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

211–220 of 373 posts

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#211

Post by Zecc »

skriticos2 wrote: post #200
just2n wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to say that this article is actually quite terrible, as is the opinion that any option that might ever be confusing to a user is an option that shouldn't ship with the product. The thesis of the article is: "Well, we have met the enemy, and he is us.* In the currently shipping version, Firefox ships with many options that will render the browser unusable to most people, right in the main settings ui." The solu…

Why not just put it in the about:config page for FF? Casual users are unlikely to accidentially access this page as there is no GUI navigation to it. Though most casual users I know avoid GUI configuration all the same, so I don't really see the issue here.

UI discussion aside, changing the option on upgrade seems a little... impolite, to say the least.

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#212

Post by lelf »

logn wrote: post #31
nhamann wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends on the type of article. I write a lot of blog posts about math. The most convenient way to do this is using Mathjax. If browsers had native support for mathematical notation then I would be inclined to agree with you, but this is not currently the case.

Can you get away with using unicode chars instead? ... Sounds like this could be a good open source project.

And load fonts with JS?

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#213

Post by simonbrown »

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.

How are you detecting whether they have JS disabled?

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#214

Post by lmm »

tomphoolery wrote: post #145
Gormo wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Is there any empirical evidence that the use of AdBlock + Ghostery or WOT or whatever privacy addons you're already using are any less secure than disabling JavaScript outright? Disabling JavaScript has a few MAJOR disadvantages to proper web usage: 1. As the blog post has said, many web sites will fail in mysterious and unexpected ways. Some web apps may be rendered completely useless. In fact, you might as well jus…

Ghostery has recently been found to be selling user data. ISTR there was a similar incident with AdBlock? I don't want to have to trust some random extension author to have got these things right.

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#215

Post by philbo »

The following rant is somewhat tangential but, as a front-end developer that takes pride in progressively enhancing websites I work on, I think this is a shame for a different reason.

So many times when speaking to employers/product owners about progressive enhancement of JavaScript components, the answer I get back is along the lines of "we don't care about that" or "we don't have the time". Sometimes in conversations with other developers too. I think this change will contribute to an increase in that attitude.

Progressively enhancing a website enables you to still deliver a whizz-bang, fancy-pants UI but ensure that it degrades to a sane text document when viewed in, say, lynx [1]. And it doesn't mean doubling the development time of every feature, which I often hear cited as an argument against. Often it can involve providing a very cut-down equivalent that takes relatively little time to build.

Should we care about people that turn off JavaScript or use a non-JavaScript browser enough to write code for them? Given that the web is an open, standards-based platform, I think we should.

[1] http://lynx.browser.org/

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#216

Post by lmm »

copypasteweb wrote: post #201
foobarbazqux wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Youtube needs either Flash or HTML5, do you think it's worthless?

works well for playing video without any JavaScript.

is W3C gunk, with its crazy and pointless clsids. works fine, as it has for 14 years.

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#217

Post by millstone »

CyberDroiD wrote: post #7

Javascript is not required to read articles on the web. It's optional. That's why "Reader" mode is so handy, just show me the article so I can read it. Sometimes I don't like waiting for my browser to struggle with poorly written JS. It sounds like a classic noobie mistake... "Why are users able to turn off Javascript?" "No idea." "Remove the feature!" If anyone says Javascript is not optional, they are trying to sel…

I came here to wax rhapsodic about Reader mode too. It's my favorite web browser feature in half a decade.

The fact is that most web sites use JavaScript _and_ CSS in a user-hostile manner. CSS is used to draw the eye towards advertising or other content on the site, with the hope of distracting me from what I came to read. Many sites even use CSS to create a faux-popup overlay "window" that has to be dismissed before the content can be viewed.

And of course, the vast majority of JavaScript is aimed at analytics, tracking cookies, advertisements, and other code that, as a user, I'd really rather not execute.

