Thread replies: 249
Thread images: 24
Thread images: 24
Anonymous
Can we agree that the web is dead? 2016-11-02 09:46:34 Post No. 57351095
[Report] Image search: [Google]
Can we agree that the web is dead? 2016-11-02 09:46:34 Post No. 57351095
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: The-Worlds-First-Website.jpg (188KB, 956x630px) Image search:
[Google]
188KB, 956x630px
>Have script blocker installed (of course)
>looking for examples of pure HTML sites
>see a discussion on search engine results
>click it
>white screen
>nothing loaded because I blocked the script that loads the site
>ironing of this degree
Fuck. Everything.
>>
>>57351095
/thread
>>
>>57351095
>Disables fundamental part of the web
>WEB IS DEAD!!!
Next you're going to be saying that Windows 10 is shit when you had never actually installed it
>>
>>57351518
>javascript is "fundamental" part of the web
Looks like in trying to prove OP wrong you just proved him right.
>>
>>57351532
But Javascript is a fundamental part of the web. Without it webpages won't even be able to run.
>>
>>57351567
That's like saying EFI is an fundamental part of the ICE. While true, the far more robust and simple carb will do the job.
>>
javascript was a mistake
>>
>>57351567
hence why OP says "Fuck.Everything"
>>
>>57351567
>Without it webpages won't even be able to run.<html>
<head>
This is unrunnable page
</head>
<body>
<h1>kys you'reself</h1>
</body>
</html>
>>
>go to typical modern website
>100 different ads/trackers/scripts blocked
>the site doesn't work at all, even CSS doesn't load
>allow javascript
>browser almost grinds to a halt due to the site being so bloated
what went wrong with modern web developers?
>>
>>57351518
I also know that poo tastes bad without having tried it, don't you?
>>
>I hate having a dynamic DOM
>I rather have a statical DOM parsed out of serialized DOM nodes (HTML)
>>
>>57351624
this
it's either no content or no performance. There's no in-between
>>
>>57351518
>Windows 10 is shit when you had never actually installed it
Do I really need to install it to know it's shit?
That's like saying "HEY JIMMY COME PLACE YOUR HEAD UNDERNEATH THIS TRACTOR TRAILER WHEEL, IT FEELS GOOD"
I do not need to do something to know it's stupid beforehand.
>>
>>57351518
I unironically hope you kill yourself even though I know you're trolling
>>
>>57351618
>You are self
>>
>>57351767
Linux sucks. Haven't installed it but it sucks.
>>
>>57352102
kill yourself you are self
>>
>>57351518
Found the cuck
>>
>>57352102
But who was phone
>>
>>57351624
I reiterate this to all my webdev friends and their argument is always "hardware is getting more and more powerful and therefore it can handle 'modern' websites".
>>
>>57352213
I see that comment on /g/ far too much as well.
Was not the entire point of technological advancement to make the load easier? Not stuff the load out with bricks to keep it the same.
>>
>>57351647
>>57351624
>WHY CAN'T MY THINKPAD T60 VIEW MODERN WEBSITES?!!
>>
>>57352234
Nice try. I have a 16-core dual-xeon system, 32 GiB of RAM and a GTX 970
Modern websites are still a lagfest. (4chan is fine, though)
>>
>>57352239
You missed the obvious retort: why shouldn't it?
>>
>>57352244
>suggesting I move the goalposts instead of directly undermining your claim
>>
>>57352234
>modern websites
websites aren't meant to be your fucking canvas, go play with brushes and paint if you want to be an artist
>>
>>57351634
You only know because you smelled poo.
Furthermore smelling and eating are almost the same (molecular wise).
Therefore you only "know" poo tastes bad because you "ate" it, yes.
Thanks for proving anons point.
>>
File: gopher1.jpg (93KB, 600x275px) Image search:
[Google]
93KB, 600x275px
its time to come back
>>
>>57352271
>i hate change :(
sorry, web 4.0 didn't evolve with autism in mind
>>
>>57352282
Gopher is the bomb.
>>
>>57352302
>change is inherently good
>>
>>57352239
b-b-but just buy a more powerful computer! it's $current_year after all! I need 5MB of jquery to animate my shitty website and make polyfills for IE6 t: typical webdev
>>
>>57352281
>You only know because you smelled poo.
Yes, and by analogy I've seen windows 10, seen it in use, and know about its “features”.
So how come I can't use that to conclude that Windows 10 is shit, just like I can use the smell of poo to conclude that the taste is shit?
>>
>>57352302
The only people who benefit from this are hardware manufacturers.
Are you a hardware manufacturer, anon? If not, why are you defending their profit margin?
>>
JS = ANSI.SYS
>>
>>57352302
It devolved into crappy bloat.
>>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r38al1w-h4k
>>
>>57351095
It's getting better. Jquery is slowly dieing. Developers are starting to use pure js. JS won't be replaced anytime soon, but it's getting more efficient. SO answers are mostly suggesting to not use jquery and this is were pajeets get most their answers
>>
>>57352302
no, it evolved with marketing and bloat in mind, which is an even worse fate
>>
>>57352424
Don't you worry, webassembly will come and make it “acceptable” to put gigantic heavy client-side apps on the web again.
Brace for a new generation of slow-as-shit websites
>>
>>57352398
DUDE BUZZWORDS LMAO
>>
>>57351095
Does CSS fit in to the "pure HTML" world? Obviously its not pure HTML but does it have the same issues as Javascript in terms of being bloat on the web?
>>
Why is javascript so terrible?
>>
>>57352184
no phones on my web REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>
>>57352993
If you remove CSS you just get a site that looks different, but the function is largely the same.
A lot of the time you can remove JS and get absolutely nothing -- the site simply does not function at all.
>>
We often say that there are no good browsers
In reality there are just shitty bloated websites
Browsers should just render simple formatted pages, not compiling and executing terrible inefficient shit
>>
>>57351518
I don't use wangblows anymore personally for years now, yet at work I manage some 108 machines all running win10
I had to install them all, too. (and by install I mean clone)
I had more horror stories about win10 over the three months I had to deploy and maintain win10 at work than my whole over a decade long lelnix experience.
TL;DR spydows10 is poo and nothing's gonna change that.
>>
>>57352398
Another good one by this guy
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XKpiP60HXwM
>>57353208
The problem is that pure content is harder than pure spectacle.
>>
>>57353127
>If you remove CSS you just get a site that looks different, but the function is largely the same.
Disabling CSS usually breaks websites even more than disabling JS does
(Try it)
>>
>>57353270
True. You can't limit space or bandwidth, but Google should award lighter websites by putting them higher up in the search results.
Your site is bloated mess? It goes down in the results
>>
File: mos-10.jpg (73KB, 550x518px) Image search:
[Google]
73KB, 550x518px
Just imagine how fast the web would be by now if we had kept it limited to this.
Then again, I'm perhaps a little too positive towards text, because its low barrier to entry makes it easy to save, and easy to interact with.
It's important to remember that things like BBS and Usenet stayed on pure text for a long time after faster and more powerful hardware and infrastructure became widespread. the 1KB/s speed of the mid 80s onwards is really fast for pure text.
This entire post is only 503bytes.
>>
remember when HTML was a document format?
>>
>>57353871
oh, I 'member.
>>
>>57351567
Kill yourself please.
>>
>>57353001
It's just the right level of bad where people have to use a generous amount of duct tape to fix it but not terrible enough that people just replace it outright.
>>
>>57353837
OP's page is 3.3KB. Meaning that it would have downloaded in about one second on connection speeds at the time.
Try find a website today that will download and render so quickly, even on super-fast broadband and a new machine.
>>
>>57351095
>>looking for examples of pure HTML sites
The OpenBSD website is still pure HTML.
>>
>>57351624
>>57352213
Most modern web developers never went to college, or started before college and hammered bad practices into their heads.
Some use WYSIWYG(What you see is what you get) programs to do HTML, CSS, etc with and the result is an unreadable mess.
>>
>>57352993
I view CSS as the same as HTML. Pretty much everything you can do with CSS you can do with inline or embedded styling. It's just a convenient way to apply styling rules to multiple pages.
>>
>>57352130
Shut your fucking mouth windows cuck boy.
>>
>>57353987
They have css inline.
>>
File: Spurdo_Dreh.gif (646KB, 512x481px) Image search:
[Google]
646KB, 512x481px
>>57351095
>looking for examples of pure html
>doesn't create his own
GTFO OP
>>
>>57351518
I tried 10 and can confirm it's trash
>>
>Pure HTML sites
http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/
>>
File: 1476014737575.gif (408KB, 250x250px) Image search:
[Google]
408KB, 250x250px
>>57351635
>dynamic DOM
>not calling it dynamic or interactive website
KYS faggot
You are the reason why they hate webdevs (FE/BE, any language)
>>
Tbh as long as a website isn't using to much js for shit like scrolling (especially that parallax shit) then I'm usually okay with most "modern" designs.
>>
File: snapshot.png (24KB, 926x978px) Image search:
[Google]
24KB, 926x978px
My setup is a Gopherhole and a gopher -> http proxy (wip) which serves up ("pure") HTML versions of menus.
It does use a little CSS though, I'm not sure if there's a truly pure HTML way of dictating margins between certain elements, but without CSS it just makes ASCII art look a little odd and otherwise is fine (pic related)
>>
>>57353270
>about 4 minutes in
>that fat/g/uy eating cheaps
>>
>>57352993
CSS is its own kind of garbage.
It contains:
>style
>animations -> this belongs somewhere else
>layout -> this would belong in HTML, but HTML is shit as well
And CSS does its part to make the web slow as well.
Proof: Make your own Atom theme and make it as minimal as possible; i.e. no rounded borders, box lines, shadows, gradients and other crap. It will be MUCH more fluid.
It then could even be much more fluid again without all the implicit garbage.
TL;DR: The whole browser stack is garbage.
>>
>>57354146
>google analytics javascript
Design isn't the only issue with Javascript<!-- yes, I know...wanna fight about it?-->
acknowledging the problem doesn't mean there isn't one
>>
>>57351635
I'd rather have render bytecode, where the browser renders a page ONE time at the beginning and places link areas.
Without any kind of interactivity beside the links.
>>
>>57354305
It's called Gopher.
Seriously, having the links be separate from the body of text is a stroke of genius in hindsight considering its been found that hyperlinks in text break concentration.
>>
So what would be your "best" site in design only written in plain html?
I really want to see one. And non of these "this site is only made out of this text".
>>
>>57354458
HTML is a document format, the whole point of it is to display formatted text.
Images were added when people wanted to look at pictures.
Java and other plugins were added when people wanted to play games and listen to music and watch videos "inside" their browser.
Javascript was sorta like Netscape's answer to Java. Rather than using a separate program for random bloat you just add the bloat directly to the web browser!
CSS was added when formatting these large heavy webpages became too difficult.
>>
>>57352302
Who even decides stupid version numbers for the web?
>>
>>57352302
>evolve
shut the fuck up
>>
>>57351518
People like this actually exist. No wonder the web is ded.
>>
>>57351518
I'll go to mars just so I don't have to breath the same air as you.
>>
>>57351518
(you)
>>
>>57352239
>he doesn't have a 10^100 core 2^100 bit computer
what are you, gay?
>>
>>57351095
Imo you should allow first party scripts, and block everything 3rd party. Unfortunate;y that's hiw it's got to be now.
>>
>>57351518
Ignorant fucking ape
>>
>>57351624
>what went wrong with modern web developers?
More tracking means the site can be optimized for more useful content. Heatmap tracking for example allows you to see exactly who bothers reading which part of the site. It sounds stupid, but it is actually a concern in many companies I've built websites for.
Beyond that you must have the like button javascript for every goddamn social media outlet there is, because otherwise none would be able to share your pages. No, normies are not capable of copy pasting a url, and word of mouth only works if you are Maddox.
And of course you have ads, because you must also make money to pay for things like hosting.
>>
>>57354172
I took a closer look at http://gopher.floodgap.com/gopher/gw which is the same idea, and they actually use a big <table> with each resource being a row, with <tt> to indicate a monospace font and all spaces converted , meaning no need for CSS.
