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

Show HN: Whosfiring

whosfiring.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 187 posts

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#151

Post by bandrami »

romanovcode wrote: post #71
mibbiting wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why computers become slower and slower, and people have to upgrade. Because lazy developers make idiotic choices. It's a static list of items. Hardly very efficient to load all that javascript, do a server request, just to display a list is it.

While I totally agree about this site, it's stupid to disregard JS as a whole. Imagine websites like FB without JS - it would be horrible.

Huh? I always use the mbasic Facebook site: it's a much, much better experience.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#153

Post by gnu8 »

codedokode wrote: post #41

Sorry, but I am going to comment on a technical implementation rather than the content of a site. The site shows blank page without JS enabled. I did not understand why one would need one megabyte of minified Javascript to display a list of 10 items. Probably it is because the developers were too busy learning trendy JS frameworks and do not know about HTML and server side page generation (in PHP this could be done m…

Maybe that's why he's fired.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#154

Post by pc86 »

romanovcode wrote: post #71
mibbiting wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why computers become slower and slower, and people have to upgrade. Because lazy developers make idiotic choices. It's a static list of items. Hardly very efficient to load all that javascript, do a server request, just to display a list is it.

While I totally agree about this site, it's stupid to disregard JS as a whole. Imagine websites like FB without JS - it would be horrible.

It's a good thing mibbiting didn't disregard JS as a whole, then.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#155

Post by DonHopkins »

jbpetersen wrote: post #28
iodbh wrote: post #6

Please pardon my negativity but i'm tired of this trend of taking something that span discussion on HN and making it into an app as soon as possible, then posting it on HN. It's getting out of control since the old geek jobs article on Indiehackers. There's now at least one of these posts per week and they're less and less interesting. It's not showing cool tech or a cool idea, it's just trying to capitalize on the i…

Make an app called "As Seen On HN", post about it, then the cycle will be complete and we can go back to the regular smorgasbord of things that get posted here. Taken a step further, a webapp that tracks businesses that emerge from different online communities would be super useful for improving commercial targeting of social media, and with a delay on content updates baked in for free users could probably find a goo…

How about an app for crowdsourcing answers to Y Combinator application questions?

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#156

Post by devgutt »

gsnedders wrote: post #142
beagle3 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it' because whoever made the site is ignoring the age-old simple practice of showing something (even the text "This website requires javascript") even if not all resources have loaded. It is entirely unlike the examples you gave. Especially because his browser does show ~99% of the internet properly (with various degrees of functionality, but still something does come up), and that there spiders, proxies, screenr…

All major screenreaders work from the DOM and the accessibility tree nowadays, and have done for a long time at this point. Dynamic content is no problem in and of itself.

Unless you are fetching data async. Google and other will not wait for data.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#157

Post by __derek__ »

Blahah wrote: post #97
tambourine_man wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not an equivalent analogy. Disabling JS displays nothing at all , while changing text and background color is a progressive enhancement. Content should still be accessible without JavaScript, even if, perhaps, in a less convenient way, i.e., every click reloads the entire page

Why? Every browser has JS, and it's a core web technology.

You and GP are missing the point: the site uses an ocean-liner's worth of JavaScript in order to do anything at all. HTML is also a core web technology and is arguably more "core" than JavaScript.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#158

Post by __derek__ »

retube wrote: post #109
codedokode wrote: post #41

Sorry, but I am going to comment on a technical implementation rather than the content of a site. The site shows blank page without JS enabled. I did not understand why one would need one megabyte of minified Javascript to display a list of 10 items. Probably it is because the developers were too busy learning trendy JS frameworks and do not know about HTML and server side page generation (in PHP this could be done m…

It doesn't even load at all in my corp environment. I am guessing the CDN or where ever the framework .js is hosted is blocked by our firewall.

No. I'm sitting at home (with JS enabled!) and got nothing at all.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#159

Post by the_gastropod »

tokenizerrr wrote: post #69
mibbiting wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why computers become slower and slower, and people have to upgrade. Because lazy developers make idiotic choices. It's a static list of items. Hardly very efficient to load all that javascript, do a server request, just to display a list is it.

Perhaps we should be going back to writing websites in assembly.

I don't think this is a fair argument. Writing web pages as single page JS apps is _harder_ than writing them as server-side generated html responses. And in many cases (this one as a great example), the user experience is worse for having done so.

Re: Show HN: Whosfiring

#160

Post by Steppschuh »

devgutt wrote: post #156
gsnedders wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All major screenreaders work from the DOM and the accessibility tree nowadays, and have done for a long time at this point. Dynamic content is no problem in and of itself.

Unless you are fetching data async. Google and other will not wait for data.

That's not true. Google indeed waits for async content to load for a given amount of time. You can inspect this from the Google webmaster tools.
Post reply on HN