One way I like to think about google is currently doing is ask myself:
"What if Apple/Microsoft/Facebook had all the prowess Google currently has?"
It can be easy to forget how well a company the size of Google is trying to remain as positive as much as possible.
I'm not here to defend Google (I hate them for some of their tactics), but looking at the bigger picture helps.
At this point it's completely irrelevant what AMP is actually solving, giving any more control to Google is just bad.
In parts of the world where individuals sit behind 500+ mbps fibre connections, AMP might seem irrelevant, and rather come off as a monopolistic approach by a data-hogging company.
To the ordinary internet user in a remote somewhere, AMP is relevant.
If they actually wanted to help they could easily fund committees and open standards for most of the stuff they do
Unlocked Android OS. They provide an OS that allows vendors to lock-out users and install permanent questionable software on the devices.
How? Have we forgotten Android is open source? Android is Open Source. How can Google police God-knows-how-many vendors using the Open Source of Android to prevent lock-ins?
Just how? I hear many blaming Google every single minute of the trash vendors do with Android Open Source. The thing, is, again, I repeat, Open Source. If a vendor decides to place a million bloatware on the phone, that's none of Google's business. It would be foolish on Google's part to even dream of making it their business.
Want a bloatless Android to use? Into a non-locked in Android OS? Why not try the many options out there that come with almost barebone Android?
Imagine what would happen if iOS is made Open Source for 1 second?
Disconnection of profiles across google services, protecting user privacy.
Again, how? I should have 1 google account, but 16 different profiles? And how does having a multitude of different profiles across google services 'protecting of user privacy'?
The last I checked, I'm onto over 20 different Google services (yeah, I've sold my life to them, sad me), and I can't think for a second, having to manage all those services independently.
So I change my name on Maps, and then my 19+ remaining profiles show my previous name?
How is this supposed to work in the first place, and how would that protect user privacy? Is rather having a centralized profile where you can manage all the various aspect of the services what would improve privacy?
I'm not sure how "Disconnection of profiles across google services" would in any way = "protecting user privacy"
Stopping tracking your every move on your phone with location services.
What happened to users taking control of their devices? Going into settings to flip off high accuracy GPS isn't enough?
As users, why do we always offset the part we can play onto the service providers?
I don't turn off my GPS, then I want Google to stop tracking my every move? How does that work?
As evil as Google might seem to be, with their seemingly self-centered approach, I wouldn't want whatever they do today, to have been in the hands of Apple or Facebook.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
One way I like to think about google is currently doing is ask myself:
"What if Apple/Microsoft/Facebook had all the prowess Google currently has?"
It can be easy to forget how well a company the size of Google is trying to remain as positive as much as possible.
I'm not here to defend Google (I hate them for some of their tactics), but looking at the bigger picture helps.
In parts of the world where individuals sit behind 500+ mbps fibre connections, AMP might seem irrelevant, and rather come off as a monopolistic approach by a data-hogging company.
To the ordinary internet user in a remote somewhere, AMP is relevant.
As if they don't already do this?
Considering some of the points you raised here (dev.to/mortoray/comment/309j), I keep wondering.
How? Have we forgotten Android is open source? Android is Open Source. How can Google police God-knows-how-many vendors using the Open Source of Android to prevent lock-ins?
Just how? I hear many blaming Google every single minute of the trash vendors do with Android Open Source. The thing, is, again, I repeat, Open Source. If a vendor decides to place a million bloatware on the phone, that's none of Google's business. It would be foolish on Google's part to even dream of making it their business.
Want a bloatless Android to use? Into a non-locked in Android OS? Why not try the many options out there that come with almost barebone Android?
Imagine what would happen if iOS is made Open Source for 1 second?
Again, how? I should have 1 google account, but 16 different profiles? And how does having a multitude of different profiles across google services 'protecting of user privacy'?
The last I checked, I'm onto over 20 different Google services (yeah, I've sold my life to them, sad me), and I can't think for a second, having to manage all those services independently.
So I change my name on Maps, and then my 19+ remaining profiles show my previous name?
How is this supposed to work in the first place, and how would that protect user privacy? Is rather having a centralized profile where you can manage all the various aspect of the services what would improve privacy?
I'm not sure how "Disconnection of profiles across google services" would in any way = "protecting user privacy"
What happened to users taking control of their devices? Going into settings to flip off high accuracy GPS isn't enough?
As users, why do we always offset the part we can play onto the service providers?
I don't turn off my GPS, then I want Google to stop tracking my every move? How does that work?
As evil as Google might seem to be, with their seemingly self-centered approach, I wouldn't want whatever they do today, to have been in the hands of Apple or Facebook.