My example was using <pre> for each resource (line), with CSS removing the margins, would you say their approach is better? It is pure HTML.
>>
>>57354668
The ironic thing is that their hosting is only so expensive because of all this bloat. If they pulled back on that shite they'd cut their page size down to ¼ if not more.
>>
I've been browsing with noscript and request police on for a long time, and no cookies. I only have the most frequent sites I use whitelisted, and I don't use cookies anywhere.
I use a separate browser profile for websites I have to log onto, and I strictly use it for that purpose.
The web has been dead for a while. I actually don't mind browsing like this though, as in most cases it just lets me read the text while blocking out all the bullshit. I wish that we hadn't gotten to the point we are at today.
>>
>>57354754
And get no revenue because only autists on /g/ prefer static pages with no features.
>>
>>57354761
You could just use lynx or elinks.
>>
I really wonder what the best design of the 90s and 00s would do against modern minimalistic designs which try to appear "oldschool".
>>
>>57351624
>>57351095
>go to a stream site with chatroom
>stream isnt even on
>only me in chatroom, we post once every few weeks
>only 11 tabs, 4chans and stream site
>have vm running
>this setup is usually good past 300 tabs
>computer keeps locking up, like bad
>this is a decent build, should NOT lock up under these conditions
>terminal - htop
>ram
>maxed
>out
>swap disabled, why the fuck would I need that I know how to manage
>been here before.jpg
>close the single tab for the streaming site that is literally doing nothing
>mfw 3gb of ram becomes free
This shit really needs to be illegal. fuck java script, fuck "web developers", and fuck all of your riced out webpages.
>>
>>57354529
They're not strictly set by anyone but 1.0 was defined as static webpages served server side. 2.0 is interactive or dynamic webpages that can be modified client side. 3.0+ is probably just a fancy way of saying "comes with spyware"
>>
>>57354529
I do
>>
>>57352239
>16-core dual-xeon system
How fast are they clocked though? If your web browser runs as a single thread then all the cores in the world won't help you.
>>
>>57355396
>How fast are they clocked though?
3.3 GHz boost / 2.6 GHz bulk (Sandy Bridge EP generation)
>>
>>57352234
first of all, it can thanlyouverymuch.jpg
second of all: that doesn't mean websites should or need to be this bloated. html5 + css should be enough for most things.
>>
>>57351518
Using javascript to load the actual content is retarded unless the content is bigger than 5mb.
>>
The jews have won. There is neocities.org tho
>>
>>57352239
https://wiki.mozilla.org/Quantum
Quantum CSS(Stylo) and Quantum DOM will be able to take advantage of your hardware. Stylo in particular will be the biggest performance increase since it scales up with the number of processor cores/threads.
>>
>>57355681
>SJWcuck
if only they could have done this back when firefox wasn't a piece of shit
>>
>>57355396
>actually talking about multi-threading because of a fucking web browser
Kill me.
>>
It's really not that hard:
Firefox
noscript
request policy
self-destructing cookies
Allow scripts on the page you are on, allow the cdn, everything works, no ads.
If it's more complicated than this just ignore that website, it's probably a scam anyway.
>>
>Flash becomes notorious for being a vector for Viruses
>eventually purged
>Javascript notorious for being a mode of virus transmission
>very idea of not using it is shunned
why?
>>
>>57352282
>it could have been gopher://
>>
1 way to fix the web is very simple: split JavaScript up in to a permissions-based system
Basic field verification.
DOM modification.
Canvas
Audio video
etc.
Split all of the features up in to specs which must be granted permission to run by the client.
Most websites use either DOM or field verification.
Some use file APIs. (Mega being a well known one)
Increasingly more are using audio / video, and recently canvas.
It won't add considerable overhead. The permissions for recent features never.
The "Click to run" features for stuff like geolocation, file API and so on. (stuff W3C never wanted to add, fucking pricks.)
Popups dead in an update. Fuck popups.
Equally, lots of browsers have introduced MASSIVE fucking memory leaks the past few years.
I have no idea what did it, but something is fucked.
You can leave any website with animation open and it could devour your RAM over a period.
This NEEDS to be fixed already.
>>57354172
RIP Gopher.
Gopher with some styling and basic templating would have been a dream for simple ticker / blog / news websites.
Styling to make it unique, templating to save resources on server end. (if you have ever looked at Tumblrs theming system, it would be like that. just without the shitty community. The theming system is the only decent thing about that site)
In the case of this templating, you would specify a URL on server, then you would have child elements tagged with the data that gets filled in in some way.
Then the usual form delio, click a button, or an event such as scrolling, to load new template data.
>>
>>57355810
Even with all of its problems javascript is still considerably safer than flash ever was. Removing flash is recommended now because in addition to the poor security it has also become redundant, all it really does is provide a larger attack surface.
>>
File: lynx-gopher.png (29KB, 560x337px) Image search:
[Google]
29KB, 560x337px
>>57355829
Imagine...
>>
>>57355902
Pretty much this.
I only have Flash installed for a very small number of sites.
Mainly Drawball.
And that browser is run under a sandbox just to be safe.
Extremely unlikely these sites would be compromised, but if they do, better to be safe.
Hell, any site could be compromised one day.
I remember that one time years back, someone swooped under and stole the 4chan domain.
They made a clone of 4chan.
It crippled horribly in a matter of minutes.
Fucking kek.
All my browsers run in sandboxes.
Best thing is you can easily reverse shit being broken on the rare occasion you done a stupid and clicked an exe or something.
I never have. Not since '95.
>>
File: gopher꞉∕∕.jpg (43KB, 840x630px) Image search:
[Google]
43KB, 840x630px
>>57355829
better?
>>57355833
>Styling to make it unique
I consider the uniformity of gopher one of its advantages. Even with just HTML you can have two sites that navigate very differently.
I might try adding some kind of theme choosing for my proxy though, like http://gopherpedia.com (GoPHPer)
>>
>>57351567
they used to run fine without it before tho.
>>
>>57355940
I wonder if adobe will ever just release the flash plugin under a permissive license. There's a lot of content out there that will never make the conversion.
I'm imagining the possibility that flash could some day be compiled in webassembly and embedded in webpages or used like a common browser extension.
>>
>>57355495
Jesus, can websites with tons of JS actually make your browser hang?
>>
>>57351095
Do you have javascript blocked? I tried making a simple web 1.0 style page but I still ended up using a one line javscript containing html includes.
>>
>>57356142
All the time.
>>
>>57356263
Out of pure curiosity, how long can this website make your browser hang with all the bloated JS it has:
http://charter.net/
>>
>>57356141
I'm sure they are working on it themselves.
I mean, you can compile projects to HTML+JS+Canvas last I checked.
We were talking about it on /f/ a while back.
There is also that uh, Mozilla project is it?
The one to emulate a flash player in JS, well, "emulate", more like Wine-is-not-an-emulator style in that it runs the file directly by translating the calls.
Sure there was another separate one.
>>57356213
>html includes
Why?
You shouldn't need that even to support IE6.
IE6 runs the majority of modern stuff fine.
You can even make fluid layouts that work in modern browsers and IE6, without the need for silly includes.
Sure, the CSS is an absolute clusterfuck, but it is legal legit CSS and not hacky stuff.
It just relies on negative margins and maximum widths. (which you can emulate with images if need be)
>>
>>57351567
>Javascript is a fundamental part of the web
No childrens on this site pls
>>
>>57356377
Mozilla project was shumway but it's been on hiatus for like over a year I think. I don't know if Mozilla plans to continue it ever.
>>
>/g/ likes gopher
There's some hope for this board yet.
>>
>>57351567
>Without it webpages won't even be able to run.
underage pls go and stay go
>>
>>57356402
unless they are girls ofc.
>>
Javascript is a
VIRUS LANGUAGE
I
R
U
S
L
A
N
G
U
A
G
E
>>
>>57356377
Let's say I want to have a reoccuring navigation or footer copyright on every page, how can I do that without using javascript html include or unneededly complex languages? The include was the easiest method I know besides doing it manually which I won't do.
>>
>>57356084
I'd only be for minimal styling though.
