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

The Verge's web sucks

blog.lmorchard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 137 posts

Re: The Verge's web sucks

#91

Post by krstck »

Remember that beautiful, amazing time when pop-up blockers had forever defeated those obnoxious and intrusive ads? My timeline could be off, but I'm thinking somewhere around 2004-2006, when Firefox was really picking up steam. I feel like the current web is in some kind of alternative universe where we've been shifted back in time over a decade. I have to use Ublock and Ghostery to make the web even remotely usable.

Perhaps websites just need to die altogether, and instead we'll just use APIs. You choose how to render the content in your browser according to your desires. Oh wait....RSS.

Re: The Verge's web sucks

#92

Post by koyote »

kryptiskt wrote: post #20
oliyoung wrote: post #2

These guys (ie Verge) are going to have a really really tough time when iOS9 lands https://developer.apple.com/library/prerelease/ios/releaseno...

They can just do what everybody else does, replace the site with "USE THE VERGE APP!!1!", and show the ads there instead. Which is a good reason for Apple to push adblocking in the browser.

Hah, but they recently removed the Verge app from the android store to get people to use the mobile site instead.

Re: The Verge's web sucks

#93

Post by eevilspock »

gorhill wrote: post #58
insin wrote: post #31

> We keep things like Adblock Plus at arm's length for plausible deniability - but everyone I know uses it. I wish this had been included in the main body of this post, with some metrics; everyone you know uses it because it makes the web suck so much less. Loading The Verge's article in a Chrome incognito window: 19.6 MB transferred, finished in 41.9 s, huge ad covering the entire page above the developer console I…

Default-deny is the best answer against bloat -- though not for everybody unfortunately, but I did try to make it as straightforward as possible with uBlock Origin[1]. Using default-deny in uBlock Origin/Chromium[2] and with the page displaying properly, I get from Network pane in dev console: - 62 requests - 508 KB transferred Once you start using default-deny mode, it's difficult to go back to anything less restric…

Raymond, how did Chris get to take over the original branch, and yours appears as a derivative work, when you are the originator? What the hell happened?

I want to switch to uBlock Origin, but I currently use Safari. It uses the least amount of resources on my Mac compared to Chrome and Firefox.

Re: The Verge's web sucks

#94

Post by eevilspock »

look_lookatme wrote: post #62
gorhill wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Default-deny is the best answer against bloat -- though not for everybody unfortunately, but I did try to make it as straightforward as possible with uBlock Origin[1]. Using default-deny in uBlock Origin/Chromium[2] and with the page displaying properly, I get from Network pane in dev console: - 62 requests - 508 KB transferred Once you start using default-deny mode, it's difficult to go back to anything less restric…

> sorry if this sounds like a plug, I do feel strongly about users re-claiming control about where their computer connects. Would you install an extension that, when clicking a link to the verge, it pops up a message that says "this site is considered by the community to be a site that employs intrusive advertising techniques" to remind you not to connect to it at all?

Totally. The web isn't going to change until there are hard consequences for those that are screwing it up, and without information such as this most users won't realize what is happening and bad websites continue to get away with it (and all the ill-gotten revenue).

Re: The Verge's web sucks

#95

Post by krstck »

gorhill wrote: post #58
insin wrote: post #31

> We keep things like Adblock Plus at arm's length for plausible deniability - but everyone I know uses it. I wish this had been included in the main body of this post, with some metrics; everyone you know uses it because it makes the web suck so much less. Loading The Verge's article in a Chrome incognito window: 19.6 MB transferred, finished in 41.9 s, huge ad covering the entire page above the developer console I…

Default-deny is the best answer against bloat -- though not for everybody unfortunately, but I did try to make it as straightforward as possible with uBlock Origin[1]. Using default-deny in uBlock Origin/Chromium[2] and with the page displaying properly, I get from Network pane in dev console: - 62 requests - 508 KB transferred Once you start using default-deny mode, it's difficult to go back to anything less restric…

The difference in page load times before and after implementing uBlock is staggering. Having to use a computer you don't own (or mobile) feels like traveling back to 1999 using 56k dial-up.

