in some cases for good reason) already feel locked-in by and fully dependent on Google with >50% of their traffic coming from there.
stevew20 9y ago
To those who think this could be a good idea: do some research on AMP, then reevaluate your opinion. To my mind, AMP is a content reassociation tool, not a content distribution speedup tool. It succeeds in both, was designed as the former, and marketed as the latter. If Airbnb goes through with this folly, how exactly will they retain their business? Google will be essentially filtering every booking that goes to Airbnb, controlling both the customer and the listings. I see most comments on HN are in agreement with this view, and those that aren't don't seem to meet the quality level normal to HN. Makes you wonder who exactly made this decision...
- fastball 9y ago
  I made my personal website AMP compatible. Took me an hour in total (including research) and in the future if I don't want the google amp overhead I can remove a single line of code and my website will run fine. FUD.
  - dingo_bat 9y ago
    Or you could optimize your website and not depend on google at all forever.
    - fastball 9y ago
      The only thinking I'm depending on Google for is some post-loading. Otherwise AMP is just optimizations, most of them are just thinks I hadn't thought of before trying to make my site AMP compatible (things like only using hardware accelerated animations and such).
ggggtez 9y ago
There's a lot of AMP hate on hacker news and I've never quite understood why. They talk about it destroying the open web, as if the existence of Facebook, Google, Amazon didn't already make a big dent in it. Really? AMP is the cross you're going to die on? I just don't get it.
- idle_processor 9y ago
  There's enough animosity out there to spread around between AMP and other centralizing forces. Calling one out doesn't implicitly give the others a pass. Facebook (especially Instant Articles and video rehosting[0]) is awful for very similar reasons. What's pernicious about AMP & co. is seizure of control and immense abuse potential that comes with preventing visitors from hitting content creators' domains. --- [0] http://splitsider.com/2018/02/how-facebook-is-killing-comedy/ http://splitsider.com/2018/02/how-facebook-is-killing-comedy...
- throwawaymaroon 9y ago
  It's the same people pounding their fists on the walls closing in around us
tyfon 9y ago
So I have seen a lot of discussion about AMP but I have yet to see it in the wild using my phone. Is it something I have to turn on or is it restricted to certain countries? I browse from Norway.
- itslennysfault 9y ago
  Consider yourself lucky. I'm guessing it's because of location. A quick search for "Google Amp" had this result near the top (an Amp version of a tech crunch article). If you open it on a computer it just redirects to techcrunch.com, but on a phone it should stay on the google domain and have a little top bar added (unless it redirects you past due to region?). https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch.com/2018/02/13/amp-for-email-is-a-terrible-idea/amp/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch.com/2018/02/13/amp-f...
  - tyfon 9y ago
    I just opened it on my phone and I was redireced to techcrunch.com without any overlays or whatnot. Maybe they are afraid that EU will smack them down for anti-competitive behaviour.
    - clan 9y ago
      In Denmark I get the AMP results. The link posted above will show a prominent "techcrunch.com" at the top - but the URL is still Google. I am not redirected to their own site.
      - dingo_bat 9y ago
        You can click on the link icon beside the "techcrunch.com" text at the top and the actual link shows up. You can click it and go to the actual page.
dingo_bat 9y ago
I don't see any performance measurements before or after. Are these presented in the video? If not, this is a monumental waste of time in my opinion.

115 points by cpeterso 9y ago

pavel_lishin 9y ago

"Boys, gather up the eggs, have I got a basket for us!"

libria 9y ago
AMP is just a subset of HTML/javascript so they're not out on a limb if AMP disappers.
- aphextron 9y ago
  >AMP is just a subset of HTML/javascript so they're not out on a limb if AMP disappers. That's not all there is to it, though. There's a whole Polymer-esque AMP JS framework that Google is pushing people to use [0]. While it does some great things, it's still absolutely an attempt at vendor lockin. [0] https://www.ampproject.org/docs/reference/components https://www.ampproject.org/docs/reference/components
  - untog 9y ago
    In fairness, Polymer is a Web Components-esque JS framework, so it is, in the end, targeting an open standard. I'm still not a fan of it, but...
- callahad 9y ago
  It really, really isn't. For one, your own JavaScript isn't allowed (though they just announced that they're working on that), for two, AMP is a not a subset of HTML, as it adds tons of Custom Elements in addition to the whitelist of standard HTML tags, and lastly, they're at least out on a small limb if it goes away, as you're not allowed to self-host the AMP framework and still be valid AMP. There are many redeeming qualities to AMP, including its significant technical merit, but the subset claim is neither accurate nor the strongest argument.

