Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?
-
Google wants to use AMP to make email more interactive | TechCrunch
Google's AMP format has always been about making mobile pages render faster. But Google is now taking it beyond posts, recipes and how-to articles. First,
“With AMP for Email, it’s easy for information in email messages to be dynamic, up-to-date and actionable.”
No. Just fucking no.
-
Looks like they're bringing to Gmail what Inbox had had for a while. Sounds good.
-
I don't want the content of my emails to change, ever. That's what literally every other form of digital communication is for. Emails are for archival and "I'll get to it later" communication.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
Looks like they're bringing to Gmail what Inbox had had for a while. Sounds good.
WHAT? I've been using Inbox for quite a while and I've never had it allow an email to run scripts or include a form in an email.
-
@ben_lubar said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@pie_flavor said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
Looks like they're bringing to Gmail what Inbox had had for a while. Sounds good.
WHAT? I've been using Inbox for quite a while and I've never had it allow an email to run scripts or include a form in an email.
Oh, I didn't read TFA. I thought it was referring to its special rendering of particular emails.
-
Looking at https://www.ampproject.org/learn/overview/ :
AMP pages are built with 3 core components:
- AMP HTML is basically HTML extended with custom AMP properties. The simplest AMP HTML file looks like this:
<!doctype html> <html ⚡> <head> <meta charset="utf-8"> <link rel="canonical" href="hello-world.html"> <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width,minimum-scale=1,initial-scale=1"> <style amp-boilerplate>body{-webkit-animation:-amp-start 8s steps(1,end) 0s 1 normal both;-moz-animation:-amp-start 8s steps(1,end) 0s 1 normal both;-ms-animation:-amp-start 8s steps(1,end) 0s 1 normal both;animation:-amp-start 8s steps(1,end) 0s 1 normal both}@-webkit-keyframes -amp-start{from{visibility:hidden}to{visibility:visible}}@-moz-keyframes -amp-start{from{visibility:hidden}to{visibility:visible}}@-ms-keyframes -amp-start{from{visibility:hidden}to{visibility:visible}}@-o-keyframes -amp-start{from{visibility:hidden}to{visibility:visible}}@keyframes -amp-start{from{visibility:hidden}to{visibility:visible}}</style><noscript><style amp-boilerplate>body{-webkit-animation:none;-moz-animation:none;-ms-animation:none;animation:none}</style></noscript> <script async src="https://cdn.ampproject.org/v0.js"></script> </head> <body>Hello World!</body> </html>Is it the little
⚡attribute that makes the HTML ⚡ go fast ⚡ ?- The AMP JS library ensures the fast rendering of AMP HTML pages.
"To make your HTML render fast, add this JavaScript framework"? I'm not following.
The Google AMP Cache is a proxy-based content delivery network for delivering all valid AMP documents. It fetches AMP HTML pages, caches them, and improves page performance automatically.
Riiiight.
When using the Google AMP Cache, the document, all JS files and all images load from the same origin that is using HTTP 2.0 for maximum efficiency.
That's about the only thing I see providing real benefit.
-
Minimal AMPHTML Email according to https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/issues/13457 :
<!doctype html> <html ⚡4email> <!-- `amp4email` also accepted. --> <head> <meta charset="utf-8"> <style amp4email-boilerplate>body{visibility:hidden}</style> <script async src="https://cdn.ampproject.org/v0.js"></script> </head> <body> Hello, world. </body> </html>Yup, there's a
⚡again.But you lost me at "email with <script>" inside it.
-
@zecc said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
<style>body{visibility:hidden}</style>So you're required to allow JavaScript to read an email?
-
@ben_lubar said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
email?
They're called apps now
-
@bb36e said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@ben_lubar said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
email?
They're called apps now
Fun fact: if you go to https://benlubar.github.io/cmv2mp4/ right now in your browser, it will download the app so you can use it offline and start up a process capable of running ffmpeg in the background, all without any input from you.
Then, it will ask permission to install the page to your home screen if you're on an Android phone, even though there is no scripting whatsoever to ask you to do that, only a
<link href="manifest.json" rel="manifest">.Additionally, because of the way the offline thing works, I can tell it to keep running scripts after you have closed the site, which is something YouTube and Twitter do already.
Remember, the only thing your computer prompted you about was the json file linked in the header. Even if you don't accept, the app is already downloaded and installed to your browser.
-
Just a reminder, my browser asked me zero times for permission to process gigabytes of video:
-
@ben_lubar said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@pie_flavor said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
Looks like they're bringing to Gmail what Inbox had had for a while. Sounds good.
WHAT? I've been using Inbox for quite a while and I've never had it allow an email to run scripts or include a form in an email.
Well, Gmail itself has allowed form submissions until the last year or so. Ever since they switched to "Every link you click on must go through Google first" mode it's been disabled though.
-
@ben_lubar said in https://benlubar.github.io/cmv2mp4/:
ffmpeg.js [FFmpeg builds ported to JavaScript]
It's as if billions of CPU cycles suddenly cried out in terror.
