Web developer accountability

>>51429199
>Should HTML go back to its roots?
I'd support this. Let the client decide how to display the content it's given.

File: 689f9f9e1a8c3f66959a339ab2650a69.jpg (617KB, 3508x2480px) Image search: [Google]

617KB, 3508x2480px

Web developers have always been fuccbois. I remember always getting told "well you shouldn't be using that browser because (subjective bullshit)" when I complain about how their site doesn't work, so I don't even bother with them anymore.

>Last line

I predict that there will be a strong push back against this sort of 'tech progressivism' though, and embracing the older and simpler technologies like static HTML webpages and conservative use of javascript/CSS.

I remember when Flash was new. I made so much cash with that shit. Back then, being a web dev was profitable, now those idiots are literally slaves

>>51429199
The problem isn't with javascript, it's kinda great that webpages aren't just non-interactive "newpaper on your monitor" pages.

The problem is that in the age of 8 core processors and 16GB RAM developers think that applications should be run by a web browser, because it can.

>>51429199
CSS is fine as long as the website is readable without it.
a little javascript is also fine IMO but only as long as it's implemented as progressive enhancement. But nowadays most websites depend on JS to even function at all and that's just retarded.

>>51429199
>Should things like JavaScript be banned?
not banned, but we need to start limiting it. it's great for anything interactive on the page that's necessary.

>>51429199
How the fuck are you supposed to build sites without CSS, are you retared?

>>51429469
http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/

https://gonmf.github.io/fwd/

>>51429317
>embracing the older and simpler technologies like static HTML webpages and conservative use of javascript/CSS
What would the average consumer win by abandoning javascript/css? Nothing. There is literally no reason for a movement like this to start.

This is literally the most ignorant thread I have ever read. Have any of you ever even made a website?

>>51429469

<table border="0">
 <tr>
  <th><h1>Like this!</h1></th>
 </tr>
 <tr>
  <td>this was great</td>
 </tr>
</table>

>>51429505
Yes.

>>51429484
http://bettermotherfuckingwebsite.com/
baka desu senpai

>>51429506
Tables are not responsive

>>51429429
Browsers are essentially a sandboxed, platform-independent, virtual execution environment. Browsers can run linux and compile C. It is simple and easy to share programs that run in browsers, because links are very sharable. On the other hand, getting someone to download your binaries and run them is much harder.

File: 1440160805102.jpg (8KB, 184x173px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 184x173px

>>51429199
>"I have no idea how websites are made" the post

>>51429521
Good. Fuck smartphone users.

>>51429541
>implying implications

>>51429560
Why? Everything else is already responsive. Tables, even on PCs, are shitty anyway.

I'm not even pissed about people using KS but I'm pissed about people using PHP which is pure cancer.

>>51429566

You wouldn't have made such a ridiculously stupid post otherwise.

>>51429594
I'm not going to apologize because it upsets you, Mr. Irrelevant Webdev. Your shitty code is cancer.

>>51429485
Privacy, performance, security, control.

Remember when webpages loaded instantly?

Now you have to wait 10 or more seconds for all the ad/tracking scripts. Even worse is pages that hide the content until everything is loaded.

Sites loaded faster 15 years ago than they do now.

There's nothing wrong with CSS. CSS is just a way to apply styles to more than one document, going without CSS is fucking stupid.

Javascript is gross but it's tolerable if kept to a minimum. A lot of shitty sites abuse it to do weird shit like disable native scroll bars so they can insert their own scrolling system and do other fucking retarded shit like that. I think TIME magazine was doing something like that, that site is fucking atrocious.

>>51429665
>privacy
normies do not care about privacy - and the host site can track the user without javascript
>performance
normies have computers that can handle it
>security
a javascript application sandboxed ina browser is safer than a native application
>control
normies are not power users. they do not care about control - and how does javascript take away your control, anyhow?

>>51429694
what web page takes 10 seconds to load? Regardless, javascript can speed page loads by loading only the most important elements before the media-heavy and less important elements.

>>51429753
10 seconds was being conservative.

Mainstream sites take up to and over a minute on an ipad mini. Then there's the constant freezing and lag.

