3 ms·
I hope they won't discard mobile.twitter.com it's lighter than lite and works without javascript
by slim 10y ago
I hope they won't discard mobile.twitter.com it's lighter than lite and works without javascript
- overcast 10y agoWhat exactly is the issue with allowing javascript. The entire internet runs on it. I keep seeing this comment on various other posts. Javascript is here to stay, and for you to get the best experience, or at all, you're going to need it.
- coldpie 10y agoJavascript does all sorts of nasty shit like opening the app store on my phone, animating pages, popping up "give me your email address!" notifications, tracking my web browsing, wasting my bandwidth, eating my CPU, dumb crap like making text fade in instead of just showing it to me. I find the web is a much more pleasant place if I can control what JS gets run.
- freeone3000 10y agoIt's expensive and slow to transfer over mobile data, and doesn't significantly improve the user experience.
- kome 10y agojavascript often is just unnecessary bloat (advertisers, trackers, useless animations, and so on) that's why people are angry at it. More often than not, bare html do the trick.
- JustSomeNobody 10y ago> ... and for you to get the best experience, or at all, you're going to need it. This simply is NOT true.
- josefresco 10y agolite.twitter.com IS mobile.twitter.com - it's just a landing page that links you over to the mobile site.