Ugh, why does nobody ever point out that AMP and Google displaying AMP are 2 different things? Yes, Google is a huge sponsor in the AMP world but they aren't the only ones involved.
AMP itself isn't so bad- asynchronous Javascript (not no script as the article suggests) and it is still valid HTML- it just has extra properties on tags (just how Angular does).
AMP is cancer. I go to a search engine to find content, not your URL-obscuring crappy implementation that I can't even readily share without opening up the URL and dissecting what I originally wanted from it. It's 2017, my phone has a decent quad core and 1080p screen... I don't need your gimped "mobile" version and I don't want you locking me into your platform every time I try and make a search.
It's absolutely baffling how anyone at google thought this was a good idea. I mean really, how do you mess something so simple up this bad?
The user experience is terrible, the implementation is terrible, the fundamental technical idea is terrible... it's gotta go back.
AMP itself isn't so bad- asynchronous Javascript (not no script as the article suggests) and it is still valid HTML- it just has extra properties on tags (just how Angular does).