3 ms·

I dunno if they are saying that, but I wholeheartedly endorse this idea. Add the "client side junk" (fancy Javascript stuff, etc.) as enhancement on top for th

I dunno if they are saying that, but I wholeheartedly endorse this idea. Add the "client side junk" (fancy Javascript stuff, etc.) as enhancement on top for those who want it after the required functionality is being properly and reliably served by the "core technologies". Serve the need properly first, then make it "nice".

Godel_unicode 4y ago
The problem is that people make the decision about what to use as inexpert users and that pretty GUI with all the space and Next buttons looks so easy to use to them. By the time they realize they didn’t actually want it, it’s too late. This is the reason people stick with things like Excel, it’s easy to transition up the sophistication ladder.
- ddoolin 4y ago
  I don't have much to add, but you really nailed the sentiment I was going for exactly. I have been lucky to both be serving a very small user group that I can work closely with, and one whose existing workflows still exist and they can go back to if ours suck, so we _have_ to be better.
komali2 4y ago
I had a coworker tell me that javascript should be added like color: stuff that makes it nicer to use for those that have it turned on, but not necessary for those that don't have it at all (or can't see color). Kind of a hard core position in my opinion considering it's ignoring the sometimes advantages / use cases for client side code (like complicated SPAs where the user is explicitly buying into the idea of running lots of code in their browser, figma comes to mind) but I still like to think about it here and there.
- happymellon 4y ago
  In the same sentiment of 99% of companies are not Google and do not need Google's infrastructure. 99% of web applications are not Figma and probably do not need any client side JavaScript. The amount of JavaScript that's actually just wrong is incredible. 1. I don't care what your client side validation thinks. That is my email address. 2. Why are you serving people all of the news story if you are going to then hide it? We can block the JavaScript and read the news.
  - komali2 4y ago
    Well both of your cases are things I happen to agree with just shouldn't be necessary anyway lol, like most of the times I'm giving up an email it's not because I want to get emails from these jerkwads that are trading some small amount of service for the right to blast me with marketing emails (and they ALWAYS ignore my choice on the "please don't send market emails" checkbox, if they even have one). And news stories that aren't served over RSS are ones I don't want to read... i hate the modern state of the internet-as-capitalist-entity. So I don't disagree on merit alone, but it seems if we wanna do a good capitalism, we need to make sure people are actually giving us real emails apparently
    - happymellon 4y ago
      But you don't need client side JavaScript for that. In fact, it makes the experience generally worse.

Godel_unicode 4y ago

The problem is that people make the decision about what to use as inexpert users and that pretty GUI with all the space and Next buttons looks so easy to use to them. By the time they realize they didn’t actually want it, it’s too late. This is the reason people stick with things like Excel, it’s easy to transition up the sophistication ladder.

ddoolin 4y ago
I don't have much to add, but you really nailed the sentiment I was going for exactly. I have been lucky to both be serving a very small user group that I can work closely with, and one whose existing workflows still exist and they can go back to if ours suck, so we _have_ to be better.

komali2 4y ago

I had a coworker tell me that javascript should be added like color: stuff that makes it nicer to use for those that have it turned on, but not necessary for those that don't have it at all (or can't see color). Kind of a hard core position in my opinion considering it's ignoring the sometimes advantages / use cases for client side code (like complicated SPAs where the user is explicitly buying into the idea of running lots of code in their browser, figma comes to mind) but I still like to think about it here and there.

happymellon 4y ago
In the same sentiment of 99% of companies are not Google and do not need Google's infrastructure. 99% of web applications are not Figma and probably do not need any client side JavaScript. The amount of JavaScript that's actually just wrong is incredible. 1. I don't care what your client side validation thinks. That is my email address. 2. Why are you serving people all of the news story if you are going to then hide it? We can block the JavaScript and read the news.
- komali2 4y ago
  Well both of your cases are things I happen to agree with just shouldn't be necessary anyway lol, like most of the times I'm giving up an email it's not because I want to get emails from these jerkwads that are trading some small amount of service for the right to blast me with marketing emails (and they ALWAYS ignore my choice on the "please don't send market emails" checkbox, if they even have one). And news stories that aren't served over RSS are ones I don't want to read... i hate the modern state of the internet-as-capitalist-entity. So I don't disagree on merit alone, but it seems if we wanna do a good capitalism, we need to make sure people are actually giving us real emails apparently
  - happymellon 4y ago
    But you don't need client side JavaScript for that. In fact, it makes the experience generally worse.