Google AMP Criticism
The cluster discusses criticisms of Google's Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP), focusing on its preferential treatment in search results, content caching on Google's servers, and views of it as vendor lock-in or an attack on the open web.
Activity Over Time
Top Contributors
Keywords
Sample Comments
Google gives special preference to AMP sites in search, images and google news. Google is also removing non-AMP URLs from Google News. fucking everything is loaded from their servers nowadays
Ironic how they are criticizing Google on an AMP page
I'm 80% sure you're joking, but just in case, this is essentially what AMP does.
Nothing, OP is ignorant. Google does AMP to make webpages faster cause they make money from people clicking on links.
Shouldn't Google have done this in the first place instead of AMP?
Genuine question: what is the advantage to the end user by seeing non-AMP versions of webpages?
By the looks of it even the founders of AMP think that too... (Google doesn't promote AMP pages any more.)
True. However, I refuse to use AMP as long as it's a google vendor lock in. Also not the solution; if they can provide an amp version without all the tracking and ad JS they could just as simply provide an actual, working website as well.
Amp is supposed to reduce file size and script overhead. Its seemingly innocent goal was to speed up page loading on slower mobile devices and reduce bandwidth usage. Google then cached entire amp versions of articles on their servers and never load the original when searchers or Google news app users click to read an article. It means the authors of the articles web pages never get hit by readers. This is I think the main reason why website owners are quite upset.
Isn’t that what google AMP does as well when you block some of their garbage?