Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why I Don't Use Netscape (1999)

complang.tuwien.ac.at

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 285 posts

Re: Why I Don't Use Netscape (1999)

#261

Post by Seirdy »

tbran wrote: post #110
forgotmypw17 wrote: post #70

I still use this strategy, though these days, I primarily use Mosaic and Netscape for testing. I tend to browse without JavaScript enabled, except for places I already trust to not abuse it. And if there is anything blocking me from accessing the page, such as a modal dialog, a cookie notice, a survey, a prompt to sign up for the newsletter, I close the tab. Over time, I have found that type of rude lack of considera…

I feel like the strategy of closing sites with newsletter sign-ups, dialog, etc. is just going to waste your time. If I'm searching for something, I just want the information. Not gonna close websites till I find one that has no popups/modals!! Popup Blocker [0] and uBlock Origin for Firefox will do a pretty good job of getting rid of the junk you don't want. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/popup-block…

I concur on using an adblocker to block modals, cookie notices, dickbars, related articles, author profile pictures, etc. In fact, I never dismiss modals because doing so may imply consent to tracking cookies (you never know these days…). I just block them with a quick cosmetic selector-based filter.

Unless it's a personal site/blog I typically open a site to find information I came for, and close it as soon as that task is done. Anything that makes this take longer than it needs to gets blocked. Sites should strive to stay open for as few seconds/minutes as possible while still giving me the requested information.

Regarding text/image-focused sites that require JS: I generally find sites made by people who haven't figured out how to send text over HTTPS to have low-quality content befitting of their low-quality stacks. I'm all the better for using my adblocker to block them from my search results page forever; it saves me time in the long run.

Re: Why I Don't Use Netscape (1999)

#262

Post by poorlyknit »

seti0Cha wrote: post #131
mrtksn wrote: post #20

So the "movement" against modern browser features is not a movement and has nothing to do with these features but its simply a version of "kids these days lost their ways" thinking. A version of conservatism, I guess. "Everything was better in the good old days" and "The new generation is horrible, the humanity is doomed" kind of thoughts are probably a manifestation of fading youth.

Back in my day, when kids heard older people talking, they listened because they knew they were hearing from someone with more experience than themselves. Kids these days lost their ways and think that knowledge and judgement are achieved in youth and then gradually fade away. Just kidding, back in my day kids assumed the same thing. Also, this exact conversation has been happening since the web was created. Linked a…

This is exact conversation (modulo the web) has likely been happening since humans became a thing. It's an endless cycle and it takes a lot of self-reflection to step out of.

Re: Why I Don't Use Netscape (1999)

#263

Post by zach_garwood »

dkarl wrote: post #59
olalonde wrote: post #46

A good reminder that techies are often completely out of touch with what the average Joe wants.

And companies writing the software that average people use are motivated solely by "what the average Joe wants," where "what the average Joe wants" is defined by business metrics like "how much is Joe clicking" and "how much is Joe spending."

Average Joes love clicking and spending. Gotta give the people what they want!

Re: Why I Don't Use Netscape (1999)

#264

Post by Seirdy »

Ensorceled wrote: post #100
alpaca128 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just checked, Google and Amazon still work flawlessly without JS. And many other "useful products" too. The question is, if a startup can't make a site that works without JS, are they actually focused on the product? Assuming it's not a webapp, of course.

You're making two completely different versions of your web product: one with a rich, modern experience using JavaScript and the other using vanilla get/post. I've built several SaaS products and I can't imagine building a complicated product that supports both a JS and no JS version with a small, startup team.

Nor can I. That's why progressive enhancement is common sense: it's way less effort, less complexity, and easier to make accessible.

Re: Why I Don't Use Netscape (1999)

#265

Post by forgotmypw17 »

rdez6173 wrote: post #119
forgotmypw17 wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you know someone has cognitive impairment which makes it difficult to use JS-heavy sites and/or is using an older device which has performance issues with heavy sites? Answer: Don't worry, they just won't be able to use your site.

The same could be said about the use of images on a site. The solution is to develop sites with accessibility in mind. Use a screen reader; experience what ALL your users will experience. Experiment with various rendering tools to emulate color blindness. There are even more tools to performance tune your website. This all comes down to the site author taking the time to cater to as many users as possible. It is not…

To me, (accessibility) = (user capability) + (user state) + (device capability) + (device state)

I think it is really [something] that you refer to someone's choice in how to optimally configure their browser for their own use as "crippling"

Re: Why I Don't Use Netscape (1999)

#266

Post by forgotmypw17 »

Merciernmon wrote: post #211
forgotmypw17 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for recommending it. It does look quite usable, other than lacking transit directions, and I plan to give it a try.

You're in luck: Apple Maps does offer transit directions. You can also toggle on viewing transit lines in the map mode menu.

Not the DuckDuckGo version, from what I can see.

Re: Why I Don't Use Netscape (1999)

#267

Post by forgotmypw17 »

ted_bunny wrote: post #246
forgotmypw17 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gosh, that is frustrating to even read about. The first time it happened, I would get rid of whatever software was involved in causing it and never use it again, except for testing purposes. I completely agree with you about everything else too. The Web is mature enough that I can use a well-tested website with a 20-year-old browser. There is no technical reason to not have a minimum-viable web browser with a smaller…

Care to namedrop your favorites?

If you're into keyboard-driven, then:

qutebrowser

luakit

If you're into more traditional, then there are these Firefox-based forks:

LibreWolf

Waterfox

Waterfox Classic

PaleMoon

I'm also a fan of Camino on Mac, but that's mostly HTTP-only at this point.

Re: Why I Don't Use Netscape (1999)

#268

Post by betwixthewires »

mrtksn wrote: post #118
badsectoracula wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is also possible that stuff are getting worse though. After all i remember friends of mine who were in university raging on how bloated the web was around 2000 and i'm 99% certain they weren't middle-aged men disguised as teenagers :-P. If anything i don't remember knowing anyone above 25y back then who even cared about web stuff. After all having some people see and complain about things getting worse doesn't mea…

When you look back, you can notice patterns: Something new and amazing comes out and it promises to take the humanity to a new age. At first it is fuelled by enthusiasm where believers work for free on it just to make it great and pay their bills by working for money on the old-school stuff. Their prime motivation is not profit. Then this thing starts becoming profitable in the sense of bringing street cred and money…

We aren't complaining about cool new features that the normies like though. We are complaining about the fact that some of us have gigabit per second bandwidth and still need multiple seconds to load and render a page. We are complaining about the fact that it is literally infeasible to build a web engine from scratch at this point, by anyone in the world. The problem isn't catering to every day people, the problem is praying on their ignorance and forcing them and us to tolerate a worse tool because they don't know any better. And when I say don't know any better, I'm not saying "they'd use Linux if they knew better" I'm saying that they legitimately don't know that over half (and I'm being generous) the data they download to render a news article is shit they're not trying to access but they're paying for, they think it just has to be that way for some nerdy technical reason they don't understand.

This is not about ideals, this is about foisting crap on the world that literally nobody wants or needs.

Re: Why I Don't Use Netscape (1999)

#269

Post by forgotmypw17 »

ted_bunny wrote: post #246
forgotmypw17 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gosh, that is frustrating to even read about. The first time it happened, I would get rid of whatever software was involved in causing it and never use it again, except for testing purposes. I completely agree with you about everything else too. The Web is mature enough that I can use a well-tested website with a 20-year-old browser. There is no technical reason to not have a minimum-viable web browser with a smaller…

Care to namedrop your favorites?

Just to add these browsers which are VERY fast and performant, at the expense of being less compatible with some more overbuilt sites:

Links (GUI)

Links (console)

Lynx (console)

w3m (console, especially if you like vim bindings)

Re: Why I Don't Use Netscape (1999)

#270

Post by vldr »

forgotmypw17 wrote: post #70

I still use this strategy, though these days, I primarily use Mosaic and Netscape for testing. I tend to browse without JavaScript enabled, except for places I already trust to not abuse it. And if there is anything blocking me from accessing the page, such as a modal dialog, a cookie notice, a survey, a prompt to sign up for the newsletter, I close the tab. Over time, I have found that type of rude lack of considera…

When I get obtrusive, unrequested maillist popups, I signup someone from my frequent spammer list. Makes me feel good :)
Post reply on HN