4 ms·

A minority that is growing quite fast , people are not stupid prepare for the javascript backlash like Flash hate wave. If your content is not worth it , if i n

by camus 13y ago

A minority that is growing quite fast , people are not stupid prepare for the javascript backlash like Flash hate wave. If your content is not worth it , if i need javascript just to read some text , if you dont explain why i should turn javascript on with a noscript tag ,then you'll lose me and many more as an audience.

dandelany 13y ago
Do you have any statistics to back up your assertion that it's growing? From what I've seen from my own anecdotal experience, as well as from access logs from past places I've worked, this minority is vanishingly small (<0.5%, even among those using screen readers it's ~1.5%) and shrinking by the day as more mobile devices support javascript. Regardless, there is no right or wrong answer in general, there is only the right or wrong answer for your particular website/market. If a significant number of the users you want to support have JS disabled, then by all means, build a site that runs without JS. But it's a cost-benefit analysis. For most sites I've worked on, the cost of lost business due to users without JS is (massively) dwarfed by the added development cost of building a full-featured app that doesn't require JS. If that means I lose you as a customer, I'm not losing sleep over it.
- marcosdumay 13y ago
  How do you differentiate a user using NoScript from a bot dismissed as a browser? If just I look at my logs, more than 90% of the access are from Firefox and don't run Javascript.
  - sergiotapia 13y ago
    What is your website about? Is it a consumer website aimed at teens, moms, father? Or a GNU hacking blog hosted on Jekyll? CONTEXT is key here.
tomjen3 13y ago
No we will not lose many more. The percentages who actually did something about flash very minuscule and we would lose more by not supporting IE6.

4 ms·

A minority that is growing quite fast , people are not stupid prepare for the javascript backlash like Flash hate wave. If your content is not worth it , if i n

by camus 13y ago

dandelany 13y ago
Do you have any statistics to back up your assertion that it's growing? From what I've seen from my own anecdotal experience, as well as from access logs from past places I've worked, this minority is vanishingly small (<0.5%, even among those using screen readers it's ~1.5%) and shrinking by the day as more mobile devices support javascript. Regardless, there is no right or wrong answer in general, there is only the right or wrong answer for your particular website/market. If a significant number of the users you want to support have JS disabled, then by all means, build a site that runs without JS. But it's a cost-benefit analysis. For most sites I've worked on, the cost of lost business due to users without JS is (massively) dwarfed by the added development cost of building a full-featured app that doesn't require JS. If that means I lose you as a customer, I'm not losing sleep over it.
- marcosdumay 13y ago
  How do you differentiate a user using NoScript from a bot dismissed as a browser? If just I look at my logs, more than 90% of the access are from Firefox and don't run Javascript.
  - sergiotapia 13y ago
    What is your website about? Is it a consumer website aimed at teens, moms, father? Or a GNU hacking blog hosted on Jekyll? CONTEXT is key here.
tomjen3 13y ago
No we will not lose many more. The percentages who actually did something about flash very minuscule and we would lose more by not supporting IE6.