dmitriid 9y ago

Meanwhile in December AirBnB's HTML page weighed in at over 1MB. Of just HTML: https://twitter.com/nikitonsky/status/939097733260038144 https://twitter.com/nikitonsky/status/939097733260038144 They shouldn't put AMP at the core of their strategy. It's enough to just make proper pages (the page referenced in the link is now much slimmer)

api 9y ago
But marketing wants this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and ...
- TurningCanadian 9y ago
  Give the marketing team a performance budget to work within?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
halfteatree 9y ago
I mean, embedding data into html looks bad, but is it really worse than loading a script separately? This is basically the "bundling" on the HTML layer, i.e., what HTTP/2 should offer. For a website like Airbnb, 1.9M for total asset size doesn't seem bad...
- treve 9y ago
  I got 8MB for the entire site (homepage, from empty cache). I don't think it's that bad either. The webapp does also 'feel' bloated to me, but it might not be due to total transferred bytes, but rather just the JS heavy frontend.

untog 9y ago

Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb. The reason to use AMP is SEO. If you want literally any benefit other than SEO, just improve the performance on your own mobile site. Then you won't have to jump through weird hoops and come up with entirely new "magic carpet" user flows, because you'll actually control your own content on your own site. The talk attached to this Medium piece was given at "TechSEO Boost", but the article itself dances around ever using the term. So we're left to wonder why AirBnb is very worried about being able to link users to their native app, while they apparently don't care at all about whether users are using their web site. It's because of SEO. > the Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP) project, which has some powerful backers including Google > It would be fair to say that Google has been a very vocal supporter of the initiative from day one. These are really weird ways of describing a Google-owned, Google-pushed initiative.

toomuchtodo 9y ago
> The reason to use AMP is SEO. If you want literally any benefit other than SEO, just improve the performance on your own mobile site. It's a growth hack to get better organic search traffic, with user experience performance improvements a secondary concern.
- untog 9y ago
  My point is that you wouldn't know it from the article. It makes it sound like you should implement AMP for user experience and fast loading, despite then going on to detail the ways in which it compromises user experience. When a big company like Airbnb jumps on a technology bandwagon people notice, and write-ups like this influence the choices other organisations make. They could at least just be upfront about the reasons why they're doing it.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - ocdtrekkie 9y ago
    The reason Airbnb is not likely to be upfront about why they're doing it, is it's very unlikely that Airbnb wants to admit they're probably being paid for it or getting some other form of special consideration for writing this. The search benefit isn't even a long-term one: Either AMP will go away for some reason at some point, or, if the status quo is maintained, everyone will be forced to use AMP by Google's search monopoly, rendering it a null benefit to your rankings as everyone else transitions to it.

JoshMnem 9y ago

It's a terrible idea. AMP is a shameful attack on the open WWW. AMP is slower than hand-optimized HTML. AMP pages are often hosted on a 3rd party domain, even sending the wrong referrers to other sites. AMP is also extremely slow on desktop browsers that have certain ad-blockers installed. If 3rd party scripts don't load, the user gets a blank page for 8 seconds. (Try it if you don't believe me.)