(Which doesn't mean that I'm not impressed by being able to do all that in the browser. But still.)
-
@zecc said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
- AMP HTML is basically HTML extended with custom AMP properties. The simplest AMP HTML file looks like this:
The simplest AMP HTML file they could come up with needs to include animation?
-
@gurth they needed something that isn't plain HTML.
-
@gurth said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@zecc said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
- AMP HTML is basically HTML extended with custom AMP properties. The simplest AMP HTML file looks like this:
The simplest AMP HTML file they could come up with needs to include animation?
That boilerplate CSS needs to be included in every AMP file so that the body can be hidden until amp.js starts up. Everything except what's inside the <body> is mandatory, and I'd say 'Hello World!' is pretty simple.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@gurth said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@zecc said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
- AMP HTML is basically HTML extended with custom AMP properties. The simplest AMP HTML file looks like this:
The simplest AMP HTML file they could come up with needs to include animation?
That boilerplate CSS needs to be included in every AMP file so that the body can be hidden until amp.js starts up. Everything except what's inside the <body> is mandatory, and I'd say 'Hello World!' is pretty simple.
So until amp.js starts up, you're looking at a blank white screen? How the fuck is that any better?
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
you're looking at a blank white screen? How the fuck is that any better?
: is that better than jellypotato?
-
@pie_flavor said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@gurth said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
The simplest AMP HTML file they could come up with needs to include animation?
That boilerplate CSS needs to be included in every AMP file so that the body can be hidden until amp.js starts up.
So …
-amp-start 8stells the animation to fire up eight seconds after AMP actually starts, and the0slater on means that the actual animation being run has a duration of zero? Still feels like they’ve bodged something together using-*-animationto me.
-
@bb36e said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@tsaukpaetra said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
you're looking at a blank white screen? How the fuck is that any better?
: is that better than jellypotato?Based on my experience with NodeBB's delayed loading on topic navigations.... maybe?
-
Thinking about AMP makes my brain hurt because it's not syntactically valid HTML.
Companies (even Google) making up their own syntax makes me cry.
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@pie_flavor said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@gurth said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@zecc said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
- AMP HTML is basically HTML extended with custom AMP properties. The simplest AMP HTML file looks like this:
The simplest AMP HTML file they could come up with needs to include animation?
That boilerplate CSS needs to be included in every AMP file so that the body can be hidden until amp.js starts up. Everything except what's inside the <body> is mandatory, and I'd say 'Hello World!' is pretty simple.
So until amp.js starts up, you're looking at a blank white screen? How the fuck is that any better?
Don't look at me, I didn't design it. All I know is that non AMP is slow, and AMP is extremely fast.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@tsaukpaetra said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@pie_flavor said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@gurth said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@zecc said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
- AMP HTML is basically HTML extended with custom AMP properties. The simplest AMP HTML file looks like this:
The simplest AMP HTML file they could come up with needs to include animation?
That boilerplate CSS needs to be included in every AMP file so that the body can be hidden until amp.js starts up. Everything except what's inside the <body> is mandatory, and I'd say 'Hello World!' is pretty simple.
So until amp.js starts up, you're looking at a blank white screen? How the fuck is that any better?
Don't look at me, I didn't design it. All I know is that non AMP is slow, and AMP is extremely fast.
I therefore challenge you to empirically validated this claim.
-
@tsaukpaetra WOMM. Thus your argument is invalid.
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
I therefore challenge you to empirically validated this claim.
Seriously? I think AMP is a bass-ackwards way of solving a shitty problem, but try loading an AMP version of a news article over 3G and compare it to some local Fox affiliate site.
Yeah, you may be able to get a faster page by stripping out almost all JS and unnecessary page elements, but news sites are solely concerned with showing you no less than three muted autoplaying videos at once on page load, so they're not going to slim their sites down unless someone forces them to.
-
@bb36e said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
try loading an AMP version of
The HTML and "amp" version should basically be identical for the comparison. Otherwise we'd be comparing discourse to NodeBB.
-
@ben_lubar said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
Fun fact: if you go to https://benlubar.github.io/cmv2mp4/ right now in your browser, it will download the app so you can use it offline and start up a process capable of running ffmpeg in the background, all without any input from you.
Thanks for the warning. Guess what site I will never, ever visit.
-
@hardwaregeek said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
Guess what site I will never, ever visit.
PornHub? I don't believe you.
-
@luhmann said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
PornHub? I don't believe you.
I was wondering if he was talking about ChatRoulette…
-
@dkf said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@luhmann said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
PornHub? I don't believe you.
I was wondering if he was talking about ChatRoulette…
I was thinking more along the lines of goatse.
Edit: I don't fucking believe it. Goatse is now a cryptocurrency.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
I don't fucking believe it. Goatse is now a cryptocurrency.
They must've seen a… gap… in the market…
-
@pie_flavor The cryptocurrency thread is
.
Also,
.supports the generation, discovery and propagation of dank memes
I don't think you know how 'dank memes' work. Also,
.Maybe I should stop looking at it now, as I have a migraine and this new fact is not exactly helping...
