AMP for XenForo 2.2

Will you buy it for $50 one-time fee?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.

mazzly

Well-known member
Yeah, no ads yet. It will most probably be one at the top and one at the bottom, like on the desktop version. I have just included the amp-variant to my installation. Just getting a confirmation from Mazzy to see if it's rendered via the add-on. Though the ad will make a slight impact and will still produce better results than the desktop verison.
Yes, for now will leave that up to <amp--auto-ads> that has been performing well for me on other site.

Still looking for beta testers?
You were the last to get in now in this week.. I don't want to bring in too many people yet at this stage :)
 

mazzly

Well-known member
@mazzly How's the addon coming along?
The initial version for "public use" should be released within a week or two. Just need to tie up some loose ends with how to charge for it / billing etc. (Currently building the site for it)

The beta test version is rendering AMP pages correctly and we have all (from those who have reported) seen good growth in the organic traffic.

I will report more once I launch the addon, but I'm very excited by how well it has performed for us so far :)
- Teaser: Before Google 3rd algo update I was up ~30-50% in traffic compared to previous 30 days, now I'm up 120%+ (google algo update gave me boost)
 

Aayush

Well-known member
Google falsely told publishers that adopting AMP would enhance load times, but Google employees knew that AMP only improves the [redacted] and AMP pages can actually [redacted] [redacted] [redacted]. In other words, the ostensible benefits of faster load times for cached AMP version of webpages were not true for publishers that designed their web pages for speed. Some publishers did not adopt AMP because they knew their pages actually loaded faster than AMP pages.
🤦‍♂️

Google also [redacted] of non-AMP ads by giving them artificial one second delays in order to give Google AMP a [redacted] [redacted] slows down header bidding, which Google uses to turn around and denigrate header bidding for being too slow
The way they’ve played this. This is actually the smartest thing they’ve ever done. Header bidding is slow af.
 

djbaxter

Well-known member
Google falsely told publishers that adopting AMP would enhance load times, but Google employees knew that AMP only improves the [redacted] and AMP pages can actually [redacted] [redacted] [redacted]. In other words, the ostensible benefits of faster load times for cached AMP version of webpages were not true for publishers that designed their web pages for speed. Some publishers did not adopt AMP because they knew their pages actually loaded faster than AMP pages.

Excellent point.

And beyond this, if the antitrust suits are successful (and given the mood of various governments around the world regarding Google's domination I suspect it will be successful), and Google is forced to abandon AMP in search results, it will make most of the debates about whether Xenforo should push AMP pages redundant and moot.
 

Masetrix

Well-known member
Excellent point.

And beyond this, if the antitrust suits are successful (and given the mood of various governments around the world regarding Google's domination I suspect it will be successful), and Google is forced to abandon AMP in search results, it will make most of the debates about whether Xenforo should push AMP pages redundant and moot.

However, as long as using AMP increases the speed and results of a site to a level that exceeds the cost, as long as the mobile view of my site goes from Poor to Good, I will need to use AMP.

Politics and Google will find a way, it's just a matter of price. Until then, or until XF has solved the speed problem of the mobile view in connection with GoogleAds ...
That the problem can be solved shows that the same page in the desktop view delivers excellent speed values - with the same ads
 

djbaxter

Well-known member
However, as long as using AMP increases the speed and results of a site to a level that exceeds the cost, as long as the mobile view of my site goes from Poor to Good, I will need to use AMP.

Politics and Google will find a way, it's just a matter of price. Until then, or until XF has solved the speed problem of the mobile view in connection with GoogleAds ...
That the problem can be solved shows that the same page in the desktop view delivers excellent speed values - with the same ads
Did you miss this part?

Google falsely told publishers that adopting AMP would enhance load times, but Google employees knew that AMP only improves the [redacted] and AMP pages can actually [redacted] [redacted] [redacted]. In other words, the ostensible benefits of faster load times for cached AMP version of webpages were not true for publishers that designed their web pages for speed. Some publishers did not adopt AMP because they knew their pages actually loaded faster than AMP pages.
 

Masetrix

Well-known member
Did you miss this part?
Sure, publishers that designed their web pages for speed and also use googleAds, the whole thing still in mobile view, they will no longer be of this opinion. Not so maybe if you host directly on the Google network. ;)

But this, my point of view, is about XenForo, here AMP brings enormous speed advantages where the mobile view is concerned. Incidentally, I only see it from this point of view because I like to use XF as it has many other advantages.
 

mazzly

Well-known member
Interesting article; weird redactions though.
Yes the redactions irk me a bit as well.