Spivak 9y ago
* But it's faster than HTML that people use in practice. * Sure, but do you really care that users are using your physical servers or just that the content is out there? It's a trade that I think a lot of businesses would be happy to make. Who wouldn't want essentially free hosting complete with ad revenue? * Do you think ad funded sites care about people who have a worse user experience with an ad blocker. I don't disagree that AMP is bad for the open web, but it's not bad for the people publishing with it.
- JoshMnem 9y ago
  If someone is going to implement AMP templates they have the ability to implement better HTML in the templates instead. It does matter that users are on your physical servers. It affects referrers and copied/pasted links, which affect brand recognition and SEO. Using AMP also puts a giant back button on your site that takes users back to the search engine results rather than deeper into your site. Many people do not want that. I don't think that airbnb is an ad-funded site. Even if it were, do ad-funded sites really want a 3rd party dictating how they monetize their sites? If so, I doubt that they are thinking through it all the way and considering the long-term effects.
  - canadianwriter 9y ago
    "If someone is going to implement AMP templates they have the ability to implement better HTML in the templates instead." Not someone. A corporation. Think bigger companies, not tiny one person sites. Just because it's possible doesn't mean they can win the sprint cycle.

dzink 9y ago

Step 1. AirBnB, VRBO and others list inventory for free. Step 2. Google starts offering rentals straight from search and forgets you have a site. Remember Facebook News anyone?

vthallam 9y ago
Exactly this! Google Flights is already a thing and the hotel search works great too. Once they have enough people directly searching from Google, they can either charge Airbnb or hotels to send traffic or build its own Airbnb backend and roll it as Google product.
tomascot 9y ago
Google is doing this with everything. In the end they will answer almost every query directly, except when you are looking for a site. Even then, they could try to identify what do you want from that site (if you use chrome or the site has google analytics) and show you the info you are lloking for.

gaius 9y ago

Two dodgy companies, made for each other. Maybe Uber could get involved somehow .

sitkack 9y ago

Airbnb doesn't know how to make a front-end that can talk to a back-end w/o breaking. Seriously, use it on a connection with packet loss and it will corrupt your application state so hard you will have to switch browsers to resolve it.

guitarbill 9y ago
Not to mention their website just plainly sucks, and was clearly an afterthought. Maybe nobody there could believe people wouldn’t want to install yet another app?
- rafi_kamal 9y ago
  Interesting, I use AirBnB quite a lot and like their UI (I primarily use the desktop version, though). Why do you think their website sucks?
  - _red 9y ago
    Its an all around bad design. Not really a UI problem, its more of a state / workflow problem. Its levels upon levels. You keep having to drill 2 or 3 levels down, but then lose the context of the higher levels when you do. For instance, when you finally click on a property, this now opens a new tab. But now this property tab doesn't show a map...so if you are looking at 4 properties, you now need to keep the "main map" page open so you can manually cross-reference what properties are where. Effectively its impossible to get anything done with having 3 or 4 tabs open all dedicated to Airbnb. Love the service and the places I wind up finding, but their website really needs a re-think.
kilroy123 9y ago
It's very buggy on a desktop for sure.
asveikau 9y ago
Some time ago I was surprised that https://airbnb.com https://airbnb.com was serving me a revoked certificate. Then still when I checked a few months later. I furrowed a brow and thought to myself, "this, from a company with lots of hype and accolades". But OK, certificate revocation is not very well implemented around the industry, so maybe just an honest mistake.

jstewartmobile 9y ago

And that great race-to-the-bottom we call the web gently accelerates. Its trajectory, unchanged.

pablo-massa 9y ago

I have mixed feelings about AMP. One thing that always I feel on discussions about AMP is that is something that is going to happen, and is not, is happening right now, regular users are already having better and great experiences on mobile. That is the good side that I see of the project, Google was capable of do that in about 2 years. Pushing development best practices seems that was not enough, companies stills doing awful job on the performance side of their websites. AMP was like force companies to do other version of their websites with limitations that prevent doing stupid development and design decisions like js/css/html bloat, repeat components and more. You like that beautiful readable and organized Medium post?, is a good experience right?, well, it happens that the editor has a lot of limitations like only let you choose 3 text hierarchies, 3 image sizes, one font family, no colors, etc. For me AMP is something like that but in the development side instead on the visual design side. The terrifying part is that Google has created a parallel version of the web who fill their needs, a stripped down version[1] that feels like an authoritarian power blocks the freedom that the "native" web always has, also happens that this parallel version has some advantages and people are loving it. I see AMP as a temporary patch of the web. [1] https://ampbyexample.com https://ampbyexample.com

pg_bot 9y ago

I'm still shocked that anyone treats AMP with anything other than contempt. Is it really that difficult to make your site faster? Blaming your crappy html/js/css on marketing demands doesn't pass the smell test for me. IMO too many engineers pass the buck instead of owning up to bad decisions and correcting them.

