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

"Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

bugzilla.mozilla.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 373 posts

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#101

Post by kondro »

straight_talk wrote: post #35
kondro wrote: post #27

I can't remember the last time I wrote an application that didn't rely on Javascript for even parts of its basic functionality. I simply don't understand why you would want to browse the web without JS enabled and the average user definitely would never turn it off except in error, causing them to think the browser is broken. Every single common-use browser on the Internet supports Javascript, there is no reason to a…

>> I simply don't understand why you would want to browse the web without JS enabled Security, performance, JS ads ... >> Every single common-use browser on the Internet supports Javascript My company provides a web based app to Fortune 500 banks, around 15% of the browsers we see have JS disabled.

15% of browsers? I don't believe it. This has definitely not been my experience. You must be counting scrapers/bots in this total.

Security? The browser sandboxes everything.

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#102

Post by veemjeem »

PavlovsCat wrote: post #44
veemjeem wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but the change isn't targeting you, the hacker news reader. There's dozens of mom & pops out there who have no understanding how browsers work and when they disable javascript, they'll complain that firefox can't render pages as well as IE.

Which is two things to me: 1. not a tragedy that can never be fixed, but usually a minor inconvenience 2. one of those random opportunities to learn something, like in this case what Javascript is. Taking away options from users because they don't know well enough can be kind of a self-full-filling prophecy, too. You cater to newbies, you get more and better newbies, entitled ones. Stuff should be nice to use, of cou…

You're a hacker, of course you've never heard anyone complain about the option. Mozilla may choose to differ as they probably have data that shows that a significant number of support emails show that disabling javascript was the root core of the problem. Besides, anyone who runs javascript disabled in a modern browser are either developers, or tin-foil hat wearers. I'm sure the ability to disable javascript was just an old remnant of 2002-era browsers when javascript was far less common. I think it's nearly impossible to find a webpage without a single reference to a javascript file these days.

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#103

Post by kondro »

dman wrote: post #73
kondro wrote: post #27

I can't remember the last time I wrote an application that didn't rely on Javascript for even parts of its basic functionality. I simply don't understand why you would want to browse the web without JS enabled and the average user definitely would never turn it off except in error, causing them to think the browser is broken. Every single common-use browser on the Internet supports Javascript, there is no reason to a…

Speed. Try loading theverge.com or cnn.com with / without javascript.

The content on both those sites load plenty fast with JS turned on… and I'm based in Australia with our shitty connection to the rest of the world.

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#104

Post by Gormo »

btipling wrote: post #86
readme wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. Non-technical users do not think that way, at all. Javascript and HTML are implementation details of the website they are using. Even people who hire IT consultants tend not to understand these things much, although they might think they do. I can imagine most web developers who freelance have dealt with a complaint from a client who had mistakenly turned off JavaScript, at least once.

Non-technical users do not even know what a browser is, much less anything about HTML or JavaScript.

What exactly is a non-technical user?

I read threads like this all the time: someone talks about "non-technical users" or "your grandma" or "pointy-haired bosses" or the like, and then goes to great length to discuss, in detail, the capacities or cognitive styles or knowledge base of members of these hypothetical categories.

It all seems like a bunch of arbitrary assumptions.

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#105

Post by zevyoura »

mullingitover wrote: post #83
Osmose wrote: post #26

Here's the bug where the option was removed: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=851702 Limi's blog post "Checkboxes that kill your product" is cited in the bug as a good explanation of the motivation behind this: http://limi.net/checkboxes-that-kill/ The option has been added to the DevTools for developers who find it useful: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=864249 And of course addons like NoSc…

Sure, blame the 'checkboxes' and not your own failure to handle disabled js gracefully. I'd be mad about this, except I haven't used firefox in years. One less reason to go back I guess.

You can blame the web at large for moving in a direction that assumes JS is enabled, but that doesn't make the UX better.

