3 ms·

I can't help but mentioning that their logo does not load without allowing JavaScript (NoScript user here). Have we really reached the point where JavaScript i

by sethd 11y ago

I can't help but mentioning that their logo does not load without allowing JavaScript (NoScript user here). Have we really reached the point where JavaScript is required to display a logo on a website?

LesZedCB 11y ago
Yes.[1] The rest of the internet has been there for a while now. Many high quality web applications utilize javascript frameworks to render the majority of the page. If you use NoScript today, you should be able to reasonably expect most of the web to be broken and not lament it. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_JavaScript_libraries#Web-application_related_.28MVC.2C_MVVM.29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_JavaScript_libraries#W...
- mikeash 11y ago
  Why not lament it?
  - LesZedCB 11y ago
    Oh, I certainly think there's justification for lamenting the state of javascript web apps. In the post, I really meant to say "complain about it."
- sethd 11y ago
  Actually most of the page does load with JS disabled with exception of their logo. > "The rest of the internet has been there for a while now." This is not my experience at all. Most of the sites I use, especially text/image content-driven websites, load fine without JS and it saves me from having to deal with a lot of annoying UX issues. In fact, in this case I was able to avoid having to suffer through the intro JetBrains decided to show visitors on this website, until just out of curiosity I decided to enable JS to see if their logo would render. I am well aware that some web applications use JavaScript frameworks but even then it's possible to render content for SEO and other purposes where JS might not be enabled. Certainly the logo can and should be rendered without JS even in these cases. I would imagine that web applications implemented in a JavaScript framework are a minority as should be the case. The vast majority of websites simply display text and images and there is no sane reason to require JS just to view text and image content.
  - Alupis 11y ago
    > there is no sane reason to require JS just to view text and image content Especially for a logo. Coupled with the intro video, it feels like we're back in the early 2000's where flash intros to every site ruled the web.
HelloNurse 11y ago
Every day, competent programmers retire and clueless n00bs replace them.

by sethd 11y ago

LesZedCB 11y ago

Yes.[1] The rest of the internet has been there for a while now. Many high quality web applications utilize javascript frameworks to render the majority of the page. If you use NoScript today, you should be able to reasonably expect most of the web to be broken and not lament it. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_JavaScript_libraries#Web-application_related_.28MVC.2C_MVVM.29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_JavaScript_libraries#W...

mikeash 11y ago
Why not lament it?
- LesZedCB 11y ago
  Oh, I certainly think there's justification for lamenting the state of javascript web apps. In the post, I really meant to say "complain about it."
sethd 11y ago
Actually most of the page does load with JS disabled with exception of their logo. > "The rest of the internet has been there for a while now." This is not my experience at all. Most of the sites I use, especially text/image content-driven websites, load fine without JS and it saves me from having to deal with a lot of annoying UX issues. In fact, in this case I was able to avoid having to suffer through the intro JetBrains decided to show visitors on this website, until just out of curiosity I decided to enable JS to see if their logo would render. I am well aware that some web applications use JavaScript frameworks but even then it's possible to render content for SEO and other purposes where JS might not be enabled. Certainly the logo can and should be rendered without JS even in these cases. I would imagine that web applications implemented in a JavaScript framework are a minority as should be the case. The vast majority of websites simply display text and images and there is no sane reason to require JS just to view text and image content.
- Alupis 11y ago
  > there is no sane reason to require JS just to view text and image content Especially for a logo. Coupled with the intro video, it feels like we're back in the early 2000's where flash intros to every site ruled the web.

HelloNurse 11y ago

Every day, competent programmers retire and clueless n00bs replace them.