Hacker News Reader

Comment by refulgentis | Hacker News Reader

If only I had a nickel for every online commenter who swore up and down that no one else implements or supports AMP, and then uses that to justify claiming Google is trying to fork the web...all major platforms pursuing end-arounds mobile ad garbage, _except_ Facebook and Apple, use and contribute to AMP.

Anyways, I'm just happy to finally have usable web results on mobile.

View on HN

Who conceived of AMP Stories? Who conceived of AMP in Email? What do they even have to do with "Accelerated Mobile Pages"?

My irritation with AMP is also driven by the fact it's not usable for me. Reader mode is often broken in iOS which is a particularly egregious regression. URLs are obviously broken. And sometimes sites can't even get text-on-a-page right with their AMP versions: https://twitter.com/lukestevens/status/963910460796936192

AMP makes it faster (maybe) but the experience is worse. I copy URLs a lot to share, and a fucking AMP link doesn't even navigate and requires a different means of finding the actual URL... garbage.

People's participation in AMP isn't voluntary. They have to implement and support AMP, or they get penalized by Google Search.

Bing, Cloudfare.

They sure exist! But Google's search has like 4/5 of the market.

If you optimize for the bottom line (as a business should), what will you pay most attention to?

I think his point was that Bing implemented AMP voluntarily, without being pressured as you suggest publishers were: https://blogs.bing.com/search/September-2016/bing-app-joins-...

Bing's primary pressure is a need to compete performance wise with Google. The fact that the implementation is bad doesn't mean they don't need to match on the metrics.

To play devil’s advocate: the reason Bing can implement their own AMP cache and conform to AMP pages so easily is because AMP is an open project.

Nobody said the problem was AMP's code being available. The issue is the way Google is forcing their framework's dominance using their search monopoly.

Does Bing host the pages on their own servers? Hosting your content on their servers could be a motivation for joining. If Google is going to appify your websites on their own servers, then Microsoft doesn't want to be left out. They can both put giant back buttons on your website that take you back to the search engine results instead of deeper into the website.

And Facebook only isn't participating because they are instead doing the same thing in a less-open way with Instant Articles.

> finally have usable web results on mobile.

Weird, I've been reading web results on mobile for over a decade.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com