4 ms·

I wholly disagree as primarily a consumer. Page speeds? Good. Everything else about it? Awful. How do I share the page I'm on without sharing the amp link. It

by wrsh07 6y ago

I wholly disagree as primarily a consumer. Page speeds? Good. Everything else about it? Awful. How do I share the page I'm on without sharing the amp link. It's an extra 2 clicks and heavily obfuscated. When browsing history, if I'm expecting to see something from news org but instead see amp garbage? Human readability (for URLs but also in other contexts, like json) is a feature. Amp throws away most features of web browsing in exchange for page speed. It's a devil's bargain, and it's not even a necessary transaction. You can get fast web pages without sacrificing everything else. That last point is literally the drum that hn has been banging since amp came out. If Google wants to reward pages for being fast, then do that. Don't reward them for being amp.

crazygringo 6y ago
> How do I share the page I'm on without sharing the amp link. It's an extra 2 clicks and heavily obfuscated. What are you talking about? At least on iOS Safari, I can use the regular browser share button (1 click) and it shares the regular (non-AMP) URL. AMP also provides a share button of its own in the upper-right hand corner (also 1 click) that brings up the identical iOS share sheet, again a non-AMP URL. So sharing works perfectly at least on iOS. Zero obfuscation, zero extra clicks. Is it different on Android or something?
- lern_too_spel 6y ago
  > Is it different on Android or something? Sharing from the browser share button works correctly in mobile Chrome but not in mobile Firefox, which is my preferred browser.
- wrsh07 6y ago
  Honestly, TIL I usually prefer to share links via copy/paste vs the Android share button (it's much easier to switch to the app I was just using vs the share button, which is a bit hit or miss) -- and bizarrely copy does one thing while the share button does what I want (something I never learned because when I see that ugly url I've always clicked out and tried to use the amp link) Finally, the amp link on android/chrome is also abysmal. It's like a worse version of the default android share where you have to swipe to a more (...) menu where you can access the normal android share menu This counterintuitiveness & needing to reinvent the wheel for how to share pages (meaning change user habits) -- these are all reasons why I hate amp It just doesn't need to exist. And if you told people "from now on Google will reward pages that load more quickly" you can bet that seo seeking news organizations would make their pages faster, without amp
piyush_soni 6y ago
> You can get fast web pages without sacrificing everything else. The thing is, no one was stopping the websites from having fast pages before, but they were just not doing it. Google kind of forced them to be fast (again, it's the end result that I'm talking about, not the ways to reach there).
- nwienert 6y ago
  The thing is, you totally ignored the entire critique. They could have achieved the same thing without forcing the garbage iframe.
- wrsh07 6y ago
  Google could have forced them to be fast by using the same lightning logo if a page met speed criteria They instead pushed a proprietary page format Web pages adopted amp because of the seo carrot That carrot could have motivated page speed without the existence of amp

by wrsh07 6y ago

crazygringo 6y ago

> How do I share the page I'm on without sharing the amp link. It's an extra 2 clicks and heavily obfuscated. What are you talking about? At least on iOS Safari, I can use the regular browser share button (1 click) and it shares the regular (non-AMP) URL. AMP also provides a share button of its own in the upper-right hand corner (also 1 click) that brings up the identical iOS share sheet, again a non-AMP URL. So sharing works perfectly at least on iOS. Zero obfuscation, zero extra clicks. Is it different on Android or something?

lern_too_spel 6y ago
> Is it different on Android or something? Sharing from the browser share button works correctly in mobile Chrome but not in mobile Firefox, which is my preferred browser.
wrsh07 6y ago
Honestly, TIL I usually prefer to share links via copy/paste vs the Android share button (it's much easier to switch to the app I was just using vs the share button, which is a bit hit or miss) -- and bizarrely copy does one thing while the share button does what I want (something I never learned because when I see that ugly url I've always clicked out and tried to use the amp link) Finally, the amp link on android/chrome is also abysmal. It's like a worse version of the default android share where you have to swipe to a more (...) menu where you can access the normal android share menu This counterintuitiveness & needing to reinvent the wheel for how to share pages (meaning change user habits) -- these are all reasons why I hate amp It just doesn't need to exist. And if you told people "from now on Google will reward pages that load more quickly" you can bet that seo seeking news organizations would make their pages faster, without amp

piyush_soni 6y ago

> You can get fast web pages without sacrificing everything else. The thing is, no one was stopping the websites from having fast pages before, but they were just not doing it. Google kind of forced them to be fast (again, it's the end result that I'm talking about, not the ways to reach there).

nwienert 6y ago
The thing is, you totally ignored the entire critique. They could have achieved the same thing without forcing the garbage iframe.
wrsh07 6y ago
Google could have forced them to be fast by using the same lightning logo if a page met speed criteria They instead pushed a proprietary page format Web pages adopted amp because of the seo carrot That carrot could have motivated page speed without the existence of amp