Google wants websites to adopt AMP as the default approach to building webpages. Tell them no.

guest · Sep 9, 2018

Google wants websites to adopt AMP as the default approach to building webpages. Tell them no.
September 5, 2018
https://www.polemicdigital.com/google-amp-go-to-hell/

Basically, Google has forced websites – specifically news publishers – to create AMP versions of their articles. [...]
And due to the popularity of mobile search compared to desktop search, visibility in Google’s mobile search results is a must for publishers that want to survive in this era of diminishing revenue and fierce online competition for eyeballs.

So AMP is being kept alive artificially. AMP survives not because of its merits as a project, but because Google forces websites to either adopt AMP or forego large amounts of potential traffic.
The Google-Shaped Web
All the articles published on Google’s developer website are intended to ensure the chaotic, messy web becomes more like a clean, easy-to-understand web. In other words, a Google-shaped web. This is a battle Google has been fighting for decades.

Websites built entirely in AMP are a total wet dream for Google. [...] An AMPified web makes Google’s life so much easier. [...]
As a side benefit, it also allows Google full control over content monetisation. No more rogue ad networks, no more malicious ads, all monetisation approved and regulated by Google.
Click to expand...

guest · Sep 19, 2018

Google is giving up some control of the AMP format
September 18, 2018
https://www.theverge.com/2018/9/18/...n-source-committee-governance-instant-article

[...] the company has stridently pushed back on the idea that it was a Google-specific project. Instead, executives said that it was a part of the open web, with open-source contributions both from Google employees and non-Googlers [...]

That message didn’t really resonate with the web community, which has largely seen it as (at best) a Google project and (at worst) an attempt to co-opt the entire web with a Google-controlled format.

Now, Google is announcing that it intends to give up some control of how the code behind AMP is managed. It plans to move the AMP Project to a “new governance model,” which is to say that decisions about the code will be made by a committee that includes non-Googlers. Until now, final decisions about AMP’s code have been made by Malte Ubl, the tech lead for the AMP Project at Google.

The plan is to create a Technical Steering Committee, an Advisory Committee, and also Working Groups. Ubl says the structure was inspired by how the Node.js project is run. Ubl also says that the group is “exploring moving AMP to a foundation in the future.”
Click to expand...

guest · Jul 4, 2020

Google's AMP, the Canonical Web, and the Importance of Web Standards
July 2, 2020
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/07/googles-amp-canonical-web-and-importance-web-standards-0

Have you ever clicked on a link after googling something, only to find that Google didn’t take you to the actual webpage but to some weird Google-fied version of it? Instead of the web address being the source of the article, it still says “google” in the address bar on your phone?
That’s what’s known as Google Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP), and now Google has announced that AMP has graduated from the OpenJS Foundation Incubation Program.

But instead of a standard starting with the web community, a giant company is coming to the community after they’ve already built a large part of the mobile web and are asking for a rubber stamp. Web community discussion should be the first step of making web standards, and not just a last-minute hurdle for Google to clear.
Click to expand...

Pushing AMP: how did a new “standard” take over?
News publishers were among the first to adopt AMP. Google even partnered with a major CMS (content management system), WordPress, to further promote AMP.

[...] some publishers adopted AMP because they thought it would improve SEO [...] However, this argument has been disputed by Google, and they maintain that performance is prioritized [...] we can only trust these statements at their word.
The AMP project was more closed off in terms of control in the beginning of it’s launch despite the fact it promoted itself as an open source project.
Click to expand...

At this point in time with the AMP project, Google can’t retroactively release the control it had in AMP’s adoption. And we can’t go back to a pre-AMP web to start over. The discussions about whether the AMP project should be removed, or discouraged for a different framework, have long passed.
Whether or not users can opt-out of AMP has been decided in many corners of the web.

However, the open web shouldn’t be weathered by multiple lessons learned on power and control from big tech companies that obtusely need to re-learn accountability with each new endeavor.
Click to expand...

guest · Dec 18, 2020

I have resigned from the Google AMP Advisory Committee
December 18, 2020
https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2020/12/i-have-resigned-from-the-google-amp-advisory-committee/

I have loved working with the AC. They are a team of brilliant individuals who are all committed to trying to make AMP better, and I’m sorry to leave them.

The stated goal of the AMP AC is to “make AMP a great web citizen.”
I am concerned that – despite the hard work of the AC – Google has limited interest in that goal.

The AC has encouraged AMP to think more about user needs – rather than Google’s needs.
Click to expand...

Google’s thesis is that the mobile-web is dying and people prefer to use apps – therefore making the web faster and more app-like will retain users. Google don’t publish data about this, so I can’t directly criticise their motives. But I do not think AMP, in its current implementation, helps make the web better.
I remain convinced that AMP is poorly implemented, hostile to the interests of both users and publishers, and a proprietary & unnecessary incursion into the open web.
Click to expand...

guest · Dec 21, 2020

Ignore AMP
December 21, 2020
https://meiert.com/en/blog/ignore-amp/

In 2018, my recommendation was to avoid AMP, to use AMP for the most relevant pages, or to use AMP only.
In 2020—the year I predicted AMP to be dead—my recommendation is to ignore it, because AMP largely appears meaningless now.

