Articles

It’s fair to say that AMP (Accelerated Mobile Pages) is a controversial topic among web developers.

AMP is a Google-guided technology that strips down web pages to a limited sub-set of tags to serve pages faster. It was developed as a web-based rival to native news apps from vendors like Apple.

The controversy first arose when it was clear how much influence Google had over the conventions, essentially creating a tiered Web overseen by a single entity. The clamor didn’t calm when it became clear that Google prioritized AMP pages for mobile search results. Developers were left in a difficult position: stand by best practices supporting a platform-agnostic Web, or do what’s right for their clients by building the most competitive mobile site possible.

But that was 2015, six years is a lifetime for a web technology, and things are about to change.

Hidden among the announcements about the much-delayed Core Web Vitals update — it’s finally rolling out, a year after originally planned, but don’t expect to see much impact until the end of August — is the news that Google mobile search will no longer prioritize AMP pages.

Beginning immediately (from the 17th June onwards) and completing sometime before the end of August, AMP will cease to be a factor in mobile site ranking. The AMP badge on mobile search results will disappear, and AMP is not required to have your site included on Google’s news app.

This significant move is due to the fact that the Core Web Vitals update from Google will expect the same speed and usability as AMP from non-AMP pages. Google still expects the same optimized user experience; it simply isn’t offering a cheat sheet on how to achieve it.

You can continue to use AMP, but there’s no automatic benefit to doing so, and the housekeeping involved in maintaining multiple front-ends means it’s far simpler to optimize your base site. Without a solid purpose, AMP ceases to fill a need. And just like that, one of the most controversial technologies of recent years slips away.

Featured image via Unsplash.

Source

The post Poll: Is AMP Dead, and Do We Care? first appeared on Webdesigner Depot.


Source de l’article sur Webdesignerdepot

We tend not to think about it, but the Internet has a physical dimension. It’s a complex network of wires, cables, servers, and technical odds and ends — if you really want to, you can track it down; doing so is particularly easy on small islands because there tends to be a single cable tethering the region to the wider world.

Those physical cables run all the way to your building, and although an ISP manages them, they are normally rented from public bodies as part of your national infrastructure.

Beyond the physical, international bodies govern protocols like ARP, IEEE, HTTP, NTP, FTP, and others, which control how data is transmitted through the network and keep everything playing nice.

Then, at the other end of the equation, there’s your device. It may be a phone, a tablet, a notebook, a desktop. It’s probably several of these. And because it’s your device, everything on it feels like yours. We tend to think of it as our method of accessing the Internet instead of being part of the Internet — in reality, it’s both.

On your device, the software you use to access the Internet is your browser. For 65% of people, that’s Chrome. Even if you’re reading this on Edge, it’s created with the Blink engine, an extension of Chromium, which is the basis for Chrome. In fact, almost every browser is built using a variation of Chromium, except those on Apple devices that require Apple’s own WebKit to be used instead.

Chromium is ostensibly open-source. WebKit is not, but both are geared towards their primary contributors’ business goals; neither Chromium nor WebKit will make a change that negatively impacts Alphabet or Apple.

Your browser is just a copy of a pre-compiled set of source files sat in a Git repo somewhere. You may have installed a few plugins in your browser. You may have bookmarked a few pages. You’ve probably moved it to your dock or your home screen. Those features are just nice add-ons for the GUI; what really matters is what decisions are made about how to render web technologies.

Imagine a world in which every single car used the same mid-range Ford engine. Add in a stereo, and paint it any color you like, you can even pick your own tires, but under the hood, it has to be that mid-range Ford engine. And the only justification is that it’s too much work to create an alternative.

The 2020s are going to be a time of enormous change. You can smell the panic in traditional banking sectors every time Cryptocurrency is mentioned. Real estate billionaires are desperately trying to get us back into offices we don’t want to return to. And yes, I’m sorry, but the climate crisis is looming, and it will force our hand. The values of a whole generation have been rapidly reassessed. Innovation and the potential for innovation are rife, except, ironically, on the Internet, where we’re still chugging away with the mid-range Ford engine under the hood.

The web has reached the point at which the browser engines we choose define real-world infrastructure. There’s a fork in the road: either browser engines are part of an infrastructure that should be rationalized into a single browser protocol, or alternative browser engines need to be nurtured, encouraged, and accessible by choice.

Featured image via Pexels.

Source

The post Poll: Is It Time to Merge Browser Engines Into a Browser Protocol? first appeared on Webdesigner Depot.


Source de l’article sur Webdesignerdepot