My ideal solution is something like ClickToPlugin, where a site can request JavaScript, and I can choose to grant it or not. Mozilla's decision is disappointing, because they are working in the interest of web publishers instead of web users.

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#218

Post by roel_v »

skriticos2 wrote: post #200
just2n wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to say that this article is actually quite terrible, as is the opinion that any option that might ever be confusing to a user is an option that shouldn't ship with the product. The thesis of the article is: "Well, we have met the enemy, and he is us.* In the currently shipping version, Firefox ships with many options that will render the browser unusable to most people, right in the main settings ui." The solu…

Why not just put it in the about:config page for FF? Casual users are unlikely to accidentially access this page as there is no GUI navigation to it. Though most casual users I know avoid GUI configuration all the same, so I don't really see the issue here.

It is, but the bug report in the OP is raging against it being there.

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#219

Post by hysan »

tracker1 wrote: post #184
hysan wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Err... I just opened up Excel (2002 since that is all I have at work), selected a cell, clicked on the SUM button (sure it uses the mathematical symbol for sum but if you hover over it, it says SUM), and then was able to click and drag (or CRTL + click for nonconsecutive cells) to select cells for the sum. This is all via the GUI. I'm not sure how this is hidden. Heck, I did this in a Japanese version of Office which…

Honestly, didn't know, I rarely use excel, but do know a lot of people who do a ton of VBA code to connect to database resources to create interactive spreadsheets.. and a lot of that is far from common, button-click functionality. And in any case, for those that want it, it's in about:config ... I doubt anyone who should be disabling JS would be looking around for it in a config frame, and not do a quick google sear…

While you may know a lot of people who do VBA code in Excel, that is actually far from the norm for the average corporate user. From my non-CS friends who have worked in both large and small companies, I have heard tons of horror stories of the insane spreadsheets that low-to-average users make using just the GUI functionality. Huge spreadsheets with formulas spanning tons of sheets to simulate what could be done in a simple function. These spreadsheets get huge over time as coworkers slowly add/update functionality over time. All using the GUI which makes it a cluster fuck (my friends' words) to understand.

And all of this actually is equivalent to the "uncommon" VBA coding that you hear of. I wouldn't be surprised if all of the VBA code / spreadsheets you hear about evolved from one of these massive GUI created spreadsheets. Why? Anecdote time:

Those VBA sheets tend to come into existence when a non-programmer decides to learn about macros, updates one of these sheets to be simpler (less data entry), and it actually works. One of my friends was one such employee and she ended up converting a few of the inefficient spreadsheets into a single faster (though still slow) one. Due to cutting down the amount of manual data entry and processing time, it made what used to take a few days of work into a single day of work (mostly to have the sheet run calculations). If this creation gets useful enough, it can take a life of its own in the company and eventually some manager might make it the responsibility of an "IT" guy to update the code. Usually because the original employee got promoted (or left for a better job) due to killing their performance reviews. My friend was one such employee who left and actually did this at more than 1 company leading to a pretty damn well paying job at a young age. Last she heard, her original spreadsheet was still being used and semi-maintained by IT. And this it how I believe a lot of those VBA coding projects come into existence.

How this all connects back to FF and the javascript option, I have no idea. What I do know is that non-technical users can be pretty goddamn creative when it comes to finding ways to simulate uncommon functionality when needed. All via the GUI.

Re: "Disable Javascript" option removed in Firefox 23

#220

Post by lmm »

bad_user wrote: post #197
hnha wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you tried opera (not the latest Chrome-bastard but earlier versions)? I'd challenge your statement, opera seems much more customizable to me.

When I said "customizable" I didn't mean in terms of settings, but it terms of what you can do with Extensions/Add-ons. Name another browser where the Firebug-like functionality is an extension and not something built-in.

That's a very arbitrary line to draw. Some "alternative browsers" exist that wrap the IE rendering engine in a different UI (and some of those include their own firebug-like functionality), does that mean IE is more customizable than firefox (which, after all, forces you to use GTK for your UI)?
Post reply on HN