This is AMP’s “decent boilerplate.” Don’t use it. Don’t use AMP.
There are many problems with AMP. They are very different, and they include: [...]
Click to expand...

This is biased, and somewhat hostile. I know. But there’s little positive to say about AMP when it comes to practical web development, meaning real use on real sites.
Click to expand...

guest · Jun 30, 2021

Good news: Google no longer requires publishers to use the AMP format. Bad news: What replaces it might be worse
Introducing 'Core Web Vitals'
June 28, 2021
https://www.theregister.com/2021/06/28/google_amp_core_web_vitals/

Google stopped prioritising Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP) format in its Top News carousel last month. This means website owners no longer need to publish an extra set of pages written in the AMP format. Instead sites need to meet what Google calls "Core Web Vitals."

This sounds like great news. As a long-time critic of Google AMP, I wish I could say that Google AMP is over and done with, but I'm not convinced.
As I wrote years ago when it launched, Google's AMP is bad – bad in a potentially web-destroying way. It's bad for how the web is built, it's bad for publishers of credible online content, and it's bad for consumers of that content. Google AMP is only good for one party: Google.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, the same can be said of Core Web Vitals.

Regardless of motivation, the fact remains that the AMP developers produced something that is bad for the open web ecosystem because it destroys three sacrosanct elements of the web: the URL, the open web standard of HTML, and the decentralisation of the web.
The URL is destroyed because when you visit an AMP page you visit a cached URL. Share that URL and the people who visit it will also visit the Google cache, not the publisher's URL. There is no web when that happens.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, there are problems with AMP's replacement as well. And those problems go right back to what was wrong with AMP in the first place: Google is in charge of it.
As web developer Ethan Marcotte points out:

"While the shift to Core Web Vitals is a step in the right direction, it also means that Google alone determines what a 'great page experience' means."
Click to expand...

guest · Jul 24, 2021

The AMP symbol is disappearing from Google search results
Google is finally done shoving AMP into everyone's face
July 23, 2021
https://www.androidpolice.com/2021/07/23/the-amp-symbol-is-disappearing-from-google-search-results/

Google really did everything it could to push its disliked Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP) project that promises faster pages on mobile but ended up just making life more complicated for web developers and users alike. Now, five years after first showing the AMP lightning bolt next to search results to denote how fast they're supposed to be, Google has stopped drawing this distinction between AMP and regular pages in Search.

The change is slowly rolling out as part of Google's latest changes to page ranking in its search engine. Google announced back in April that it will no longer force web developers to create AMP pages to rank better in search, with regular websites slated to show up in the news carousel which was previously reserved for AMP sites only.
Click to expand...

Overall, this change is much overdue. Nobody ever truly loved AMP websites.
We can only hope that Google will further deemphasize AMP on mobile and will instead use its resources to promote the usage of better performing HTML and JavaScript technologies.
Click to expand...

guest · Nov 19, 2021

Twitter no longer opens the AMP version of articles on Android, iOS
November 18, 2021
https://9to5google.com/2021/11/18/twitter-amp/

Last year, Google announced that Search’s Top Stories carousel will no longer require a website to adopt Accelerated Mobile Pages in order to appear. The move away from AMP continues as Twitter for Android and iOS now just open the regular version of mobile webpages.

Twitter (via Search Engine Land) quietly updated its “Publish faster articles with AMP” developer documentation with a “We’re in the process of discontinuing support for this feature” notice. The company originally described the capability as allowing for “fast-loading, beautiful, high-performing mobile web experiences,” so that “people read more of your content through Twitter.”

Twitter supports AMP in our mobile clients. When you publish a page with a linked AMP edition, we will present the best available version of your article to users.
Click to expand...

AMP support “will be fully retired in Q4 of 2021,” and that already looks to be widely implemented today. The Android and iOS apps just load the full webpage with normal responsive accommodations.

For enthusiasts, this move is a nice change and comes as developers on iOS have created extensions to get rid of AMP links and redirect to the full site. Many were annoyed with the URL formatting, while most AMP content did not have feature parity with the full site version.
Click to expand...

Log in or Sign up

Google wants websites to adopt AMP as the default approach to building webpages. Tell them no.

guest Guest

guest Guest

guest Guest

guest Guest

guest Guest

guest Guest

guest Guest

guest Guest

Log in or Sign up

Google wants websites to adopt AMP as the default approach to building webpages. Tell them no.

guest Guest

guest Guest

guest Guest

guest Guest

guest Guest

guest Guest

guest Guest

guest Guest

Useful Searches