Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I explicitly said I have no idea how AMP isn't a web framework. Are you saying that it's a CDN too? If that's problematic then fork the web framework code on GitHub and replace GCS with your own thing to make a buck.

The root problem is search engine ranking policies. Frameworks can't fix that systemically. If Google was actually downranking websites that go too far with bloat and popups then people wouldn't do it. It's not complicated. What frameworks actually do is help you "check off a box" for misguided views Google holds about things like mobile friendliness, which punish small web sites, and favor big bloated complicated ones that can afford to devote engineers to sitting around checking off boxes.



its a cdn first and a framework second.

The whole point of amp was suppose to be that google could host the amp'ed pages on their servers. They claim that by hosting it on their servers they can prefetch it from search results (they could otherwise, but it would expose details about the user and their searches to sites the user never ended up visiting) and that this would make it faster. in practice this rarely leads to more then low 2 digit MS improvements over normal because the cache servers are so overloaded dealing with all the prefetch queries. Googles CDN is not what it used to be and i've even taken the step of moving my google fonts off of google and on to my cloudflare'ed domain for my 70mil/ppm website because it made things faster.


AMP is a framework, but Google provides caching for AMP results. Basically it serves them from its search index. And people scream about this vertical integration.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: