SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 55
  1. #26
    Robert Wellock silver trophybronze trophy xhtmlcoder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    A Maze of Twisty Little Passages
    Posts
    6,316
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    No EDGE, but that's partially irrelevant even if I had broadband (not EDGE) I would still disable JS.

  2. #27
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I cant get the point for doing that. Does eBay, Amazon and the most forums work without js?

  3. #28
    SitePoint Wizard Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,278
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Sitepoint works great: no ads. I also don't have to hunt for options when posting: they are all there. And clicking on someone's name brings me to their profile page, which lists all their sections... I notice when using my "lets-everything-in" browser (Chrome), posting is harder, profiles brings a retarded list up, and then user pages have all the info hidden in tabs.
    CSSCreator also doesn't need Javascript. Everything must go through the server anyway, so JS can only enhance that somehow. Front-end client scripting cannot and should not replace back-end programming and validation. You cannot trust the client, the client is always untrustworthy and tainted.
    (I recently filled out a form which, looking at the source code, uses Javascript to validate the fields. Haha. I filled it in through my server, meaning in Lynx, meaning no Javascript. I was very tempted to write "j4v45cr1ptv4l1d4t10n" for my mobile phone number just for the lawlz, since it would have been sent, but it was for a job solicitation so I didn't)

    Amazon.com works great. In fact this is why I'll order stuff from Amazon instead of some other, local stores (that and the local stores often want to force me to make an account with a password just so I can buy some cheap Logitech mouse... hello, goodbye). With Amazon, you have no idea you're missing something.

    eBay, I have no idea. Never been there.

    LinkedIn is terrible when using the keyboard in a graphical browser (this has nothing to do with Javascript: no :focus styles), but when I am reading my mail (I ssh over to the server where I use the mutt client to read my mail) when there's a notice from LinkedIn and a link for me to click, the default browser there is Elinks (which I don't like as much as Lynx, but whatever, it works). I seem to be able to do everything. They could use some skip links so I tab less, but whatever.

    In fact I do quite a bit of browsing with Lynx or Elinks over ssh. Sitepoint is fairly easy to use with those, except there's no way to tell a quote from regular text, which sucks. It's not in the content, but they seem to rely purely on styles. So you get
    Quote:
    some text
    and more text
    and more text
    where does the quote end
    and the reply begin?
    you don't know
    have to guess.

    Sites that I use that don't work without JS:
    Twitter (but EasyChirp, formerly AccessibleTwitter, can work without it, though misses some things... and they supposedly have a low or no-JS version on their mobile version)
    Slideshare (duh)
    Youtube (you'd think this was duh but I'm not talking about the videos...) no comments visible without Javascript? Can't log out without Javascript, but you can log in? What kind of idiocy is that? They may have fixed that recently, who knows... I refuse to let Google link my old YouTube account with an email they happen to have associated with me. I will not link, so no more logging into YouTube for me I guess. Too bad
    Flickr seems to kinda work but I don't do much with it except view someone's linked photos or browse their galleries
    My bank: absolutely nothing works, and in fact I can't even just turn scripts on... they seem to want to do indecent things with my browser so I use the lets-everything-in browser for banking. Yup, they rely on Javascript, the least secure thing you could possibly rely on. I don't feel too safe banking online, lawlz.

    DeviantArt can't wipe its own butt without Javascript enabled. It also stores the art across a heap of servers, and they seem to call each other with Javascript for some reason. The menu doesn't work (well).

    Blocking Javascript speeds up the loading of fat-lady-on-the-beach web sites that seem to spend an inordinate amount of time calling other servers like facebook's or some weather site's just to load a bunch of unasked-for widgets and junk. Like, with JS on, in Chrome, I'll be sitting waiting like 30 seconds for a page to load, when all I'm waiting for is someone to get a 200OK for some goofy "read about us on Facebook" iframe. Christ, if I want to connect to facebook I'll go there myself. And so anytime the weather widget (wow, great, it's telling me what the weather is... so does my window!) is sitting there trying to load, it's wasting my time.

    Anytime some bloataceous script is loading to round box corners and make a slow retarded fade-in/fade-out on stuff I'm trying to click on, I want it blocked. I didn't go to that site to ooh and aah over a 15-second fade-with-music freaking dropdown menu, did I?

    I recently found a list of article summaries about stuff like research on Agile design, XP and whatnot... there were a few usability links. One study of 300 people had them use an original site, and another group visited another version of it which had more graphical decorations, fancier menus and a bit more art.

    The participants all viewed the prettier site more favourably than the plainer functional site. They even said they thought it was easier to use. However it turned out they took longer to do tasks, did more tasks wrong, and mis-read statements on the site more with the prettier one. I thought that was funny, because how a user feels about their success on a website is almost as important as how much success they actually had... so kinda sad to see people were basically tricked into thinking they did better when they did worse.