-
LeNewMemeNiceMayMayManCoin is a revolutionary new cryptocurrency developed entirely by /r/circlejerk. It is the first currency in history to use LeNewMemeNiceMayMayManCoinMan (a.k.a Le New Meme Nice Maymay Man, a.k.a. Unidan) as its official mascot.
-
@ben_lubar said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
Fun fact: if you go to https://benlubar.github.io/cmv2mp4/ right now in your browser, it will download the app so you can use it offline and start up a process capable of running ffmpeg in the background, all without any input from you.
........ that's called a "program".
Additionally, because of the way the offline thing works, I can tell it to keep running scripts after you have closed the site, which is something YouTube and Twitter do already.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
That boilerplate CSS needs to be included in every AMP file so that the body can be hidden until amp.js starts up.
This is utter bucking fullshit and anyone who uses this design pattern needs to be shot in the head through their ass with a very slow moving bullet.
99.99999999999999999% of the sites that do this end up being this:
- Shows all the content. Usually a bunch of sections with their headers, and the full content.
- The .js loads 15 seconds later
- Screen blanks out, then fades back in
- Now all of the header of each section are 800pt font, and the section bodies are all half a sentence with "Read More..." because they've hidden information they've ALREADY LOADED THIS ISN'T A FUCKING AJAX CALL TO LAZY LOAD THINGS.
Fuck off with that shit.
-
@bb36e said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@tsaukpaetra said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
you're looking at a blank white screen? How the fuck is that any better?
: is that better than jellypotato?Isn't one of the absolute basic rules of webdesign something like "If you don't present your audience with captive information in less than a second, most of them will click away"
I'd rather show the top of a partially rendered page than a blank screen with a pulsating logo of some stupid fucking logo designed by a CEO that makes no sense.
-
@lorne-kates It's more on the order of 'the site loads immediately all at once with no weirdness'.
-
I decided to check out the AMP site to find out some more about it, and almost straight away, I encounter weirdness. When I move my mouse pointer from right to left across the page, the Docs menu suddenly opens:
Turns out it does this the moment the pointer reaches the right edge of it, regardless of the pointer’s vertical location (as long as it’s not below where the menu is). It also happens when moving from left to right, but again, only when the pointer reaches the right edge of the menu, so it pops up and hides again almost instantly if moving slowly, and not at all if moving fast.
-
@gurth E_NO_REPRO, unless you're missing that the buttons extend all the way down to the border of that blue strip.
-
@lorne-kates said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
Isn't one of the absolute basic rules of webdesign something like "If you don't present your audience with captive information in less than a second, most of them will click away"
I think it used to be that people would wait no longer than 10 seconds for a page to load (over dial-up, so people expected long waits). Some of these "fancy" pages take longer to load than pages did in effing 1995!
-
@pie_flavor said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
the buttons extend all the way down to the border of that blue strip
-
@el_heffe said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
“With AMP for Email, it’s easy for information in email messages to be dynamic, up-to-date and actionable.”
No. Just fucking no.
...those are IMs.
-
@bb36e said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@ben_lubar said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
email?
They're called apps now
Appmails?
-
@gurth said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
almost straight away, I encounter weirdness
I notice on mobile that tapping the hamburger menu flickers the whole screen. The first time the flicker was rather long, but it's still there even now...
-
@tsaukpaetra said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@gurth said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
almost straight away, I encounter weirdness
I notice on mobile that tapping the hamburger menu flickers the whole screen. The first time the flicker was rather long, but it's still there even now...
That's because @ben_lubar is using your phone to transcode his videos.
-
@polygeekery said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@tsaukpaetra said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@gurth said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
almost straight away, I encounter weirdness
I notice on mobile that tapping the hamburger menu flickers the whole screen. The first time the flicker was rather long, but it's still there even now...
That's because @ben_lubar is using your phone to transcode his videos.
It's @ben_lubar 's version of mining in your browser. Only he forgot the part where it uploads the results for him to see.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@gurth E_NO_REPRO, unless you're missing that the buttons extend all the way down to the border of that blue strip.
I first noticed it when my mouse pointer was at about the level of the “Best practices for creating an AMP story” entry in the menu I pictured. It also only happens with this menu, not any of the others.
-
Yet another reason to avoid Gmail. I just hope other email providers have a way to disable this shit. I mean, come on. It's bad enough that Yahoo shows videos in empty mailboxes with no way to turn them off. This seems to go beyond the pale and provide Google with yet another way to steal your data to serve you ads.
-
@polygeekery said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@el_heffe said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
“With AMP for Email, it’s easy for information in email messages to be dynamic, up-to-date and actionable.”
No. Just fucking no.
...those are IMs.
.... those are .vbs attachments in Outlook Express.
-
@pie_flavor said in Google wants to make e-mail more "interactive" - what could possibley go wrong?:
@lorne-kates It's more on the order of 'the site loads immediately all at once with no weirdness'.
If by "immediately" you mean "immediately after showing a spinner for 5-10 seconds while the site loads non-immediately".
SoBrave.net