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#106

Post by slaxman »

betterunix wrote: post #84
slaxman wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

May be that works for you. But a significant number of web developers are moving on JS frameworks for web development such Angular, Meteor, Node, etc. Most sites built on these frameworks will break is javascript is disabled. As an end user, that is the worst user experience you can ask for.

"Most sites built on these frameworks will break is javascript is disabled" You know, there is a solution: the noscript tag. You know, the tag that lets you retain some level of functionality for people who do not have Javascript enabled. Why should I have to expose myself to various security and privacy problems just because some web development framework cannot keep an old version working ? There are a lot of reaso…

Yes, the noscript tag can be used. In fact if you see Rails' implementation of unobtrusive javascript, the application defaults to its html behaviour in case javascript is off. However, not all frameworks take this approach.

Moreover these days, developers don't develop for 100% of use cases. they start with implementation of say 80-85% of use cases. Folks not wanting to use javascript never come into that category, which means that noscript approach is almost never taken except may be in the case that the web application developed is targeted at that user category.

Lastly I would suggest this simple solution (http://someonewhocares.org/hosts/) to block all those pesky ads and pop-ups.

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#107

Post by tomschlick »

grannyg00se wrote: post #94
x0x0 wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other thing Alex posted is firefox really gives you no indication of why the internet looks weird and is breaking left and right. So you can disable js or images or ssl and unless you're lucky enough to know a programmer or IT person really have no guide to undoing whatever happened.

If "the internet" is suddenly breaking left and right after you've disabled certain features wouldn't you try re-enabling the features?

You give people way too much credit. Keep in mind most people still blatantly deny changing anything when something goes wrong for whatever reason. "I didn't even do anything, it just broke."

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#108

Post by [deleted] »

kondro wrote: post #101
straight_talk wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> I simply don't understand why you would want to browse the web without JS enabled Security, performance, JS ads ... >> Every single common-use browser on the Internet supports Javascript My company provides a web based app to Fortune 500 banks, around 15% of the browsers we see have JS disabled.

15% of browsers? I don't believe it. This has definitely not been my experience. You must be counting scrapers/bots in this total. Security? The browser sandboxes everything.

[deleted]

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#109

Post by jonknee »

betterunix wrote: post #84
slaxman wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

May be that works for you. But a significant number of web developers are moving on JS frameworks for web development such Angular, Meteor, Node, etc. Most sites built on these frameworks will break is javascript is disabled. As an end user, that is the worst user experience you can ask for.

"Most sites built on these frameworks will break is javascript is disabled" You know, there is a solution: the noscript tag. You know, the tag that lets you retain some level of functionality for people who do not have Javascript enabled. Why should I have to expose myself to various security and privacy problems just because some web development framework cannot keep an old version working ? There are a lot of reaso…

> Why should I have to expose myself to various security and privacy problems just because some web development framework cannot keep an old version working?

For a lot of sites and everything else coming up there is no old version. It's a Javascript app. Noscript could at best display an error, but if you're browsing around without Javascript you probably know enough that the error is on your end.

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#110

Post by BoyWizard »

Gormo wrote: post #91
gkoberger wrote: post #22

Here's a very relevant blog post by Alex Limi of Mozilla: http://limi.net/checkboxes-that-kill/ Most sites these days that aren’t just displaying content will fail in interesting & mysterious ways if you don’t have JavaScript enabled. For the general population, Firefox will appear broken. And yes, I know that some people have reasons (privacy, web development) to turn off JavaScript. There are many add-ons that can…

Is there any empirical evidence that suggests that people accidentally disabling JavaScript and then being confused as to why websites don't look right is a significant problem? The author of that article says: "Is it really worth having a preference panel that benefits fewer than 2% of users overall? — obvious spoiler alert: The answer is no." The answer is yes . If 2% of users have a purpose for it, perhaps it woul…

> If there really is a problem, it may be worthwhile to move it to an "advanced settings" panel, but removing it entirely is a terrible idea.

Is this not the equivalent of 'about:config'? In reality it is the advanced settings panel, just without the pretty dialog to go with it.

Post reply on HN