Not full on DOM manip shit like we have with HTML.
Mainly color, background-color, widths, display:inline and inline-block, tables and a few others.
Maybe ability to set a logo image element at the top somewhere, so you can have your sites logo.
Alternative being a banner as well.
That way websites would actually have used it and not just ignored it. ;-;
Instead of that, what we have are shit websites like Tumblr, Twitter and the high overhead JS by their shitty college-tier coders.
Google are the same. They changed most of the code on their sites to that shitty massively enclosed code for fuck knows what reason.
Code more than a few enclosures deep massively ups the overhead. It's like they just chose to ignore it.
That's the reason why most Google services got all kinds of slower on even reasonable machines.
Google Street view is impossible to use on netbooks now. It lags so bad.
Youtubes HTML5 player lags them so badly that it can take 5 seconds for the page to respond to clicks. Yet the mobile player works fine.
This fetish for high-overhead code is murder.
>>57356506
Server includes?
Why are you doing includes on the client end?
WHAT
>>
>>57356506
>ctrl-c
>ctrl-v
Or php.
>>
>>57356531
>Why are you doing includes on the client end?
he's a fucking scrub javascript "programmer" that's why.
Or perhaps it's a 50 mb image of the copyright notice and it has to sit on a CDN somewhere, you never know these days.
>>
>>57351518
JavaScript is a tool used by idiots who don't know how to properly make a webpage just a webpage.
The applification of hypertext is why the web is so god damn insecure and Flash was the first shot that was fired.
Web apps are being made to allow companies to monetize data. Chromebooks are a gross example of how having everything online and using your "computer" that's a glorified thin client means you don't own your own data.
>>
>>57356551
>php
So basically the complete opposite of what everyone wants, some loads more bullshit for a very simple include. Good job.
>>57356531
It's just one line of document.write, why is that so triggering? I rather not type it manually into every page and then go back and change every one if I had to make an edit.document.write('<p>I may <a href="http://4chan.org">edit</a> this many times in the future.</p>');
>>
>>57356701
I mean, if it is that simple, it isn't all that harmful.
But if it was something complex, I'd have used a SSI language. Preferably not PHP since that is first choice and the worst choice.
I know lots of people will hate the document.write use like that, but I don't mind it myself.
Used sparingly, it is fine.
>>
>>57356701
But... don't you need to include the definition of that function into evey page anyway ? So insn't it the same if you have to edit the definition of the function with if you have to edit the text of a footer itself ?
Is there more to the function, does it load stuff from somewhere else or use something dynamic like getting the current date or something ?
>>
>>57356142
>Jesus, can websites with tons of JS actually make your browser hang?
Yes, of course. Even JS-free websites can lock up my browser for a good 10-20 seconds because lolwebkit. The web is also unusably slow in general for most heavy sites.
Trying to open something like twitter for example is an exercise in masochism
>>
>>57356701
If you're going to copy-paste that, why not just copy-paste the footer in to HTML?
>>
>>57356296
Website took about 30 seconds to load fully during which it was basically unusable. It also maxed out my 16 Mbps connection for a good 5 seconds or so.
After having loaded, scrolling is pretty choppy but it's just barely usable (better than the heaviest shit out there). Well, I say usable in a technical sense - all the flashing imagery makes it pretty unusable mentally. I had to close the tab or risk getting a headache.
>>
File: Hinata x Son Goku.png (130KB, 400x400px) Image search:
[Google]
130KB, 400x400px
>>57356808
>>57356872
Don't bully the retard !
>>
>>57356808
>>57356872
I am not copy and pasting THAT, what lies on every page is<script src="footer.js"></script>
So maybe now you understand what I'm trying to avoid retyping everytime I want to make an edit.
>>
>>57356908
If you weren't a retard you'd use a build system instead. Even something like GCC would work nicely.
>>
>>57356908
> what I'm trying to avoid retyping everytime I want to make an edit.
You don't need to retype it every edit, just copy-paste it once.
>>57356898
Fuck you, anti-bully ranger!
>>
Are there any guides on how to make fancy websites without JS? Like, mandatory usage of embedded videoplayer for webms, gifs and css for cool animated menus and stuff?