    So I'm aware that people who get pretty shiny effects tend to think well of those things, ask for those things, and want those things. Maybe I'm aware of why I'm on a site (and maybe that's because I'm a web developer?), so I'm more conscious of get-in get-out get-done. Anything that slows me down or breaks my flow earns my scorn. Grandma, though... prolly thinks it's fine. And she's not going to turn off Javascript for anything.
    Nor do I expect her to or think she should. But if she doesn't have it for some reason, she'd damn well better be able to use my site, and if she's never been there before, she should never know the difference.

  4. #29
    SitePoint Addict EarlyOut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sector R
    Posts
    280
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    They've never gotten over the demise of the VT100.

  5. #30
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Glasspoole View Post
    you guys have problems - are you surfing with a 56k modem
    The only problem being I'm not paying for a 22mbps connection to have websites that only have about 5k of content I actually give a **** about end up behaving as slow or slower than they did fifteen years ago at 33.6kbps just because some joker thought that 500K of pretty pictures, 400k of javascript for NOTHING useful, 100k of markup and CSS bloat totaling hundreds of separate files was "cool".... practical, or again, even usable.

    Bloated slow buggy bull that frankly makes websites LESS usable -- like lightbox idiocy, like ajax tabs breaking normal browser navigation, like buggy slow webmail "applications" that are nowhere near as useful as webmail was a decade ago without that crap, consumes five times the bandwidth (sold by the code junkies to the suits as using less bandwidth -- <cosby>RIGHT</cosby>) to the point that someone who stopped using mail clients as soon as web mail was practical a decade later has stopped using crap like hotmail, Y! or gmail and has gone back to using old-school clients like Thunderbird or Opera M2.

    Now I'm NOT saying all the scripted stuff is pointless -- google maps, even Facebook are forgivable sins to a degree (most of Facebooks issues stemming from the hoops they have to jump through to get around XSS blocks)... But idiotic jquery bloat for NOTHING useful that in many cases interferes with actually using the page, or worse is just blowing tens of K on doing bytes worth of CSS' job... not so much.

    See why I call sites with megabyte plus pageloads built with 80-200 separate files "the road to failure".

    Of course, that's before we even talk what it costs the site owners to host it JHVH forbid it sees real traffic.

  6. #31
    SitePoint Wizard Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,278
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    They've never gotten over the demise of the VT100.
    Those were the days...

    YOU DAMNED KIDS GET OFF MY LAWN!

  7. #32
    SitePoint Addict EarlyOut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sector R
    Posts
    280
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    See why I call sites with megabyte plus pageloads built with 80-200 separate files "the road to failure".
    How quaint. News flash: the web has become an interactive, visual medium - film at eleven.

    But seriously, this "one size fits all" attitude is rather blinkered. If you're putting together a site designed to present various essays about the use of metaphor in └ la recherche du temps perdu, then "all content, no fancy stuff" is certainly the way to go. But if you're putting together a website for Justin Bieber fans, that approach is going to yield an "average time on site" of about 1.3s, with a 100% bounce rate.

    These days, most people aren't going to spend much time on a site that resembles a 19-Century newspaper - all text and perhaps a line drawing to illustrate the main story.

  8. #33
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The problem is that if you want to sell a product it has too look modern and fancy. If the site looks like it where 10 years old nobody stays.

    You guys are to much pc and programming freaks. You need to think like the normal user. Opening the images from a gallery all in a new tab and go through the tabs and close them? Sure its the way i do it and you guys. But let me tell you something: From all the people i know, know 3 that the mouse has a middle click. Who from the normal users know that you can click the wheel?

    Tabs in the browser? My parents are now since 13 years also everyday in the web. My mother was selling everyday stuff in ebay. But until today they don't understand this tab think and can't handle it. They minimize the browser and open another one. And i know a lot of people who do that.

    Most people i know make still after years a double click on links.

    And for what is my 64.000 mbit/s flat god if not for surfing? Everything opens in one second and the flat costs $25.

  9. #34
    The CSS Clinic is open silver trophybronze trophy
    Paul O'B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Hampshire UK
    Posts
    40,355
    Mentioned
    179 Post(s)
    Tagged
    6 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Glasspoole View Post
    Ok, because of you guys i changed every site back to use body as background and not styling the html. And now the same thing happened on the body on another site in Opera AND IE8.

    But after figuring out on the last time that it was jQuery i checked if im the only one. And see its a jQuery (brain) bug and happens also on the body tag:
    jQuery: ╗ jQuery 1.6.1 Released
    #9420 (jQuery 1.6.1 sets background color to white in Opera 11+)
    #9450 (Background image disappears on IE8 with jQuery 1.6.1)
    Nasty bug - I hope they fix it quick.

