> AMP pages are fast to load (so fast to crawl), easy to understand (thanks to mandatory structured data), and devoid of any unwanted clutter or mess (as that breaks the standard).<p>Oh, how horrible it would be if the whole web were fast to load, easy to understand and devoid of unwanted clutter or mess.<p>I hate AMP because it makes my web experience slower and worse - lately it seems like Chrome on android has taken to loading broken "offline" versions of any suggested pages, making me refresh to read anything, and whenever a search takes me to reddit I have to edit the url to get a version that respects my page settings (and, strangely enough, loads a lot faster than the AMP version). But I don't see the chaos of the current web as inherently virtuous; encouraging web pages to load faster and be easier to read is absolutely something Google should be doing, and I'll certainly favour a search engine that prioritises fast, easy-to-read pages over one that doesn't.
AMP is fundamentally broken.<p>I've said this before, I'll say it again: companies are not people. Once a company reaches a certain size, the rule is to <i>assume bad faith</i>. Always.
On the one hand - yeah, AMP can go to hell. It's a massive overreach and, as pointed out, is getting awfully close to an actual attempt to rewrite the Web.<p>On the other hand, we probably wouldn't be in this situation if website owners didn't try to bog down their own websites with tens of MB of sheer garbage. Trimming the fat isn't a priority for website owners, so Google is trying to make it their priority. As long as sites think it's OK to lard up their sites with trackers, video ads, and all manner of nonsense, AMP will continue to be attractive to the end user.
Some browsers like Kiwi browser on android now give you the setting to redirect AMP websites to their normal URL. This is a very good feature that I always have enabled[1].<p>More browsers should add this feature to fight this non-sense. I think for FF, Chrome extensions like this must already exist.<p>[1] <a href="https://kiwibrowser.com/features/" rel="nofollow">https://kiwibrowser.com/features/</a>
[2] <a href="https://kiwibrowser.com/wp-content/uploads/elementor/thumbs/Features-AMP-oe27675i2rt74nfeiknst6242i0tazqpow6qjdg6ww.png" rel="nofollow">https://kiwibrowser.com/wp-content/uploads/elementor/thumbs/...</a>
What's going to happen to all the url's if Google ever decides to announce they are getting rid of AMP? So annoying that you copy the link and it grabs some google url, so it's a matter of time the internet gets littered with those redirecting urls.
AMP solves problems that existed 10-20 years ago. Not today. Websites load fast enough (when using an ad blocker). Sure that Google doesn't like that.
AMP messes up data science analytics too. Now we have a mix of the following formats,<p><pre><code> google.com/amp/s/...
amp.domain.com/...
domain.com/amp/...
domain.com/.../amp
</code></pre>
I guess it could even be a query parameter although I have not yet seen this. Does anyone know if there is an "AMP url normalizer" library or write-up?
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.
Does the WebExtensions standard permit us to release extensions that bypass AMP URLs when they are visited by the browser?<p>Could someone please charge me money for that extension on the iOS and macOS App Stores?<p>I'm not expecting this to be maintained for free, I don't want to install a full-blown ad blocker, I just want a single-task de-AMP-er that just de-AMPs.<p>(Yes, I use Firefox, but I want to de-AMP <i>all</i> iOS and macOS webviews, not just the ones that load in Firefox.)
Just request the desktop site or use DuckDuckGo. Problem solved.<p>Luckily Google still serves the desktop site to my phone. Twitch won’t do it even if I spoof my user agent because they want you to use their shitty app. So, I just stopped using Twitch on my phone or tablet. Problem solved again.
I had never heard about it before reading the article, looked it up, and I agree with the article. This is yet another wretched idea like jsx. Kill it before it lays eggs!
Side question: is it still considered "cool" to work at Google?<p>I'm asking since the answer in case of Facebook seems to have shifted.
I agree that Amp can go to hell, but I'm very unsympathetic to these particular complaints:<p>> <i>“The canonical page allows users to view and add comments, but the AMP article does not. This is often considered missing content by users.”</i><p>> <i>“The canonical URL allows users to share content directly to diverse social media platforms. This feature is missing on the AMP page.”</i><p>> <i>“The canonical page contains a media carousel that is missing or broken in the AMP version of the page.”</i><p>As far as I'm concerned, all that stuff is trash. I use ublock origin cosmetic filters to remove all that crap on every news site I read.