4 ms·

Pfft.. JavaScript is usefull. Its not my fault that its heavly abused or even generated, turining into bloat. Just take a look at my homepage: http://borg.uu3.n

by Borg3 2y ago

Pfft.. JavaScript is usefull. Its not my fault that its heavly abused or even generated, turining into bloat. Just take a look at my homepage: http://borg.uu3.net/~borg/ http://borg.uu3.net/~borg/ It needs JavaScript, but will work on anything.. from IE 6.0 or FF 2.0 upward. It simple, clean and fast. And imo looks nice :)

graemep 2y ago
I mostly want to read information. Your site is clean and fast BUT its slower to navigate than a list of links and only works for a niche audience. It is also hard to use on a phone browser.
- jakelazaroff 2y ago
  I mean this without any derision: who cares? There’s nothing wrong with building something for a niche audience. Yes, if we were evaluating it as a business or government website, we could point out usability and accessibility issues with the design. But it’s not any of those things; it’s OP’s personal homepage, and they seem pretty happy with it. See also: An App Can Be a Home Cooked Meal https://www.robinsloan.com/notes/home-cooked-app/ https://www.robinsloan.com/notes/home-cooked-app/
  - graemep 2y ago
    I agree there is no problem building something like this if your aim is to either please yourself, or to reach a niche audience. I have a webapp that only I use. Most information websites (even things like personal blogs) are trying to reach a wider audience, so its not what most people should be doing.
    - jakelazaroff 2y ago
      I don’t know about that! A lot of my blog posts are pretty technical, and intended for a narrower audience than “people who understand how to use a CLI”. One of the best bits of writing advice I’ve seen is that you should write with one specific person in mind — like, an actual human being you know — which helps you prevent yourself from going too broad or too deep. Obviously a homepage is not a blog post and the goal there is different. But OP gets to decide what that goal is — and again, they seem pretty happy with how it turned out!
      - graemep 2y ago
        > A lot of my blog posts are pretty technical, and intended for a narrower audience than “people who understand how to use a CLI”. Yes, it depends on what your aims are. If you have unusual aims youc an do unusual things.
    - joshmanders 2y ago
      Author of "I lost my love for the web" post. I'd just like to say this line, is exactly what I was talking about. > Most information websites (even things like personal blogs) are trying to reach a wider audience, so its not what most people should be doing. You don't find value in how op created his website so now you are here, telling them they shouldn't be doing it that way.
      - graemep 2y ago
        No, I am am saying that 1) I prefer sites that do not require JS and 2) its not what most sites should do given their aims.
        joshmanders 2y ago
        And you're proving my point. Why can't he just make it how he wants? Not every website on the internet should follow how YOU or MOST sites should do.
        krapp 2y ago
        He can. Literally no one is stopping anyone from building a website however they like. No one is putting a gun to anyone's head and forcing them to use a framework or a SPA. All of that is intended for enterprise and business anyway. Use JQuery and a simple grid if you want. Or just plain HTML. Or run off to geminispace and scream into the void. Yes, people will criticize. Unfortunately you can't stop people from criticizing. That's no reason to just give up, that's just life.
        joshmanders 2y ago
        > Unfortunately you can't stop people from criticizing. Yes you can. Instead of ignoring it signaling that their criticism was acceptable, you can push back on it and remind them it's irrelevant and unwanted and they should probably just keep it to themselves. Then more people will maybe stop and think before deciding to blast someone for not following some arbitrary rules you made up in your own head for how someone else should build websites and apps.
bxparks 2y ago
It's unreadable on my phone. The font is microscopic, like 0.5pt. Dark mode is awful. Light grey on black makes it even worse. Firefox Reader mode is disabled. The pop up keyboard takes up half the screen and obscures most of the content. And forcing a commandline interface on a phone user seems truly sadistic.
- jakelazaroff 2y ago
  What do you think this comment achieves other than making someone feel bad about something they’re proud of?
  - bxparks 2y ago
    Sure, I should have been more tactful. (I was still groggy in bed while reading the post on my phone, and it's difficult to type lengthy diplomatic sentences with long words on a phone keyboard.) The commenter seemed to have intended for the website to reach a wide audience: "will work on anything.. from IE 6.0 or FF 2.0 upward". But it kinda fails to meet that goal.
    - Borg3 2y ago
      Well, more retro focused audience.. But also point is, you can do decent webpage that is not bloated and work on older/retro platforms. Its sad what web become, if you do not run latest stuff from FAANG companies, you are pretty much excluded.
  - Borg3 2y ago
    No worries, I do NOT feel bad about it. My home page is not for general consumption like smartphone browsers. Im actually very supprised that such a website like Hackers News are being read on smartphones. Damn, world changed a lot.
    - bxparks 2y ago
      Ironically HN is one of the few websites that works well on my phone, because it uses so little of modern web technologies. I use a 7-year old smartphone, it's painful or impossible to read many websites. I have to use old.reddit.com instead of www.reddit.com. Twitter stopped working on my phone a few years ago, good riddance. But my phone is with me everywhere, my laptops are not. So HN is one of the permanent tabs on the phone.

by Borg3 2y ago

graemep 2y ago

I mostly want to read information. Your site is clean and fast BUT its slower to navigate than a list of links and only works for a niche audience. It is also hard to use on a phone browser.

jakelazaroff 2y ago
I mean this without any derision: who cares? There’s nothing wrong with building something for a niche audience. Yes, if we were evaluating it as a business or government website, we could point out usability and accessibility issues with the design. But it’s not any of those things; it’s OP’s personal homepage, and they seem pretty happy with it. See also: An App Can Be a Home Cooked Meal https://www.robinsloan.com/notes/home-cooked-app/ https://www.robinsloan.com/notes/home-cooked-app/
- graemep 2y ago
  I agree there is no problem building something like this if your aim is to either please yourself, or to reach a niche audience. I have a webapp that only I use. Most information websites (even things like personal blogs) are trying to reach a wider audience, so its not what most people should be doing.
  - jakelazaroff 2y ago
    I don’t know about that! A lot of my blog posts are pretty technical, and intended for a narrower audience than “people who understand how to use a CLI”. One of the best bits of writing advice I’ve seen is that you should write with one specific person in mind — like, an actual human being you know — which helps you prevent yourself from going too broad or too deep. Obviously a homepage is not a blog post and the goal there is different. But OP gets to decide what that goal is — and again, they seem pretty happy with how it turned out!
    - graemep 2y ago
      > A lot of my blog posts are pretty technical, and intended for a narrower audience than “people who understand how to use a CLI”. Yes, it depends on what your aims are. If you have unusual aims youc an do unusual things.
  - joshmanders 2y ago
    Author of "I lost my love for the web" post. I'd just like to say this line, is exactly what I was talking about. > Most information websites (even things like personal blogs) are trying to reach a wider audience, so its not what most people should be doing. You don't find value in how op created his website so now you are here, telling them they shouldn't be doing it that way.
    - graemep 2y ago
      No, I am am saying that 1) I prefer sites that do not require JS and 2) its not what most sites should do given their aims.
      - joshmanders 2y ago
        And you're proving my point. Why can't he just make it how he wants? Not every website on the internet should follow how YOU or MOST sites should do.
        krapp 2y ago
        He can. Literally no one is stopping anyone from building a website however they like. No one is putting a gun to anyone's head and forcing them to use a framework or a SPA. All of that is intended for enterprise and business anyway. Use JQuery and a simple grid if you want. Or just plain HTML. Or run off to geminispace and scream into the void. Yes, people will criticize. Unfortunately you can't stop people from criticizing. That's no reason to just give up, that's just life.
        joshmanders 2y ago
        > Unfortunately you can't stop people from criticizing. Yes you can. Instead of ignoring it signaling that their criticism was acceptable, you can push back on it and remind them it's irrelevant and unwanted and they should probably just keep it to themselves. Then more people will maybe stop and think before deciding to blast someone for not following some arbitrary rules you made up in your own head for how someone else should build websites and apps.

bxparks 2y ago

It's unreadable on my phone. The font is microscopic, like 0.5pt. Dark mode is awful. Light grey on black makes it even worse. Firefox Reader mode is disabled. The pop up keyboard takes up half the screen and obscures most of the content. And forcing a commandline interface on a phone user seems truly sadistic.

jakelazaroff 2y ago
What do you think this comment achieves other than making someone feel bad about something they’re proud of?
- bxparks 2y ago
  Sure, I should have been more tactful. (I was still groggy in bed while reading the post on my phone, and it's difficult to type lengthy diplomatic sentences with long words on a phone keyboard.) The commenter seemed to have intended for the website to reach a wide audience: "will work on anything.. from IE 6.0 or FF 2.0 upward". But it kinda fails to meet that goal.
  - Borg3 2y ago
    Well, more retro focused audience.. But also point is, you can do decent webpage that is not bloated and work on older/retro platforms. Its sad what web become, if you do not run latest stuff from FAANG companies, you are pretty much excluded.
- Borg3 2y ago
  No worries, I do NOT feel bad about it. My home page is not for general consumption like smartphone browsers. Im actually very supprised that such a website like Hackers News are being read on smartphones. Damn, world changed a lot.
  - bxparks 2y ago
    Ironically HN is one of the few websites that works well on my phone, because it uses so little of modern web technologies. I use a 7-year old smartphone, it's painful or impossible to read many websites. I have to use old.reddit.com instead of www.reddit.com. Twitter stopped working on my phone a few years ago, good riddance. But my phone is with me everywhere, my laptops are not. So HN is one of the permanent tabs on the phone.