6 ms·

How is hijacking the domain with Google for AMP not anti-competitive? I'm surprised a class action lawsuit hasn't erupted because of that.

texasbigdata 7y ago
Also what is the technical benefit? On android it feels like a downgrade
- drusepth 7y ago
  What makes you think it feels like a downgrade? AMP results seem to, on average, load faster with a better UI to me.
  - nostrebored 7y ago
    Not sure why this is being downvoted. I encourage people to visit the non-AMP version of smaller news providers. Enjoy the popups, video ads, autoplay, bloated sizes, etc.
    - JohnFen 7y ago
      Whenever I get an AMP page, I always go to the non-AMP version, even for smaller news providers. I find the non-AMP version to be superior every single time, but I use NoScript so I don't see the popups, video ads, autoplay, etc.
    - Iolaum 7y ago
      If you use adblocking addons you don't get many of those.
      - bashinator 7y ago
        Or even reader mode - I don't mind flashing the cruft for a few seconds while I turn it on, and it's the best of all worlds. The site gets their ads (briefly) loaded, and I get a clean page to read.
- brazzledazzle 7y ago
  It seems faster for me across devices but there’s usability issues, at least on some sites/pages. In my experience “find on the page” is spotty or impossible on mobile sometimes.
Twirrim 7y ago
AMP isn't being forced on websites, they choose to enable it or not.
- jdmichal 7y ago
  That's an arguable point if not enabling it means lower rankings on search... Which is problematic when both are being offered by the same company.
- dmitriid 7y ago
  You either choose AMP and appear in the search carousel at the top of search results in the biggest search engine in the world. Or you choose not to implement AMP and you don't appear there. Your "choice".
- craftinator 7y ago
  Cake or death.
- type0 7y ago
  Yeah and death row prisoners choose their last meal /s
bduerst 7y ago
It is not a requirement for AMP. CDNs now let you roll your own domains on the AMP standard: https://blog.cloudflare.com/announcing-amp-real-url/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/announcing-amp-real-url/ Bing also uses the AMP standard: https://blogs.bing.com/Webmaster-Blog/September-2018/Introducing-Bing-AMP-viewer-and-Bing-AMP-cache https://blogs.bing.com/Webmaster-Blog/September-2018/Introdu...
- aaronm67 7y ago
  > It is not a requirement for AMP. CDNs now let you roll your own domains on the AMP standard All these certificates do is make it so Google's browser (and only Google's browser) will mask the fact you're on Google's domains if you sign the file a certain way. If anything, this shows more anti-competitive practices -- they're adding features into their browser that specifically benefit a features of their search engine.
  - bduerst 7y ago
    That's not true. CDNs also use their own non-Google domains and infrastructure for AMP hosting: https://amp.cloudflare.com/ https://amp.cloudflare.com/
    - manigandham 7y ago
      Effectively 0 AMP sites are using anything other than Google's CDN.
      - d1zzy 7y ago
        But as long as it's possible it doesn't qualify as lock-in.
        manigandham 7y ago
        You don't need lock-in to be anti-competitive. The requirement of extra work to implement AMP to get that higher search results page placement is the issue.
zweep 7y ago
Because the Department of Justice doesn't enforce anti-trust law anymore. Read the book "Chickenshit" for more details.

texasbigdata 7y ago

Also what is the technical benefit? On android it feels like a downgrade

drusepth 7y ago
What makes you think it feels like a downgrade? AMP results seem to, on average, load faster with a better UI to me.
- nostrebored 7y ago
  Not sure why this is being downvoted. I encourage people to visit the non-AMP version of smaller news providers. Enjoy the popups, video ads, autoplay, bloated sizes, etc.
  - JohnFen 7y ago
    Whenever I get an AMP page, I always go to the non-AMP version, even for smaller news providers. I find the non-AMP version to be superior every single time, but I use NoScript so I don't see the popups, video ads, autoplay, etc.
  - Iolaum 7y ago
    If you use adblocking addons you don't get many of those.
    - bashinator 7y ago
      Or even reader mode - I don't mind flashing the cruft for a few seconds while I turn it on, and it's the best of all worlds. The site gets their ads (briefly) loaded, and I get a clean page to read.
brazzledazzle 7y ago
It seems faster for me across devices but there’s usability issues, at least on some sites/pages. In my experience “find on the page” is spotty or impossible on mobile sometimes.

Twirrim 7y ago

AMP isn't being forced on websites, they choose to enable it or not.

jdmichal 7y ago
That's an arguable point if not enabling it means lower rankings on search... Which is problematic when both are being offered by the same company.
dmitriid 7y ago
You either choose AMP and appear in the search carousel at the top of search results in the biggest search engine in the world. Or you choose not to implement AMP and you don't appear there. Your "choice".
craftinator 7y ago
Cake or death.
type0 7y ago
Yeah and death row prisoners choose their last meal /s

bduerst 7y ago

It is not a requirement for AMP. CDNs now let you roll your own domains on the AMP standard: https://blog.cloudflare.com/announcing-amp-real-url/ https://blog.cloudflare.com/announcing-amp-real-url/ Bing also uses the AMP standard: https://blogs.bing.com/Webmaster-Blog/September-2018/Introducing-Bing-AMP-viewer-and-Bing-AMP-cache https://blogs.bing.com/Webmaster-Blog/September-2018/Introdu...

aaronm67 7y ago
> It is not a requirement for AMP. CDNs now let you roll your own domains on the AMP standard All these certificates do is make it so Google's browser (and only Google's browser) will mask the fact you're on Google's domains if you sign the file a certain way. If anything, this shows more anti-competitive practices -- they're adding features into their browser that specifically benefit a features of their search engine.
- bduerst 7y ago
  That's not true. CDNs also use their own non-Google domains and infrastructure for AMP hosting: https://amp.cloudflare.com/ https://amp.cloudflare.com/
  - manigandham 7y ago
    Effectively 0 AMP sites are using anything other than Google's CDN.
    - d1zzy 7y ago
      But as long as it's possible it doesn't qualify as lock-in.
      - manigandham 7y ago
        You don't need lock-in to be anti-competitive. The requirement of extra work to implement AMP to get that higher search results page placement is the issue.

zweep 7y ago

Because the Department of Justice doesn't enforce anti-trust law anymore. Read the book "Chickenshit" for more details.