Re: The Verge's web sucks

#96

Post by krstck »

look_lookatme wrote: post #62
gorhill wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Default-deny is the best answer against bloat -- though not for everybody unfortunately, but I did try to make it as straightforward as possible with uBlock Origin[1]. Using default-deny in uBlock Origin/Chromium[2] and with the page displaying properly, I get from Network pane in dev console: - 62 requests - 508 KB transferred Once you start using default-deny mode, it's difficult to go back to anything less restric…

> sorry if this sounds like a plug, I do feel strongly about users re-claiming control about where their computer connects. Would you install an extension that, when clicking a link to the verge, it pops up a message that says "this site is considered by the community to be a site that employs intrusive advertising techniques" to remind you not to connect to it at all?

Web of Trust does something similar, but seems to be geared more towards spam and malware. Would be nice to have something to keep track of all the sites that I forget not to go to (e.g. Forbes).

Re: The Verge's web sucks

#97

Post by dguaraglia »

vinceyuan wrote: post #7

I did the same thing several days ago. But after 30 seconds, the web page did not finish loading. It has downloaded 7+ MB. I closed it.

Exactly! The worst (or best) part of having a slow mobile site is mobile platforms are, by and large, single-task platforms: you click on a link and then look at the screen until the page load.

If your website makes me stare at a blank screen for over 5 seconds that's it, the attention span for your low-content article that I was about to read out of boredom is gone. Close tab, click next link.

I guess it's a self-limiting problem in the end :)

Re: The Verge's web sucks

#98

Post by _ll5a »

giancarlostoro wrote: post #47
JustSomeNobody wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He blames mobile browsers for at least half the article (I had to stop reading). Sure, mobile browsers may not be great, but web sites these days seem to be written by people who just don't give a shit. Their hipster attitude is ruining people's experience.

I agree. I've wanted to write my own blog post about the things that suck about Mobile web, it's not the device or the software (typically), it's the way websites are designed (or not) for phones that sucks. You get advertisements that hijack all your screen real estate, open up the Android Market out of nowhere (why do they have this much priviledge? That shouldn't happen on the desktop without asking for permission…

I hate how helpless I feel when using a phone. This website wants to open the App Store? Guess I have to let it. I was hoping this was at least a little better on the Android side of things, but maybe not. Sigh.

Re: The Verge's web sucks

#99

Post by wiremine »

nly wrote: post #72
wiremine wrote: post #50

As a consultant, I only see web site producers making an effort to curb poor web practices when Google forces them to: Google's move to boost mobile-friendly design in the rankings has driven us a TON of responsive design work. I wonder if that is going to be what it takes to fix today's bloat problems: Google takes the hammer to sites that too much advertising cruft. Otherwise, I don't see business makers seeing muc…

I don't think any of this is appropriate for a search engine. I want a search engine to find me the best results for my query based on content, even if it's ad-riddled.

I agree 100%. I'm just observing that it is one of the few external sources of influence I see change organizational behavior. Business people FEAR google's impact on their success.

Re: The Verge's web sucks

#100

Post by A_COMPUTER »

vvanders wrote: post #83
mdevere wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Temporarily disabled by default but they turn them on for certain articles. They claimed this was because comments had become too negative. It is possible they are genuinely just trying to protect the mental health of their staff who are usually the targets of more aggressive comments but somehow I doubt it.

It seemed to happen after they posted the SpaceX article(www.theverge.com/2015/6/29/8863121/spacex-falcon-9-rocket-explosioauses) that was poorly thought through. They got some criticism(but not abusive) feedback in the comments. They started deleting comments in that thread and it all went downhill from there once people realized posts were being removed. Kinda a shame, I liked Topolsky & Co but I don't visit it nea…

It had been brewing a while, in my opinion. What I was seeing happening was, reasonable people would point out flaws in the article, then a moderator would jump in and argue with the person like they were a child and their points were stupid, escalating the situation and probably now pissing off more people than just the original complainer. I stopped reading their comments because of the moderators. Moderators should be seen and not heard.
Post reply on HN