3 ms·

If sites were "just fixing the garbage" Google wouldn't have had a reasonable reason for rolling out AMP. I presume to some extent AMP was intended to be like

If sites were "just fixing the garbage" Google wouldn't have had a reasonable reason for rolling out AMP. I presume to some extent AMP was intended to be like Google Fiber. That is a kick in the pants to get others to up their game. It didn't work out that way. The truth is too many sites are done with an all-about-the-brand mindest. And users are a distant second in the priority list. I'm not sure what the answer is. Sure, obviously, it's not AMP. But we still need something. Users - which is all of us - are being abused.

jacquesm 4y ago
They didn't have a good reason. They could have achieved everything and more that they said they wanted to get out of AMP by simply penalizing slow sites. It was just another power grab, and publishers went with it because AMP sites were given priority in the SERPs. Anyway, this has been talked about in many threads over 100's of comments.
- chiefalchemist 4y ago
  > They could have achieved everything and more that they said they wanted to get out of AMP by simply penalizing slow sites. It's not that simple. If the slow sites have better content and/or Google's customers (i.e., the people searching) expect those sites then Google has to deliver, or at least try. Keep in mind, it's also possible those slow site were spending ad money. Like it or not, Google can't intentionally piss them off. I'm not saying AMP was an ideal solution. Only that it was smarter than nothing. Nothing wasn't an option.