I would like to know what the average user thinks of AMP. We techies are ok with a uncontrolled freewheeling web, but a lot of people have a problem with that and hate that experience.
Malte Ubl (@Cramforce) would like to have a word with you.
But even if there are websites where the AMP version would be preferred (and I'm sure there are), that's not the whole story. In order for a user to make an informed decision about their preference, they have to take into account the whole cost -- not just the immediately observable part of it. That includes all future ramifications of an AMP-centric future, many of which would definitely not be good for the user.
So while I'm sure there are examples of egregiously bloated websites that would be superficially improved by AMP, I'm not convinced the user comes out with a net benefit.
I am often surprised when I browse on the laptops or mobiles of friends and family, and see totally ad-infested, slow-loading crap. It is a different web than I have.
When I say "Dude, what's going on here? I can improve your life. Let me install FF and an ad-blocker" they just shrug and say "Nah, its okay like this". Aboslutely frustrating.
From my experience, the average user does not understand the web nor AMP, but once the difference is explained, they almost always react negatively to AMP. Of course, there is definitely some bias involved here since it's usually me doing the explaining.
An AMP or regular page is an implementation detail that mostly us care about.