Disabling javascript makes the pages load instantly without freezing or lag.

>javascript can speed page loads by loading only the most important elements before the media-heavy and less important elements.
Without Javascript, text loads first, followed by media.

>>51429818
I dont have an ipad mini so I haven't had that experience.

>Without Javascript, text loads first, followed by media.
Right, but I'm talking about loading entire sections of the page before others. Netflix designed something like this to quicken perceived page load times - and they found a 70% improvement.
http://techblog.netflix.com/2015/08/making-netflixcom-faster.html

Are you retarded? No web dev ever liked IE

>>51429199
>After all, their job is to use web standards wherever possible and they failed to do that

What exactly would that look like?

>Hey anon, why doesn't my button look sexy? This isn't going to sell.
Yeah, but it's coded to standards, here, look, RFC-XYZ says so right here
>Yeah yeah, but where are my buttons?
We can't do them and code to the standards at the same time
>yeah well I don't care about standards, I just want my fucking buttons.
No, that's not right, the standards are there for a reason
>You're fired Anon, I have Kumar Bagavahn Patel on the phone here and he says he'll have it done tonight for half of what we paid you to not do it
Well fuck.

>>51429753
>a javascript application sandboxed ina browser is safer than a native application
Programs and Javascript snippets are completely different beasts.
>sandboxed
Doesn't mean shit when webdevs start implementing actual "programs" purely within the browser. Automatically trusting code that is pushed to you from a server, without version pinning or cryptographic verification, is insane.
>how does javascript take away your control, anyhow?
CSS does.

>>51429748
The problem is that sites assume that everyone is going to use their CSS, and that there is no general way to override stylesheets globally, since most sites have different layout/structure.

>>51429615
>hey look mom, I'm using memes on /g/

just chiming in to say that yes, OP is clueless

>>51429913
bonus fact, I actually had pretty much this conversation with an employer around firefox (scrolling issue, they report (or used to) computed values in authored units while W3C requires the unit to be pixels). I actually had a fix that would work and didn't need a terrible browser-specific hack that's probably broken by now but it required a minor design change so it was a no-go.

>>51429895
Stop pretending you were even born back then.

>>51429885
I don't want to come across as being completely against Javascript. It does some good things. But it's used so much in a way that degrades the experience needlessly.

>>51429199
Web browsers interpreted standards their own way and many were not standards compliant, including IE. It used to be worse then then it is now. This has to be a troll post since it is so far from the truth it's ludicrous.

>>51429964
I think we agree that things spelled out in >>51429748 are terrible and should be destroyed.

>>51429972
Netscape was worse than IE.

I know I still have a Core 2 Quad, but are websites becoming slow as fuck for anyone else? Especially search boxes, I can type my search faster than the letters will appear on the screen. On sites like Newegg and Amazon, the scrolling lags, and it takes a second for a link to register that my mouse is hovering over it. Is this Wirth's Law in action? When I watch Task Manager I see that the CPU % spikes. I don't think it's my RAM because I have 8 GB and rarely use more than 4.

>>51429972
OP is true. People didn't care about standards. Hence all the "Best Viewed in X" messages sites had.

>>51429818
>Mainstream sites take up to and over a minute on an ipad mini. Then there's the constant freezing and lag
Which ones? My dayjob is working on a top 50 alexa US rank site, we test on ipad minis, 5 seconds would be totally unacceptable for load time and >300ms latency for non-IO actions is disallowed as well. This is standard, a third party ranks us for latency/responsiveness and uptime relative to other sites in the same industry and we're about the middle of the pack.

is it too late to fix this?

>>51429956
>CSS does
What are userstyles?

>>51430040
See the next sentence.

JavaScript and CSS aren't even the problem. Properly written, minified and gzipped, JS and CSS weigh basically nothing and allow you to do incredible stuff in a web page. The problem is the backend stuff. PHP is garbage, MySQL is both garbage and unreliable, and webpages that need to be recompiled on every load are insane if you're loading hundreds or thousands of times an hour. Precompiled static sites like Jekyll and Pelican are probably 50x faster than WordPress on equivalent hardware and expose zero vulnerabilities as long as the permissions on the files themselves are set properly. For inherently dynamic sites, languages that don't constantly need to be interpreted from raw source code are superior. Python, Go, and Java are the winners here. Another idiotic thing is storing static content in databases instead of flat fucking files so you have to wait on database queries on every page load, for which there is no real method of caching.

