Hacker News Reader

Comment by Sargos | Hacker News Reader

Not AMP per se but just how Apple make sweeping changes by fiat without soliciting feedback that affect how standard technologies are used throughout the web. This is just another move they've made that will force whole industries to adapt for no reason other than Apple wanted to do it.

View on HN

Google created it to consolidate control of content on their platform to get people to get used to a specific UI provided by Google. There are other companies that hold caches, but the design and implementation is essentially chosen by Google (note that the fact that the AMP privacy policy just leads to the Google privacy policy). I can completely understand why Apple would want to get rid of it -- it adds a Google UI to the article that otherwise wouldn't have it and it isn't necessary to see the content.

Edit: clarified about AMP usage and Google's involvement.

> The only company that I know of that uses AMP is Google

Google and Micorosft (Bing) have caches. I think Twitter does to (they definitely use AMP). Lots of other social media and other platforms use and highlight AMP content, and I think there are a couple other big players with caches, too.

It's definitely not just Google.

I'll edit it to say that Google is the gatekeeper, not the only ones that hold caches.

thats not true. amp is a collection of best practices to speed up the web!

Amp doesn't bring anything new to the table in terms of best practices, what is new is agglomerating even more online content under Google's control via caching. Lightweight page design never became impossible, it's simply that most websites couldn't care less about investing work into improvements.

It is? So how do I get the advantages in Google search (being ranked in the carousel right above the top result) without running the official JS from Google’s CDN?

I can’t even use the JS from a local CDN.

Do you know what AMP is? How it is used?

In this case Apple is literally helping you and publishers not get screwed. I think you need to read up on AMP, because seeing the words 'standard technologies' and 'AMP' in the same comment in that way is extremely awkward.

> In this case Apple is literally helping you and publishers not get screwed.

I'm not getting screwed by AMP, and neither, AFAICT, are publishers.

My comment is focused on Apple's behavior and not AMP specifically. I do know how AMP works.

I don't like how Apple unilaterally changes the way that things work (even if that means AMP) without regard to any other parties.

What about when google unilaterally change the way lots of websites work by forcing AMP down my throat?

They have the biggest search engine by far. They have the most popular mobile OS by far.

But it's Apple you're mad at?

While that can be a bad thing, in this specific case it is curtailing a similar abusive overreach by google, and IMO a good thing.

You can use exactly the same arguement you made against AMP, I don't see negating AMP as some great evil.

Yea it's really rare for me to interpret a situation as Apple making a pro-consumer move and Google being anti-consumer[1], but here we are.

[1] or more charitably appealing to a subset of users at high cost to a non-trivial fractions of other users

Reply on news.ycombinator.com