  10. #35
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by EarlyOut View Post
    How quaint. News flash: the web has become an interactive, visual medium - film at eleven.
    These days, most people aren't going to spend much time on a site that resembles a 19-Century newspaper - all text and perhaps a line drawing to illustrate the main story.
    I'm NOT saying it has to resemble that -- none of us are. Notice I'm saying Javascript for NOTHING, bloated libraries for NOTHING, presentational images for NOTHING.

    If it's doing something useful that does not get in my way, and/or has graceful degradation as the gee ain't it neat bull is turned off since it was put together with progressive enhancement, and stays within sizes and filecounts that are actually practical to deploy -- then fine.

    But slapping together two or three giant scripting libraries to use two or three times as much javascript as it would be without the libraries, basically using 300-400k of scripting to do 20-40k of scriptings job -- that's what we're talking about.

    Or the PSD jockey who takes a layers out of their pretty picture as a 'slices' and runs it directly into their layout as a 50-100k alpha .png's each resulting in hundreds of K of images, when if they pre-composited and built for the web instead of for photoshop they could get the SAME APPEARANCE using 5 to 20k images using a third as many files...

    Or just crapping all over accessibility and functionality using garbage like framesets, ajax based tabs, and a bunch of other manure that amounts to useless bloat -- that quite often BREAKS normal page functionality. The old rule about scripting that it seems many are forgetting; it should enhance functionality, NOT replace it.

    Those last few playing to this irrational fear it seems some developers have of page loads -- maybe if they didn't waste 100k of html and several dozens slow "onload" for nothing scripts to do 8 to 20k of HTML's job, didn't have a hundred or separate files linked into every page, and practiced separation of presentation from content to leverage CSS caching most of the appearance, that "dreaded" pageload would be a non-event.

    But that would make too much sense.

  11. #36
    Barefoot on the Moon! silver trophy Force Flow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Northeastern USA
    Posts
    4,606
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul O'B View Post
    Nasty bug - I hope they fix it quick.
    Looks like the fixes are already committed in the upcoming 1.6.2 release.
    Visit The Blog | Follow On Twitter
    301tool 1.1.5 - URL redirector & shortener (PHP/MySQL)
    Can be hosted on and utilize your own domain

  12. #37
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Glasspoole View Post
    My parents are now since 13 years also everyday in the web.
    Gahugafugah? Can someone translate that into English for me?

  13. #38
    SitePoint Addict EarlyOut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sector R
    Posts
    280
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    Gahugafugah? Can someone translate that into English for me?
    Oh, come on. Can't really argue with his point, so you make fun of his syntax? Is that really the best you can do? I'll wager his English is better than your German. "For 13 years, my parents have been using the web daily."

  14. #39
    SitePoint Addict EarlyOut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sector R
    Posts
    280
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    Notice I'm saying Javascript for NOTHING, bloated libraries for NOTHING, presentational images for NOTHING.
    For NOTHING in your opinion. To you, something may be pointless bloat. To others, it may be what makes the web a different place than it was a decade ago, and they want it. Sorry you don't like it.

    Say, isn't that a windmill over there?

  15. #40
    SitePoint Wizard Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,278
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    whut? omigod where? kill it! kill it! SANCHO KILL IT WITH FIRE AAAAAAAHHHH


    oh wait, I thought you said wolf spider with babies

  16. #41
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by EarlyOut View Post
    For NOTHING in your opinion. To you, something may be pointless bloat. To others, it may be what makes the web a different place than it was a decade ago, and they want it. Sorry you don't like it.
    Read through again, I'm not saying you can't have much of that functionality.

    I'm basically saying don't use 300k of javascript that relies on 200k of libraries to do 20-40k's job or worse, CSS' job. Don't use 400k of images to do 40-50k's job... don't use anything that changes how the browser normally behaves as that will annoy and confuse users to the point they'll go looking for ways to stop said behaviors. Don't blow 100k of HTML on 5k of plaintext when 10k of HTML will do the EXACT SAME job just as well if not BETTER.

    ... and I quote:
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    Take that idiotic Jquery-ui garbage; 279k of script MINIFIED for some sixteen or so functions that shouldn't average more than 4k apiece WITHOUT jquery. (excepting perhaps "autocomplete" -- that I'd ballpark at 8-16k by itself)...
    That 4k apiece BTW being without minification.... and that 279k still relying on some other fat bloated library to even work in the first place -- SHEER IDIOCY. But of course it's what the people too lazy to learn to do their job properly can just copypasta like some twelve year old script kiddie.

    I know, I know, you've got better things to do than listen to me quote myself.

