5 ms·

This is great, and I hope they keep the (or a) JavaScript-free interface, because that's the #1 advantage over things like Google Groups which defy any browser

by cm3 10y ago

This is great, and I hope they keep the (or a) JavaScript-free interface, because that's the #1 advantage over things like Google Groups which defy any browser convention and you have to fight for usability. If I'm reading an archive of posts, I don't want a web application that tries to override the browser's controls and fails to deliver.

0xCMP 10y ago
Very true. Google Groups are not something I look forward to using most times.
wtbob 10y ago
Seconded. Being able to just read the articles from any browser was one of the great things about gmane.
na85 10y ago
Agree 110% on the js-free being a huge positive. It's getting to the point where I want to revive those "thank you for not using AOL" flashing gifs and update them to try and start some kind of "no js" countertrend. I fucking hate javascript.
- pmontra 10y ago
  Upvoted. I don't hate JavaScript but there is no need for JavaScript on a site like that. I suggest NoScript as a way to turn on or off JS per site. Partially offtopic. The very page at http://home.gmane.org/2016/08/29/next-steps-gmane/ http://home.gmane.org/2016/08/29/next-steps-gmane/ is much better with JS turned off: JS loads the Raleway font which at the given size and color (#666) is too thin and not contrasted enough to be readable. I have to zoom in many times before it gets OK. The default Arial is much easier on the eyes. Raleway is not that bad on my tablet, maybe because of a higher DPI (8.4" at about 2500x1600 vs 15" at 1920x1080) or because it's AMOLED. Not bad but not good enough. Arial wins even there. With a color of #222 or darker Raleway starts the be readable, but still worse than Arial.
dcosson 10y ago
Interesting. While javascript heavy, google groups always gets the job done fine for me. What I really dread is having to use something like the Postgres mailing list, which is painful with conversations split between multiple pages and block quote formatted so it takes mental effort to even figure out what's the previous message and what's the reply. I'm not familiar with gmane and am young enough not to have been a heavy newsgroup user.
- coldpie 10y ago
  Google Groups is a nightmare. It does some godawful overscroll-bounceback thing. My OS can handle scrolling just fine, thank you very much.
- mynewtb 10y ago
  Try it on a slow connection and weak (or stressed) CPU. It becomes unusable.
  - cm3 10y ago
    And the amount of HTML, CSS, and JS it loads is disproportionate to the content, making me dread anytime I have to use it to read a thread. The asynchronous loading of content induces a painful delay in the workflow.
- zeveb 10y ago
  > block quote formatted so it takes mental effort to even figure out what's the previous message and what's the reply You think it takes mental effort to read proper quotes, e.g. in https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CANP8%2BjKvbe2jwOzUMGotX7ajzh-qQ7%2Be2AT2qoU_ktAvZQN%2BPg%40mail.gmail.com https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CANP8%2BjKvbe2jwOzUMGo...? That's proper quoting style. It's incredibly readable, much more than the top-posting scourge we must deal with on so many mailing lists.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
mrweasel 10y ago
Google Groups seems like a proof of concept for GWT. Something someone design during a lazy friday afternoon. Except for the content, I have nothing positive to say about Google Groups. More often than not I prefer to not having a question answered, if the only solution is to use Google Groups.
- kbarker 10y ago
  The first iteration around 2004 was great. I think it worked without Javascript, was fast and had a clean interface (just like this site). The current one definitely suffers from the second system effect. I also avoid it and actively search for other locations with the same content.
- cm3 10y ago
  This may be surprising, but Sourceforge provides plain mailman lists for projects, and that's a viable alternative to Google Groups for open source projects.

by cm3 10y ago

0xCMP 10y ago

Very true. Google Groups are not something I look forward to using most times.

wtbob 10y ago

Seconded. Being able to just read the articles from any browser was one of the great things about gmane.

na85 10y ago

Agree 110% on the js-free being a huge positive. It's getting to the point where I want to revive those "thank you for not using AOL" flashing gifs and update them to try and start some kind of "no js" countertrend. I fucking hate javascript.

pmontra 10y ago
Upvoted. I don't hate JavaScript but there is no need for JavaScript on a site like that. I suggest NoScript as a way to turn on or off JS per site. Partially offtopic. The very page at http://home.gmane.org/2016/08/29/next-steps-gmane/ http://home.gmane.org/2016/08/29/next-steps-gmane/ is much better with JS turned off: JS loads the Raleway font which at the given size and color (#666) is too thin and not contrasted enough to be readable. I have to zoom in many times before it gets OK. The default Arial is much easier on the eyes. Raleway is not that bad on my tablet, maybe because of a higher DPI (8.4" at about 2500x1600 vs 15" at 1920x1080) or because it's AMOLED. Not bad but not good enough. Arial wins even there. With a color of #222 or darker Raleway starts the be readable, but still worse than Arial.

dcosson 10y ago

Interesting. While javascript heavy, google groups always gets the job done fine for me. What I really dread is having to use something like the Postgres mailing list, which is painful with conversations split between multiple pages and block quote formatted so it takes mental effort to even figure out what's the previous message and what's the reply. I'm not familiar with gmane and am young enough not to have been a heavy newsgroup user.

coldpie 10y ago
Google Groups is a nightmare. It does some godawful overscroll-bounceback thing. My OS can handle scrolling just fine, thank you very much.
mynewtb 10y ago
Try it on a slow connection and weak (or stressed) CPU. It becomes unusable.
- cm3 10y ago
  And the amount of HTML, CSS, and JS it loads is disproportionate to the content, making me dread anytime I have to use it to read a thread. The asynchronous loading of content induces a painful delay in the workflow.
zeveb 10y ago
> block quote formatted so it takes mental effort to even figure out what's the previous message and what's the reply You think it takes mental effort to read proper quotes, e.g. in https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CANP8%2BjKvbe2jwOzUMGotX7ajzh-qQ7%2Be2AT2qoU_ktAvZQN%2BPg%40mail.gmail.com https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CANP8%2BjKvbe2jwOzUMGo...? That's proper quoting style. It's incredibly readable, much more than the top-posting scourge we must deal with on so many mailing lists.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

mrweasel 10y ago

Google Groups seems like a proof of concept for GWT. Something someone design during a lazy friday afternoon. Except for the content, I have nothing positive to say about Google Groups. More often than not I prefer to not having a question answered, if the only solution is to use Google Groups.

kbarker 10y ago
The first iteration around 2004 was great. I think it worked without Javascript, was fast and had a clean interface (just like this site). The current one definitely suffers from the second system effect. I also avoid it and actively search for other locations with the same content.
cm3 10y ago
This may be surprising, but Sourceforge provides plain mailman lists for projects, and that's a viable alternative to Google Groups for open source projects.