Re:AMP: the missing controversy
by lern_too_spel on Saturday February 24, 2018 @10:27PM
(#16456942)
I want instantly loaded web pages now, not in 5 years when the standard is ready and Apple has finished dragging its heels and implemented it in its browsers, allowing publishers to finally use it.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
That attitude is what allowed Internet Explorer to become the dominant browser. What are you going to do when Google gets bored of supporting Chrome and disbands the team, leaving your web pages tied to a stagnating browser?
Re:AMP: the missing controversy
by lern_too_spel on Saturday February 24, 2018 @11:30PM
(#16457135)
> What are you going to do when Google gets bored of supporting Chrome and disbands the team, leaving your web pages tied to a stagnating browser?
The whole point is that AMP works on all major browsers as they exist today. Waiting for a new standard and then waiting for Apple to implement it is a non-starter.
Sure, just like Google Earth works on any browser, or Hangouts, or ...
Google's always only supporting competing software just as much as absolutely necessary
Re:AMP: the missing controversy
by lern_too_spel on Sunday February 25, 2018 @11:09AM
(#16459554)
Google might make web apps that work in only one browser, but publishers won't publish in a format that supports only one browser. That's why Microsoft, Baidu, Yahoo Japan, etc. also have AMP caches.
On the other hand, using the web package standard as the ancestor suggests would currently trap you to Google.