I guess so. It’s been an ongoing issue, even after replacing the HD, reinstalling browsers etc. Still, it’s only a problem with a few JS-heavy sites, where a lot of the content won’t load until JS does its thing—which it often never does. Seems like an unnecessary road block to me.
1 Like
[quote=“felgall, post:2, topic:109951, full:true”]
…snip…My main dislike of Discourse is that it becomes unusable with JavaScript off and there are a few things that don’t work in some browsers even with JavaScript on. [/quote]
I wasn’t too keen on Discourse when I first met it here, and it doesn’t work on one of my devices–an Ipad (which I refuse to update IOS because I’m pissed at Apple.) But on the other hand, Discourse functions. I don’t frequent all that many forums, but I’ve noticed that the few IPBoard forums I do visit are broken with IE11. Quoting, cut-paste, and sometimes photos do not work without some kinky click-technique on IPBoard. I think Discourse has some good ideas, but I’m dubious whether they’ll last in the long haul. However, it works/functions… that right there is a good thing on today’s internet.
[quote=“James_Hibbard, post:6, topic:109951”]
How can a JavaScript coder screw up your computer? [/quote]
I have no idea if some JavaScript (vice Java) can screw up my computer. If it can, I’d sure appreciate some pointers so I could “batten down the hatches” a little more.
It can’t. I was trying to be polite 
Java on the other hand is a different matter, the best advice being (or at least having been) not to install it.
Now that is a security risk.
I hear what you’re saying though. I updated my iPad 2 to iOS 8 and it went from being nippy to sluggish.
I figured Apple wants me to buy a new iPad.
[quote=“ralphm, post:3, topic:109951”]
@AngC I’m not quite sure what your point is. Are you saying you wish JS wasn’t used at all on the web? That seems a bit extreme. [/quote]
Well, yes, I guess that is what I was saying. (i.e., no JavaScript.) Based on my Amazon experiment, it seems like one can build web pages that work without relying on JS.
I’m a user, not a designer/developer. I’m not stupid, but I have no familiarity with jQuery, Ember, etc. I don’t know what Google+ is; I don’t use GMail or Facebook. But in your post you tell me JS is unreliable. You sound like you know more than I do, yet I should embrace JS when a more informed person such as yourself states it doesn’t work very well? I don’t follow that logic.
However, despite my paranoia, I don’t generally disable JS on any of our computers. In everyday use, I’ve adopted my own version of progressive enhancement (actually it’s more like regressive degradation.) I use the newest computer in the household (husband uses a work laptop, besides he’s lax on security so he gets the next ones down the tier.) My computer gets all the updates, and I monitor security to the best of my ability. I use it strictly for some offline uses, plus banking and online shopping at very select sites. If I want to go to other sites, I use one of the other computers.
The JS designers do all sorts of fun things, that perhaps may not screw up my computer, but certainly are annoying. For example: disable the back arrow, disable the X(close window) button, remove the title bar, etc.
The bottom of the barrel computer that I use is my Ipad. I’ve actually grown rather fond of the stupid thing but here’s a really nice design feature I encounter at many website: Disable the zoom/resize feature. As a user I think that’s a really stupid idea. Let’s see, I should haul my lazy bottom off the couch and find my glasses to look at your tiny font that you won’t let me resize or just back up and view one of the other ten billion search hits.
I sometimes wonder whether designers ever think about their audience. I was pondering this and thinking about how automatic it’s become for me to deal with annoying website junk. For example, I enjoy reading at news/opinions sites. Going on memory here, without looking, one site I frequent is Forbes. They interrupt my access to content with a grey box which I have to click at top right to get rid of in order to access the content. I don’t remember what Forbes wants of me, the only thing I recollect is how to X out of it at the upper right. Another one that comes to mind is one of the major newspapers: NYTimes or maybe LATimes; that one throws up a first screen with a timer that tells me my browser sucks and then throws another box up that says something about “This is awkward” The only reason I remember that without looking is that I think awkward is kind of a cool word.
The problem I see with most designers is that they get too hung up on the “pretty” website they made (and if I, for instance, resize it I’ll mess up their design–never mind that if I can’t see it I’m gone) or they’re using JS to shove ads down my throat.
There’s certainly a lot of bad design out there. Fortunately, there are people who understand all this—from those championing accessibility standards to those gunning for user-friendly interfaces—so the best we can do is learn from them and aspire to do this job better. Until people abandon bad sites, though, they will probably continue to be bad, because they are achieving their goal of raking in the big $$$.
2 Likes
I do keep JS disabled by default and just enable it on a site-by-site basis if necessary - and if doing so doesn’t cause too many problems for me. (We had a similar discussion a while back, and I’ll point you there if you’reinterested in my reasons, rather than rant again here. Do you still design with "No Script" in mind?)
1 Like
I don’t remember what Forbes wants of me
Advertising revenue. Not directly from us, but that’s what that’s all about. Wait for your content or click here to continue to your article… gah.
Until people abandon bad sites, though, they will probably continue to be bad, because they are achieving their goal of raking in the big $$$.
Too true.
The JS designers do all sorts of fun things, that perhaps may not screw up my computer, but certainly are annoying. For example: disable the back arrow, disable the X(close window) button, remove the title bar, etc.
Do you actually encounter these things? Often? Using what browser? And what websites?
In my experience, it’s not uncommon for a site to be unusable without JS - the navigation doesn’t function, for example, or the layout is really screwed up. Or, indeed, there is no content loaded at all.
I found a few of those (the content doesn’t load at all) and I find it really annoying. I mean, I understand that you may use AJAX to update part of the content… but not loading at all from the very beginning? It’s just… frustrating!
1 Like
In my experience, it’s not uncommon for a site to be unusable without JS
Except that that’s not what I was asking about? 
I meant my experience is rather the opposite of @AngC’s.
Oh, she’s saying, JS messes things up, and you’re saying, without it things often won’t work.
Gotcha. Same page. lol
1 Like
A lot of sites are starting to forgo the template language and just go straight to JS as a template language. It saves on unessisary server time if you’re just going go back and modify everything in JS anyway.
I think Discourse follows this mentality.
I’m not saying I agree with this though. I do believe that there should be some templating on the server and don’t use JS to do everything… but my reasons for this are speed not user preference. My stuff will still look like crap w/o JS. 
But I feel things that use it for everything, like Discourse, are kinda unessisarily heavy on the browser. (For now)
And then there’s this:
I sometimes spend quite a bit of time gazing at that…
1 Like
Interestingly enough I’ve never gotten a single error on this site that I can recall that wasn’t just a page not found, as discussed other places.
It might be because I drink the Google Kool-Aid and Chrome wins? 
I don’t get any errors. Is that a Safari error?
Browser Plugins can also cause errors in other scripts because they tend to try and manipulate pages. Plugins are the devil.
It’s Firefox on Linux unless I’m mistaken…
Nope.
[quote=“jeffreylees, post:38, topic:109951, full:true”]
It’s Firefox on Linux unless I’m mistaken…
[/quote]'Tis indeed. Firefox 35 on Ubuntu Gnome 14.10 to be precise, but it’s been happening on all versions ever since we started testing Discourse, IIRC.
1 Like
And I was thinking it was the userscript’s use of Mutation Observer loading up memory and getting frustrated that attempts to fix things were having sporadic effect.