lazyjones 9y ago
> I'm still shocked that anyone treats AMP with anything other than contempt. The more people treat it with contempt, the higher its value becomes for the others due to its only advantage, getting a SEO boost from Google. Also, marketing people (in some cases for good reason) already feel locked-in by and fully dependent on Google with >50% of their traffic coming from there.

stevew20 9y ago

To those who think this could be a good idea: do some research on AMP, then reevaluate your opinion. To my mind, AMP is a content reassociation tool, not a content distribution speedup tool. It succeeds in both, was designed as the former, and marketed as the latter. If Airbnb goes through with this folly, how exactly will they retain their business? Google will be essentially filtering every booking that goes to Airbnb, controlling both the customer and the listings. I see most comments on HN are in agreement with this view, and those that aren't don't seem to meet the quality level normal to HN. Makes you wonder who exactly made this decision...

fastball 9y ago
I made my personal website AMP compatible. Took me an hour in total (including research) and in the future if I don't want the google amp overhead I can remove a single line of code and my website will run fine. FUD.
- dingo_bat 9y ago
  Or you could optimize your website and not depend on google at all forever.
  - fastball 9y ago
    The only thinking I'm depending on Google for is some post-loading. Otherwise AMP is just optimizations, most of them are just thinks I hadn't thought of before trying to make my site AMP compatible (things like only using hardware accelerated animations and such).

ggggtez 9y ago

There's a lot of AMP hate on hacker news and I've never quite understood why. They talk about it destroying the open web, as if the existence of Facebook, Google, Amazon didn't already make a big dent in it. Really? AMP is the cross you're going to die on? I just don't get it.

idle_processor 9y ago
There's enough animosity out there to spread around between AMP and other centralizing forces. Calling one out doesn't implicitly give the others a pass. Facebook (especially Instant Articles and video rehosting[0]) is awful for very similar reasons. What's pernicious about AMP & co. is seizure of control and immense abuse potential that comes with preventing visitors from hitting content creators' domains. --- [0] http://splitsider.com/2018/02/how-facebook-is-killing-comedy/ http://splitsider.com/2018/02/how-facebook-is-killing-comedy...
throwawaymaroon 9y ago
It's the same people pounding their fists on the walls closing in around us

tyfon 9y ago

So I have seen a lot of discussion about AMP but I have yet to see it in the wild using my phone. Is it something I have to turn on or is it restricted to certain countries? I browse from Norway.

itslennysfault 9y ago
Consider yourself lucky. I'm guessing it's because of location. A quick search for "Google Amp" had this result near the top (an Amp version of a tech crunch article). If you open it on a computer it just redirects to techcrunch.com, but on a phone it should stay on the google domain and have a little top bar added (unless it redirects you past due to region?). https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch.com/2018/02/13/amp-for-email-is-a-terrible-idea/amp/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/techcrunch.com/2018/02/13/amp-f...
- tyfon 9y ago
  I just opened it on my phone and I was redireced to techcrunch.com without any overlays or whatnot. Maybe they are afraid that EU will smack them down for anti-competitive behaviour.
  - clan 9y ago
    In Denmark I get the AMP results. The link posted above will show a prominent "techcrunch.com" at the top - but the URL is still Google. I am not redirected to their own site.
    - dingo_bat 9y ago
      You can click on the link icon beside the "techcrunch.com" text at the top and the actual link shows up. You can click it and go to the actual page.

dingo_bat 9y ago

I don't see any performance measurements before or after. Are these presented in the video? If not, this is a monumental waste of time in my opinion.