4 ms·
It’s nice to see a “You don’t need X” article that isn’t just annoying snark. This actually answers some questions people had, which feels like a much better re
by graypegg 4y ago
It’s nice to see a “You don’t need X” article that isn’t just annoying snark. This actually answers some questions people had, which feels like a much better reason to write something like this, rather than the usual rage-bait “you don’t need JS/CSS/Framework/Technology considered harmful” medium articles.
- jerf 4y agoThere's definitely a lot of websites out there that are just super dynamic and flashy and complicated in ways they don't need to be, and I mean that to the owner's detriment, not necessarily the reader's. How many hacked Wordpress sites didn't even need to be Wordpress in the first place? If you don't have comments on your site, you probably don't really need Wordpress, and even if you do a Disqus-like solution on a static site is probably still more secure. Which, again, I mean in terms of bothering the owner, not just the users. I think articles that are just all about how you're bothering your readers can be a bit tedious, but there are ways even the owners are hurt by the belief they need every whizbang thing, because they all have maintenance costs and general quirkiness costs associated with them too.