  17. #42
    SitePoint Wizard Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,278
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Your sig is creepy, Crusty

  18. #43
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Off Topic:


    Quote Originally Posted by Stomme poes View Post
    Your sig is creepy, Crusty
    Way way way ot...

    There's some things in this world ya just can't explain...

  19. #44
    SitePoint Addict EarlyOut's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Sector R
    Posts
    280
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    I know, I know, you've got better things to do than listen to me quote myself.
    Well, if you're going to cherry-pick your own comments, and quote only the rational bits, yeah.

    I'm talking about the "let's go back to the glorious 1990s" remarks, like the "500K of pretty pictures" and "lightbox idiocy" rants. Guess what - people want "pretty pictures," and they don't want to have to open each image in a new tab, with no easy navigation and no captions.

    My own feeble little photo album software effort uses Highslide JS, and it's had over 100,000 downloads so far. I guess all those users are just "idiots" in your universe.

  20. #45
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by deathshadow60 View Post
    I'm basically saying don't use 300k of javascript that relies on 200k of libraries to do 20-40k's job or worse, CSS' job.
    Would be nice if i could get rid of the qTip tooltip, because the tooltips styling can be easy made with just css (canvas, border radius, shadow) - but there is one problem i have. And thats the viewport. I wont to show it on the left side of my form inputs but if the user has just 1024px than without javascript the tips are not visible.

    And not all javascript is bad for usability/accessibility. I to the tooltips on the form because it explains to the visitor what to put in the fields and the validation shows instantly whats wrong without the need of sending the form first.
    Or take lightboxe's: You can switch though the images just with the keyboard arrows and can close it with esc.

    I do what i can to make everything faster and my sites give me 90-100 points on YSlow and Google Page Speed. I change every old stuff now from shadow png's and 4 png's for round borders because we don't need it anymore for styling. I use image sprites and so on...

    But sorry i'm not a javascript god and i can't to some stuff without jQuery.
    And days have just 24 hours and there is really a lot of stuff you need to learn by yourself. You spend more time with reading books and to torture google than building things. Javascript, MySql, Ajax, Apache, Debian (unix), picture editing, video editing, google maps api, html, css, php, browser caching, and then all the different frameworks like Drubal, Typo, EE, Wordpress, Magento, OSCommerce, phpbb, vBulletin, Joomla...... endless story...

  21. #46
    SitePoint Wizard Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,278
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    So far that's pretty much the only reason I use jQuery for anything... I have to get something done within a deadline (or even just a reasonable amount of time) and my vanilla Javascript isn't up to it.

    Though I did manage a nice pile of jQuery-less spaghetti on a site recently. It works, but it's like Frankenstein's monster. However, if it breaks, at least I know how to fix it. And it degrades.

  22. #47
    SitePoint Zealot adrian_schmidt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Malm÷, Sweden
    Posts
    14
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Why so much hate in this thread? And why do the moderators accept it?

  23. #48
    SitePoint Wizard Stomme poes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    10,278
    Mentioned
    50 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Discussion and strong opinions are different from hate.

  24. #49
    Non-Member bronze trophy
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Keene, NH
    Posts
    3,760
    Mentioned
    23 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Off Topic:


    Quote Originally Posted by adrian_schmidt View Post
    Why so much hate in this thread? And why do the moderators accept it?
    You say that like hate is a bad thing... I hate anti-Semites... I hate racists... I hate pedophiles... I hate sleaze-ball scam artists who dupe clients into paying money for sites "vomited up any old way" that interfere with users actually be able to use the site or will cost the client ten times more than it should in the long run, especially if *shock* the site actually ends up with real traffic -- is that a bad thing?

    Hate can be a powerful motivator and just as much a force for good as for evil. Usually the people who try to stamp out hateful speech are trying to do little more than control your mind and stamp out independent thought. Hence why most of your dirty hippy types *****ing about "thought police" don't realize that they've fallen for it themselves. (see FSF zealots)

    Conformity, status quo, and the wussy "If you can't say anything nice" copout -- filed right alongside Eisenhower's "apathy that had its roots in comfort, blindness and wishful thinking."

    The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
    -- George Bernard Shaw, Maxims for Revolutionists

    Hate is like any other emotion -- fear, love, joy -- it's what you do with it that makes it good or bad. Fear of fire prevents you from getting burned, or can prevent you from taking action to save yourself and others. Love of your fellow man can lead to great acts of kindness or horrible acts of jealousy. Joy can be the greatest of emotions until pursuit of it consumes you. Hate of bad things can cause you to act against them for the betterment of others.

    Hate, it's a force for good!

  25. #50
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    119
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    My favorite about hate:
    Your eyes are full of hate, Forty-One. That's good. Hate keeps a man alive. It gives him strength.

    from Ben Hur


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •