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

Building an HTML-first site doubled our users overnight

mohkohn.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

351–360 of 605 posts

Re: Building an HTML-first site doubled our users overnight

#351

Post by 8note »

atoav wrote: post #180
OskarS wrote: post #165

As a non-web dev, I have a question about this part: > There was a sad coda; as is the way of contract work, I moved on. I explained what I had built to my replacement, that it always worked even without javascript. He was appalled and said, “but that’s a lot more work for us.” Why is it more work? The approach described in the article seems honestly reasonably simple: just write the standard components for the form,…

By this point people don't appear to have any real clue how to write HTML anymore. Writing semantic HTML isn't significantly harder than say writing Markdown. You copy some HTMl skeleton and you literally just stack your elements into the body. I managed to do that as a 13 year old on MySpace without any deep instruction. Sure you have to close elements as well so the syntax is slightly harder than markdown, but that…

>

writing straight html and css sucked. building reddit css themes sucked

Re: Building an HTML-first site doubled our users overnight

#352

Post by creesch »

rjsw wrote: post #282
creesch wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I wonder why there isn't a mobile OS that simply lets you build apps with JavaScript, HTML, and CSS and gives you reliable storage without all this effort. There is! You just have to time travel all the way back to 2009 when webOS was launched by Palm. Time travel is the easy part, you then also need to somehow prevent Palms demise and webOS fading into obscurity as a smartphone OS. If 2009 is too far back you can…

You can still buy KaiOS phones, I have one.

Sure, but they aren't exactly widespread or even close to mainstream.

Re: Building an HTML-first site doubled our users overnight

#353

Post by nosioptar »

OskarS wrote: post #165

As a non-web dev, I have a question about this part: > There was a sad coda; as is the way of contract work, I moved on. I explained what I had built to my replacement, that it always worked even without javascript. He was appalled and said, “but that’s a lot more work for us.” Why is it more work? The approach described in the article seems honestly reasonably simple: just write the standard components for the form,…

I used to do web dev. (Got out of it due to js frameworks and their bloat.)

I'd pee myself in happiness to take over a project like this.

Re: Building an HTML-first site doubled our users overnight

#354

Post by duderific »

OskarS wrote: post #165

As a non-web dev, I have a question about this part: > There was a sad coda; as is the way of contract work, I moved on. I explained what I had built to my replacement, that it always worked even without javascript. He was appalled and said, “but that’s a lot more work for us.” Why is it more work? The approach described in the article seems honestly reasonably simple: just write the standard components for the form,…

I was confused by that too, but then I thought maybe the new replacement was commenting that using javascript in the app would provide more work for contractors, which he perceives as a good thing. So not using javascript provides less work. I could be wrong though.

Re: Building an HTML-first site doubled our users overnight

#355

Post by 8note »

neya wrote: post #217

Sadly, this is the story of nearly every React project I've reluctantly inherited. In my experience, it's because React is not opinionated like its peers Vue and Svelte. So, a bunch of devs will use something for state management and and another team will use something else completely. Eventually both teams leave after making a mess. But, if you look at the graphs and numbers that MBAs chase, they will all look like…

> Ironically Facebook was super popular in the 2014s because they didnt have much React based BS going on.

facebook was super popular in 2014s because they were just starting the transition from mostly being about people to mostly being algorithmic rage bait, and they tapped a new market of fox news/conservative talk radio listeners

Re: Building an HTML-first site doubled our users overnight

#356

Post by igsomething »

concinds wrote: post #215
chao- wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starting a few years ago, I realized some junior and medior engineers never once considered the possibility of building a website (app, experience, etc.) in anything other than a heavy SPA framework. But they're not stupid people! If you directly asked "Can you build a website without React?" they know the answer is obviously "Yes." However, if you asked them to build a new website, they would unthinkingly start a ne…

You are far too empathetic to them. They should not hold the jobs they have. These are the people writing React monstrosities for government benefit websites, and testing them on fast iPhones and fast 4G, without realizing that every page load for actual users will take 30 seconds on their old $200 Android on 3G, and users won’t complete the form. It’s a culture of not giving a shit, that’s the deeper issue.

I had a contract once to save a government website that had serious performance issues, it was so unusable that people preferred to go in-person and wait 4h in a queue rather than try to fill the forms online.

The frontend was in React because the company that got the contract initially used React for everything. The frontend was a 5MB SPA, but it could've been (mostly static) HTML files with some interactivity for forms like TFA. Everyone working on the project agreed React didn't make sense, but we couldn't do anything about it because someone from the government IT department would have to admit they made a mistake. There was no budget for rewrites in the contract. The few times a developer attempted to remove any "React monstrosity" they got in trouble.

Sometimes developers care, but the people in charge don't, and in government environments every change must go through them first.

Re: Building an HTML-first site doubled our users overnight

#357

Post by alok-g »

oulipo2 wrote: post #335
alok-g wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> There should always be a way for tech-illiterate people to ask someone, and fill their forms Isn't that more open to fraud and abuse though by the "someone" whether that is a gov employee or otherwise.

If it's a government employee (as it should), it shouldn't be open to fraud and abuse, no. There should be a trail of what happened

Yes, there 'should' be a trail. And there's someone and a process to check that trail. And a process to find the issues, correctly so, and fix, and do all that on a timely basis, and reimburse the person for damages, ...

PS: I have actually suffered through some of this, badly so, though in an unrelated setting.

It comes back to which system is more robust/mistake-proof and more practically recoverable.

Re: Building an HTML-first site doubled our users overnight

#358

Post by kstrauser »

simpaticoder wrote: post #174
OskarS wrote: post #165

As a non-web dev, I have a question about this part: > There was a sad coda; as is the way of contract work, I moved on. I explained what I had built to my replacement, that it always worked even without javascript. He was appalled and said, “but that’s a lot more work for us.” Why is it more work? The approach described in the article seems honestly reasonably simple: just write the standard components for the form,…

Simpler doesn't mean easier. Consider a chef who at their previous job started using a wood-burning stove. This is an objectively simpler tool than a gas or electric stove, yet it would be very difficult (even impossible, depending on local architecture and regulations) for a new kitchen to add one.

90% of the SPAs I use could be Django/Rails/Flask apps with no noticeable difference, other than that they'd be many times more responsive on slower devices.

"Old" SSR apps are mature, not obsolete. It's ridiculous when they're not considered even when they'd be the right tool for the job. I wouldn't try to clone Google Docs in Django, but something like Linear could 100% be modeled as a CRUD app with new page loads on click without a substantial loss of functionality from the user's POV. Not to mention built-in, automatic support for pervasive "deep linking", aka "linking", because you access a URL's contents by GETting and rendering that URL is just how it works.

Re: Building an HTML-first site doubled our users overnight

#359

Post by fiedzia »

chao- wrote: post #198
OskarS wrote: post #165

As a non-web dev, I have a question about this part: > There was a sad coda; as is the way of contract work, I moved on. I explained what I had built to my replacement, that it always worked even without javascript. He was appalled and said, “but that’s a lot more work for us.” Why is it more work? The approach described in the article seems honestly reasonably simple: just write the standard components for the form,…

Starting a few years ago, I realized some junior and medior engineers never once considered the possibility of building a website (app, experience, etc.) in anything other than a heavy SPA framework. But they're not stupid people! If you directly asked "Can you build a website without React?" they know the answer is obviously "Yes." However, if you asked them to build a new website, they would unthinkingly start a ne…

There is a reason we use React today - if you want dynamic and complex site, HTML is PITA to work with. Either you reload everything on any change (not good), or end up with a maze of partial reloads in event handlers (not good either). It was done, it was bad, React (and similar frameworks) was the solution. If you don't need complexity of React, fine, use HTML. But if you do, who can guarantee that 5 min later someone will not start requesting site not to reload here and there, but update this bit here. So I don't blame people for just using React. And in this case the issue wasn't that react was used, but that it was used poorly.

Re: Building an HTML-first site doubled our users overnight

#360

Post by Joeri »

concinds wrote: post #215
chao- wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Starting a few years ago, I realized some junior and medior engineers never once considered the possibility of building a website (app, experience, etc.) in anything other than a heavy SPA framework. But they're not stupid people! If you directly asked "Can you build a website without React?" they know the answer is obviously "Yes." However, if you asked them to build a new website, they would unthinkingly start a ne…

You are far too empathetic to them. They should not hold the jobs they have. These are the people writing React monstrosities for government benefit websites, and testing them on fast iPhones and fast 4G, without realizing that every page load for actual users will take 30 seconds on their old $200 Android on 3G, and users won’t complete the form. It’s a culture of not giving a shit, that’s the deeper issue.

New cheap android phones are just as slow as old cheap android phones. The bottom of the market has been stuck in performance limbo for years, and modern web dev frameworks are ill designed to meet them where they are at.
Post reply on HN