Talk:Accelerated Mobile Pages

Origin
The article should mention how and who originated AMP. It presently lacks this information. 2A02:8388:1641:4700:0:0:0:5 (talk) 05:50, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Undue weight notice
Regarding the "may lend undue weight to certain ideas, incidents, or controversies" message, that section is actually much shorter than it could be. It would be easy to include more links and opinions that are highly critical of AMP. Instead of shrinking this section, the other sections should be expanded. The article still doesn't mention how AMP works. Let99 (talk) 04:58, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Accelerated Mobile Pages. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160309204347/http://www.malikasharma.co.nz/2016/02/accelerated-mobile-pages-code-seo/ to http://www.malikasharma.co.nz/2016/02/accelerated-mobile-pages-code-seo/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:09, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Complete rewrite
I just made a complete rewrite, I think I hit all the points mentioned above, balanced things out, added some history, added a ton of cites.Trapper (talk) 18:05, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Dubious
In Technology:Performance there is quote from CNBC stating "a 387% decrease in mobile page load time". Yes, there is such a statement on the referenced page, but I can't imagine how someone calculated it. If the decrease is calculated by $$\frac{t_{original}-t_{new}}{t_{original}}*100%$$ then the only way to end up with value over 100% is by negative new time. In this case the page has already loaded before the user clicks the link if I understand it correctly. Petriri (talk) 07:53, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * The value is most likely calculated as $$\frac{t_{original}}{t_{new}}*100%$$. In this way, if the new page load times are 1.23 seconds, then the old page load times would be about 4.76 seconds. I will agree that this is a little bit of a confusing way to present the comparison (saying "a factor of 3.87" or "pages loaded 3.87 times faster" would be easier to understand), but it is not necessarily inaccurate. Jvinniec (talk) 12:48, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

The open-source claim is dubious
AMP is not "open source" because it is a specification, not a computer program. There are some open-source libraries associated with it, but that doesn't make the spec open-source. It is highly controversial whether the main goal of AMP is simply to make websites faster. See the links in the criticism section. Let99 (talk) 13:09, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

"created as a competitor"
The line "created by Google as a competitor to Facebook Instant Articles and Apple News" doesn't seem to make sense, as AMP doesn't really compete with either. It is certainly a response to a broader trend of fast-loading app content, which would include those two solutions but it is hardly a competitor for either. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdNerd (talk • contribs) 16:50, 4 June 2020 (UTC)