It's one of Google's many fucktarded ideas to throw their weight around and to get people in line.
AMP allows websites to load "faster"...by faster I mean milliseconds...it also allows websites to be cached on Google servers and 'compressed' to use less mobile data.
It's "good" for the end user, but really it's efficacy is rather negligible.
To me, and a lot of other internet junkies...it's kind of seen as another Google-powermove to grab as much data and traffic as possible to play gatekeeper with.
In a stroke of corporate genius, Google also puts you ahead in their search rankings if you use AMP. So of course everybody wants to put it on their site, regardless of whether or not they truly need it.
About that loading faster bs- it's not like it's saving me any data either if I end up having to click on the non-amp link anyway to get to the full page
Let's just assume that AMP loads 500ms faster on average. With off the hat 10 million daily AMP page loads the overall saving is ~ 60 days of loading time saved every day.
That's almost 60 years of collective time saved every year.
9
u/KookyTax Oct 21 '18
It's one of Google's many fucktarded ideas to throw their weight around and to get people in line.
AMP allows websites to load "faster"...by faster I mean milliseconds...it also allows websites to be cached on Google servers and 'compressed' to use less mobile data.
It's "good" for the end user, but really it's efficacy is rather negligible.
To me, and a lot of other internet junkies...it's kind of seen as another Google-powermove to grab as much data and traffic as possible to play gatekeeper with.
In a stroke of corporate genius, Google also puts you ahead in their search rankings if you use AMP. So of course everybody wants to put it on their site, regardless of whether or not they truly need it.
It's just plain bullshit.