3 ms·
> Agreed, but currently there is no great solution that allows you to do that and provide the kind of UI dynamism that really does improve UX. Strongly disagre
by mi100hael 10y ago
> Agreed, but currently there is no great solution that allows you to do that and provide the kind of UI dynamism that really does improve UX.
Strongly disagree that there's any actual improvement on UX. Plenty of sites like GitLab, GitHub, YouTube, etc. insist on using JS to load what could be entirely separate pages, but instead leave the user with some slow, hand-rolled progress bar on the top of the page. For sites doing nearly-full-page refreshes, a server pre-rendering is going to be faster. For sites doing smaller content-level changes, there's no reason something like turbolinks, pjax, or regular old ajax/DOM manipulation can't be used, which is almost always faster.
- paulddraper 10y ago> regular old ajax/DOM manipulation Yes, exactly. There's no way to do this on the server, so anything you do with DOM will be split in to separate server and client side worlds. For example, https://github.com/git/git/compare/master...next https://github.com/git/git/compare/master...next will show you "base: master, compare: next" when you load it. But I can use the dropdown + autocomplete to update that value. That value is set both on page load, and also (justifiably, IMO) dynamically. Multiply that by a hundred bespoke things and you yearn for less server client spaghetti.
- chiefalchemist 10y agoFurthermore, and pardon me if this is stating the obvious, but improving the underlying technology for UX does not necessarily lead to an actual improved UX. Look around. There continues to plenty of misused (?) technology (i.e., crappy user experiences.) In short, technology isn't the problem with most UXs.