4 ms·
I disable JSbecause, on a lot of sites, I'm only there to read words on a page and those words come up instantly without JS and in as long as 30 seconds with it
by alistproducer2 10y ago
I disable JSbecause, on a lot of sites, I'm only there to read words on a page and those words come up instantly without JS and in as long as 30 seconds with it.
Why do you think Google created AMP (which is just a fancy way of telling devs to stop using JS for text sites)?
Look, there are plenty of site for which JS makes a huge difference - proper web applications. For every one of those site there are 9 that load half a MB of cruft so they can animate their stupid banner.
- iLoch 10y agoI'm not saying text content doesn't have its place, but what I am saying is that unless you're absolutely certain your users aren't going to be using JS (hint: that's effectively no one) then it's just not worth your time to accommodate those users - especially when they optionally disable JS, AND you have to degrade the experience for the rest of your users in most practical applications. How often do you design features for 1% of your users?
- kinlan 10y agoA lot of it is about performance, if you need JS to fetch the content of your site after the SPA or Shell has loaded then you are incurring a significant amount of overhead for something that could have been streamed from the server and rendered as it was parsed by the browser.
- iLoch 10y agoPerformance will come as the need develops. Yes it's faster to render something on the server right now, but that may not be the case in the near future. The concept of loading something from the server is also only accounting for a very specific use case. These days most websites will require more data from the server after the webpage has been loaded anyway. Server rendering simply wont make sense for some binary applications, such as games.
- robin_reala 10y agoPlaystation Now exists and is server rendering for games: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_Now https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_Now
- mixedCase 10y ago>AND you have to degrade the experience for the rest of your users in most practical applications I would say the opposite. The absolute majority of developers who insist on requiring JavaScript with no option to gracefully downgrade on pages that do not need it are the ones degrading the web experience.
- alistproducer2 10y agoFrom my experience having JS turned off, most sites render the text I want to read in a readable fashion sans JS.
- robin_reala 10y agoAll the time, as 1.2% of my monthly users is 1.15 million people (hint: that’s effectively a lot of people). People will be accessing my content and using my services with Javascript deliberately off or situationally unavailable, and they need to be able to do so. It’s defensive design.
- perseusprime11 10y agoIs it really true you don't need JS for AMP? Checkout Washingtonpost.com/pwa
- alistproducer2 10y agoAMP pages can’t include any author-written JavaScript. Instead of using JavaScript, interactive page features are handled in custom AMP elements. The custom AMP elements may have JavaScript under the hood, but they’re carefully designed to make sure they don’t cause performance degradation. https://www.ampproject.org/docs/get_started/technical_overview.html#allow-only-asynchronous-scripts https://www.ampproject.org/docs/get_started/technical_overvi...
- perseusprime11 10y agoThanks for sharing. How do you go about taking a current website and building a PWA? Do I have to change my website architecture drastically?
- angry-hacker 10y agoI'm interested what if my site already is 'amp' - do I really need to have a duplicate page? And add even more markup? I don't understand amp, Google already has loading time as signal, just increase it even more.