>>51430023
I've found the National Post to be the worst offender.

>>51430059
Also, once ASP.NET gets open sourced and integrated into Mono that will be a respectable option too.

>>51429199
Web is such a fragmented hell. But I hope HTML5 Unites everyone who enjoyed HTML.

I like designing pages but I usually trust my artist to code that for me in CSS3 and HTML5

>>51430056
Sure there are, you can write CSS that isn't dependent on structure. This is how like "color inversion" user styles work for people who want to reduce screen glare. Sure things can end up looking kinda wonky but the alternative is what? No CSS? Then everything is going to look wonky, testing becomes a nightmare, you win nothing.

>>51430059
Let's be real. You have to throw more servers when you use Python for anything but metadata handling.

Java is good for compatibility but it's outright disgusting. It will make you good money if you can keep up with new API releases.

I'm a roots guy.

I only use jQuery for $. and append, I frown on frameworks unless they're involved in the back end and you have a good reason, I just want a whole bunch of Ajax calls to a real restful server that serves either json, html or return codes.

About browsers, my battle with IE is about caching. FYI, no-store means "do not store, zero cache", no-cache of means "revalidate every time", revalidate means "revalidate if it's a stale record". IE does no store when the header is no cache, revalidate seems to almost replicate no cache and no store does nothing. Fuck. Which RFC standard did this come out of Microsoft? Oh, that's right, none, either hire devs that read (and write) documentation or stop pretending you're a serious software company.

File: Screen Shot 2015-11-19 at 7.15.12 PM.png (14KB, 445x86px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 445x86px

>>51430071
Confirmed, site is shit. Took 10+ seconds to fully load.

>>51430071
>650 requests on page load
This isn't a JS's fault, it's a braindead developer's fault. No one handling any meaningful level of traffic should be serving unminified files. No one with that much code should be serving unminified files.

>>51430059
> Another idiotic thing is storing static content in databases instead of flat fucking files so you have to wait on database queries on every page load,

Good point. The generator should also implement caching so it does not go over the list again.

https://web.archive.org/web/20150505081443/http://www.nczonline.net/blog/2012/08/22/the-innovations-of-internet-explorer/

>>51430117
http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec13.html

>>51430092
Have you benchmarked ASP? It's slower than PHP. And it's already on mono. Most C# webframeworks are either ugly or slow, I had to write my own to get one I liked: gotta be based around http verb methods, gotta have a simple means of getting the userip and user agent, can't process headers unless it's meant to, and of course, gotta go fast.

So my fully implemented backend gets at least 2000 requests a page second. If everyone doesn't mind waiting 5 seconds at most, it could serve a 10000 user website/business easy.

ASP is slow as an old dog like because of how it keeps connections open and keeping connections open might be a good idea if you're.... Streaming? But otherwise it should just close as fast as possible. If you are streaming, a combination of nagle and chunked encoding could work and you might not even need to do write things with connections.

>>51430186
You'll find that IE does not follow that standard. They programmed their browser based on ignorance, or rather for appeasing ignorance. One should not be tolerant of shit developers.

>>51429199
The problem is that structuring a website as a backend + a js mvc frontend is super comfy.

I don't really see anything replacing it soon.

>>51430225
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/ie/archive/2010/07/14/caching-improvements-in-internet-explorer-9.aspx

>>51429199
I think web development is in the best shape it's ever been ,in terms of paradigm, for Dynamic content

with JSON\REST apis doing the shit they do I think it's great, because now you can have cachable template pages, get a 50 byte file, and have it fill up like 40 fucking elements or something ...

