111–120 of 487 posts
My personal/hobby business web site ( https://www.rlvision.com ) is based on code 22 years ago. It's built with tables, because that's how you did things back then. The age shows. But I haven't found reason to rebuild it yet. Simply put, it works. It may not be mobile friendly, but the goal is to make available my Windows software, so my aim is desktop users.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you actually tried the site on a mobile device? It's impossible to read the text and navigation is hell. Wouldn't classify that as "mobile friendly".
Just tried on iPad, the site works great. Did you mean ‘phone’ and not ‘mobile device’?
My father still updates his website with Frontpage (he had a recent 6 month outage because he inadvertently deleted the Windows XP vmdk on his system, but I recovered that for him recently.) He’s 75, and isn’t interested in converting or learning anything new at this stage. The funny thing is for years his home-made site was the top google hit if you searched for “hill's criteria” (See Hill's criteria of causation).…
https://developers.google.com/speed/pagespeed/insights/?url=... 100 Points. Mobile First. Better than React Native.
100 points on pagespeed is not that hard with static sites. - drop 99% of the JS (PWA, lazy-loading, infinite scroll, jquery, you don't need any of them for a webpage), convert the remaining for 1% to vanilla js and use it as progressive enhancement. - use EM or % as layout width/height - inline css, js, and svg EDIT - no webfonts! The only thing that'll remain as an issue are tables wider, than viewport, on mobile.…
Jokes aside, the first thing I read was the sentence "here there is a java applet, sorry your browser doesn't support it" :D Which is funny, after all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is hilarious! Turns out 18 year old websites were mobile friendly after all
Have you actually tried the site on a mobile device? It's impossible to read the text and navigation is hell. Wouldn't classify that as "mobile friendly".