5 ms·

This is an off-topic short rant. Vote as you like (obvious enough), but skip reading this if you want on-topic discussion. Shoot me if this is how the web is h

This is an off-topic short rant. Vote as you like (obvious enough), but skip reading this if you want on-topic discussion. Shoot me if this is how the web is heading. (Recent browsing suggests maybe it is...) We get not only the insufferable "bottom bar" (is there a standard name for those yet?), but also a "top bar", a hover "Click Here to Share" box and a pop-up "Learn More, Instantly" box (not to mention the general clutter and overdense design). Man, that's foul.

stevelosh 16y ago
I activated Safari Reader as soon as I saw those walls of 12px text, so I had no idea what you were talking about until I went back and let the page finish loading. "Foul" is not a strong enough word for that. Maybe "vile" is better?
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- mkramlich 16y ago
  Same here. And I love Safari Reader aka Readability! A good rule of thumb I have is that if you "have to put a bag over the head" of something in order to make that thing pleasant to digest or access (whether it's a UI or a bureaucracy or paperwork or a person or physical widget or whatever), then really the source thing itself should be designed that way in the first place. In this case, my own ideal style of web design is very close to what Readability/Reader produces. Thus making it redundant to the extent I've achieved my ideal.
samstokes 16y ago
Those bars are even more irritating on a mobile device. The fixed height and position means they obscure half of the actual content and you can't scroll away from them. Do not want.
- jpr 16y ago
  They also break the "scroll one whole page at a time" paradigm that many are used to. EDIT: I just realized that Chrome devs have apparently already decided that it's not worth fighting the idiotic bars, so Chrome scrolls less than one page.
Groxx 16y ago
I think I'll call them "Mercuries", now that I've thought about it (get it? floating footers!).
w1ntermute 16y ago
Add the following to your hosts file: # Web toolbars/widgets 127.0.0.1 wibiya.com 127.0.0.1 cdn.wibiya.com 127.0.0.1 apture.com 127.0.0.1 www.apture.com 127.0.0.1 cim.meebo.com In this case, the top toolbar is from Apture and the bottom from Wibiya.
- telemachos 16y ago
  Thanks for taking the time to track these down. (I love a rant with a happy ending.)
- spirulina 16y ago
  Thanks for the list Just added these to the "Adblock Plus" Preferences in Firefox (under Tools). Worked like a charm.
- sprout 16y ago
  Or simply install NoScript, and worry about whitelists, not blacklists. I can get at the content there with no trouble, and don't have to worry about any of those toolbars.
  - w1ntermute 16y ago
    I've used NoScript, and it's extremely annoying having to enable it on each site you want it on. Not to mention blocking it in the hosts file automatically blocks it in all browsers, and that I don't agree with some of the things the NoScript author has done (http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/01/236248 http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/01/236248).
  - jpr 16y ago
    NoScript is a symptom, not a cure. I haven't yet figured out a good name for the disease though.
    - pbhjpbhj 16y ago
      >NoScript is a symptom, not a cure. I haven't yet figured out a good name for the disease though. Web3.0?

stevelosh 16y ago

I activated Safari Reader as soon as I saw those walls of 12px text, so I had no idea what you were talking about until I went back and let the page finish loading. "Foul" is not a strong enough word for that. Maybe "vile" is better?

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
mkramlich 16y ago
Same here. And I love Safari Reader aka Readability! A good rule of thumb I have is that if you "have to put a bag over the head" of something in order to make that thing pleasant to digest or access (whether it's a UI or a bureaucracy or paperwork or a person or physical widget or whatever), then really the source thing itself should be designed that way in the first place. In this case, my own ideal style of web design is very close to what Readability/Reader produces. Thus making it redundant to the extent I've achieved my ideal.

samstokes 16y ago

Those bars are even more irritating on a mobile device. The fixed height and position means they obscure half of the actual content and you can't scroll away from them. Do not want.

jpr 16y ago
They also break the "scroll one whole page at a time" paradigm that many are used to. EDIT: I just realized that Chrome devs have apparently already decided that it's not worth fighting the idiotic bars, so Chrome scrolls less than one page.

Groxx 16y ago

I think I'll call them "Mercuries", now that I've thought about it (get it? floating footers!).

w1ntermute 16y ago

Add the following to your hosts file: # Web toolbars/widgets 127.0.0.1 wibiya.com 127.0.0.1 cdn.wibiya.com 127.0.0.1 apture.com 127.0.0.1 www.apture.com 127.0.0.1 cim.meebo.com In this case, the top toolbar is from Apture and the bottom from Wibiya.

telemachos 16y ago
Thanks for taking the time to track these down. (I love a rant with a happy ending.)
spirulina 16y ago
Thanks for the list Just added these to the "Adblock Plus" Preferences in Firefox (under Tools). Worked like a charm.
sprout 16y ago
Or simply install NoScript, and worry about whitelists, not blacklists. I can get at the content there with no trouble, and don't have to worry about any of those toolbars.
- w1ntermute 16y ago
  I've used NoScript, and it's extremely annoying having to enable it on each site you want it on. Not to mention blocking it in the hosts file automatically blocks it in all browsers, and that I don't agree with some of the things the NoScript author has done (http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/01/236248 http://news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/05/01/236248).
- jpr 16y ago
  NoScript is a symptom, not a cure. I haven't yet figured out a good name for the disease though.
  - pbhjpbhj 16y ago
    >NoScript is a symptom, not a cure. I haven't yet figured out a good name for the disease though. Web3.0?