If it went away users would vaguely wonder why the search results links they follow are now slow loading and more ad blighted than they were recently. They love the outcome without knowing what is achieving it.
I highly doubt any user would make that connection. At best they will think that some sites put out a UI change (which is normal) at worst they will think that their internet is a bit slow for a bit and in a few days won't think about it again.
You are assuming that the normal user would assume that different websites behaving slightly differently would somehow be connected. That is assuming way too much technical knowledge on the case of an average consumer.
You are also parroting a supposed benefit when not only has cellular gotten faster, home internet, wifi, general internet infrastructure has also gotten faster and the idea that we need AMP for something to load fast is... frankly a lie.
As far as ads go... maybe? But in my experience anywhere that AMP would actually be used, I don't see this issue (and I also don't want google having more power over ads). I have an app on my phone to always redirect AMP and I don't experience any issues because of it.
Users will not care. Or notice, or think about it for more than a minute of "Oh hey, this site changed something" and move on with their day.
Edit:
The fact that google had to strong-arm publishes into this (when if it did what it claimed, publishes should love it!). Has continued to refuse to give users the ability to disable it. Shows that users don't care. Google knows that if they gave the option, people would disable it because someone told them they should. But the unfortunate truth is we don't know for 100% certainty how users feel because no choice was given.
Why would publishers love it? They're the ones who created the problem of bloated slow loading pages in the first place. The whole thing is a workaround for their inability to make decent webpages...
We don't need AMP for web pages to load quickly. But people weren't (aren't) making web pages that load quickly, and people prefer web pages that load quickly, so there was an opening for AMP to fill. It would be better if there were no opening for it to begin with, but publishers predominantly chose (choose) to make crappy bloated webpages.
It would also be (far) better for
a similar but open solution not controlled by a single company to gain mindshare, but I don't see what would incentivize such a thing.
So all in all I conclude that AMP is better than the prior status quo, and I prefer to click on AMP links when I have a choice (especially on mobile).
> If it went away users would vaguely wonder why the search results links they follow are now slow loading and more ad blighted than they were recently. They love the outcome without knowing what is achieving it.
They'd be pretty happy that the webpages then landed on y'know, worked.
You are assuming that the normal user would assume that different websites behaving slightly differently would somehow be connected. That is assuming way too much technical knowledge on the case of an average consumer.
You are also parroting a supposed benefit when not only has cellular gotten faster, home internet, wifi, general internet infrastructure has also gotten faster and the idea that we need AMP for something to load fast is... frankly a lie.
As far as ads go... maybe? But in my experience anywhere that AMP would actually be used, I don't see this issue (and I also don't want google having more power over ads). I have an app on my phone to always redirect AMP and I don't experience any issues because of it.
Users will not care. Or notice, or think about it for more than a minute of "Oh hey, this site changed something" and move on with their day.
Edit:
The fact that google had to strong-arm publishes into this (when if it did what it claimed, publishes should love it!). Has continued to refuse to give users the ability to disable it. Shows that users don't care. Google knows that if they gave the option, people would disable it because someone told them they should. But the unfortunate truth is we don't know for 100% certainty how users feel because no choice was given.