4 ms·
> The alternative to JS is not "no scripting", it's websites that only function with proprietary plugins installed. Yes and those were websites that for the mo
by throwaway81523 5y ago
> The alternative to JS is not "no scripting", it's websites that only function with proprietary plugins installed.
Yes and those were websites that for the most part nobody gave a crap about. The important sites weren't willing to dump so many of their viewers. Heck, even post-JS, the web didn't suck so badly until the option of shutting off JS was removed from browser UI's. Before that, enough users shut off JS that sites wanting wide audiences had to be able to function without it.
- teaearlgraycold 5y agoNo one cared about YouTube? No one cared about Netflix?
- throwaway81523 5y agoPeople were willing to set exceptions for sites they thought were important. Not important AND requires JS => bye.
- vkou 5y agoI'm not sure the likes of YouTube and Netflix need further privileges compared to the rest of the web.
- throwaway81523 5y agoIt's not that they needed privileges, it's that people were willing to grant them. They alternatively would have been willing to install desktop applications, like they do now for Skype, Slack, and a few other services, but not for random web sites that they don't deem to be worth it.
- xeromal 5y agoI think you're underestimating the amount of sites that had flash.
- chrisbuc 5y agoYes, even getting copy /paste functionality to allow a user to click a button to copy a piece of text needed a bit of flash. https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6355300/copy-to-clipboard-without-flash https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6355300/copy-to-clipboar...