-

Nothing terrible about JS i think the implementation by developers is stupid somedays

Sites shouldn't be Full of dependencies, scripts,fancy effects that overall look tacky and make your site seem slower than it really is, or make your site slower,etc., etc.

i think certain things belong in native apps... I think devs ask too much of browsers, and given browser fragmentation fucks a lot of things up, making it 10x harder to do shit

I think the move to the API model has been the smartest thing for the internet, and i can't believe thats not what they've done in the past... It makes it easy to have a dynamic site, but also a non web-site site. (maybe i'm just autistic about native clients)

>>51429317
In the day and age of social media, I think we're stuck with psuedo-dynamic sites at the least (Server Side Rendering, Something like Jade) which isn't horrid. this could generate shit to work on windows 95 if anyone cared to, no JS, no CSS (or maybe css)

>>51430462
this desu senpai

>>51430462
Hey look, a sane opinion held by someone who seems to have some base level experience with the technologies he's talking about.

What are you doing on /g/?

>>51430778
>defending the modern Web

>>51430778
The problem is that you're young enough to have grown up with a vastly different web than the rest of us. You don't understand how bad things are, because you've never seen anything else.

>inb4 static sites are dead grandpa

File: theinternet.png (67KB, 337x1294px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 337x1294px

>>51430462
>with JSON\REST apis doing the shit they do I think it's great, because now you can have cachable template pages, get a 50 byte file, and have it fill up like 40 fucking elements or something ...
Right in the fucing garbage. You are the reason webpages take so long to load even on this 80/20 connection.

File: 1405058144166.png (259KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

259KB, 640x480px

>>51430841
>/pol/
And you were doing so well, anon.

>>51430778

>defending the modern web

>>51429521
What is there to respond to and how? Bear in mind that all this is is a table of data.

>>51430880
Responsive means that it adjusts to the current screen size.

>>51430880
Responsive means "can be resized", for some reason.

>>51430897
No.

>Should things like JavaScript be banned?
To be replaced with what? Flash and Java applets are dead. Silverlight is dead. Static HTML does not meet the needs of most companies. If JavaScript is removed, it must be replaced with something equally capable of enabling dynamic content without reloading the page.

But muh webapps

>>51430908
Yes. See >>51430888.

>>51430841
You might as well kill yourself your kind of dying out anyway. I bet you like the web before with hypertext too huh? Carita fucking newspaper you fucking regressive

>>51430872
It's not my screencap, but it is saved from /pol/. You have to visit /pol/ when happenings are happening.

>>51430888
That would explain why software is totally unresponsive and sluggish nowadays -- the term doesn't even mean what it used to.

>>51430934
what

>>51430937
Responsive means that in the context of the Web.

>>51430916
Limbo, Elm/S-expressions.

So I'm just going to rant here without the whining because its not me.

CSS is good and can greatly minimize the size of the html if a external style sheet is used. The problem comes from a combination of CSS frameworks which are completely unnecessary and trying to make every device display exactly pixel perfect representations of the rendering on the web designers favorite browser. The latter will never be accomplished because there are too many variables.

JavaScript can be good only if used correctly. It has the same problem as CSS has with frameworks, they are completely unnecessary and most could be replaced with a couple of functions. Sites similar to google docs require JavaScript, but all other sites should work without it. Frankly most shouldn't even use it at all, like blog/news style sites don't need any. Lets take this site the amount of JavaScript for board functionality is just a little bloated, which is ok, but all the external google analytics bloat is not.

Basically the problem comes down to incompetent devs that don't care. Here comes the excuses. Yes you lazy bitch's I have made and will continue to work on websites(front and back end), all which gracefully degrade and work on every device that displays html. But keep it up, I make a lot of money ripping magic bullshit out of your shitty code bases.

>>51431464
You are a good person, anon.

>>51431464
>The problem comes from a combination of CSS frameworks which are completely unnecessary
Literally people have no idea that they can really cut bootstrap the fuck up with minimal to no reprocussions to optimize their site...

CSS frameworks aren't inherintly bad, i think partially devs are lazy

javascript can be good, I think websites that do lists with one entry per page or websites where you cant view text without allowing javascript should be banned, bloated websites are cancer

>>51429518
is their not a bettermotherfuckingwebsite generator?

>>51432011
It's called Vim.

>>51432110
Made a test html file, that's pretty nice thanks anon