Anywho the lawsuit seems to be mostly related to header bidding, not about prioritizing AMP result, because they are faster.. (and yes, I read the part about the Faustian bargain)

The way they’ve played this. This is actually the smartest thing they’ve ever done. Header bidding is slow af.
Luckily there are alternative ways to serve ads apart from header bidding :) Also AdSense is not the only ad network you can use, I personally utilize Ezoic that is a 3rd party ad broker that provides the best bid from across dozens of ad networks :)

Excellent point.

And beyond this, if the antitrust suits are successful (and given the mood of various governments around the world regarding Google's domination I suspect it will be successful), and Google is forced to abandon AMP in search results, it will make most of the debates about whether Xenforo should push AMP pages redundant and moot.
Well the lawsuit seems to be mostly related to header bidding manipulation which I agree is a quite a shoddy thing to do.

The way I see it the following might happen: Google gets a relatively small fine and has to stop "slowing down" the header bidding. Then they pay that fine which will very likely not even compare to what they have earned from their shoddy practices.

Then they will continue to prioritize AMP results, as those are anyway faster. (unless you start comparing oranges to apples..)



Bottom line: It doesn't really matter what happens with AMP, as long as it isn't discontinued (which I doubt, even though it was initially a google product).

We should just focus on increasing the amount of traffic that comes in to our forums. right? or?

I know personally how much my own site(s) have grown by utilizing AMP..

But you can also discard anything I say, as I'm biased and have built an AMP add-on (which will increase your traffic, no doubt) that I will release any day now :D

All the best, and a happy new year!
 
Last edited:

eva2000

Well-known member
his is actually the smartest thing they’ve ever done. Header bidding is slow af.

Indeed, header bidding sites check their page speed waterfall and number of requests - it's crazy how much slower a page is. So I can see why Google AMP would try to eliminate that from page speed/performance perspective. Though it also has a bonus for them financially.

Though with Google also forcing more folks to focus on mobile first page speed and user experience signals, they're also inadvertently forcing folks to be more mindful of their page speed/structure too. So you have folks optimising their non-AMP pages to an extent that they can be as fast if not faster than AMP based pages. It's still a benefit to entire web in doing so. My own Xenforo is fast by Google Search Console web vital metrics even with Google Adsense and that is all optimisations I did without using AMP - just need to be mindful of how you structure your style and what styles you choose too.

One thing folks can try, is developing your web site and testing it will on a 1.6-5Mbps capped internet connection from start to finish :) If you push 4+ MB sized pages to your visitors, it will be slow regardless if you're visitor is using a slow 3G/4G connection on a slow mobile device.

1609353856717.png

Haven't tried Cloudflare's AMP Real Url yet though

1609353975008.png

What does AMP Real URL do?​

Traditionally, clicking on a search result for an AMP page takes visitors to a cached page served from google.com/amp/. AMP Real URL allows mobile browsers to show your site’s actual URL while still serving the content from Google’s AMP cache. This is accomplished through cryptographic signed exchanges. AMP Real URL only works on pages that are compatible with the AMP specification and only applies to visitors coming from Chrome on Android at this time. As the underlying technology gets adopted by more browsers, more visitors to your site will be able to view your real URL.

Showing the actual URL offers several advantages:

  • Brand fidelity - Site visitors see your brand, not Google’s, at the top of all your pages.
  • More accurate analytics - Keeping AMP and non-AMP content in the same domain facilitates more accurate analytics attribution.
  • Reduced bounce rates - Showing your actual URL may encourage users to remain on your site, instead of returning to the search results page.
  • Security - AMP Real URL uses cryptography to sign your AMP pages with a publicly verifiable certificate, ensuring no one can add, remove, or modify your content.
 

eva2000

Well-known member
vs
just retested those urls and I can see clearly that you have a lot of room for improving non-AMP style - just optimising that could have you close to your AMP results to start with

your non-AMP has more javascript alone than the entire AMP page size! ;) with almost twice the amount of javascript requests and 3x image requests to total almost 3.9x times the size of AMP page

1609355756975.png

your AMP

1609355782723.png
 
Top