>>
>>57356908
<link rel="import" href="footer.html">
>>
>>57357014
No. Web development has been compromised.
>>
>>57356908
<object data="footer.html"></object>
>>
>>57356995
>get triggered by "bloat" and offer a solution with even more bloat
>>57357004
My current include is already a paste once solution, if anything has anything less bloat than literally 1 line, I want to learn about it. So basically not this dude >>57356995.
>>57357023
I looked it up and it seems you still have to use javscript to append the imported html, is this true? Is this any better than the old way?
>>
>>57357113
>I looked it up and it seems you still have to use javscript
That may be true, check the >>57357111 solution, that is probably what works.
>>
>>57357113
>get triggered by "bloat
I write sites in React, and use NoScript, not triggered.
Just think that having JS for one thing you could remove is stupid.
>>
>>57357111
I forgot you could abuse that shit to do that.
I remember doing that with EMBED in IE6 as well.
I used that on the myspace forums many times for screamers and full page covers, along with the fact parsers ignored whitespace like tabs or newlines.
I miss Myspace forums. They were so hilariously broken.
>>
>>57356455
She's a big girl.
>>
the non-hack non-javascript way is a server side include
http://nginx.org/en/docs/http/ngx_http_ssi_module.html
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/current/howto/ssi.html
>>
>>57351618
>zero tags
>fucked up head
jfc just stop
>>
>>57357139
>>57357111
Okay I just tried it, and I guess it technically works. But instead of including code into <body>, it's almost like embedding a whole inline frame that needs its own CSS styling. So the pro is it doesn't need javascript so fucking autists like OP won't get triggered, but you have to treat this element as a whole new thing and not just footer text inserted into the index.html code which is easy and clean.
>>
>>57357252
/g/ are being very silly, look at >>57357190
including the headers/footers like that should be done server side, not client side as with JS, <object>, <iframe>, etc.
>>
>>57357252
Man I'm just screwing with you, there's no pure html way to do this, object, embed and iframes are all horrible hacks.
I personally, would just use whatever backend you are using to do this instead of serving the javascript. Your backend is still technically serving that footer.js alongside your html so you might as well do it in code. But I could see how this would be annoying if you're using some big framework which isn't too receptive to small aditions like this.
Just don't be surprised if I visit your website and don't see the footer.
>>
>>57352213
What kills me is the way they blame their inefficient design ideas on the hardware. They're just not testing it thoroughly enough with various browsers on different OSes and making assumptions that it'll just werk.
When my Android phone can load a script heavy page in desktop mode, my Linux desktop can do the same, but then when I boot Windows on my desktop machine and try the same page, it grinds to a fucking halt in almost every browser, that's NOT the hardware. That's a retard webdev running OS X and only testing it with 2-3 browsers and assuming it's fine.
Hardware can advance all it goddamn wants, if the OS and browser engine is shit and doesn't utilize the hardware properly, those pages will still run like shit.
>>
>>57357559
And using basic, core, HTML for the foundation of the site (which is guaranteed at this point to work perfectly on any browser) is beneath them.
>>
>>57357559
>That's a retard webdev running OS X and only testing it with 2-3 browsers and assuming it's fine.
A bit like all those guys who knew nothing but FrontPage so nothing but IE would work with their stuff.
>>
>>57357252
>all this effort
>instead of just using a real templating solution
surely this has got to be satire, right?
>>
>>57352213
>webdev friends
found your problem
>>
>>57358779
All the solutions offered by this useful board is "install this bloat" or "use php bro" which is ironically the real bloat.
>>
>>57359357
Server side include, its not PHP, doesn't require any installation.
>>
>>57359357
rajeet, my boy, it is time for you to choose
>beautiful lightweight, flexible server-side templating
>disgusting client-side javascript includes
>>
>>57351518
Atom
Tables
>>
>>57359491
server side include is just another way of saying “server side templating”, only that in this case your script languages is nginx
Also, just leave the poor guy alone, he thinks all server-side code is done with PHP. He clearly has no fucking clue how to build a static website
>>
>>57351518
Objectively Windows 10 is much worse than 7 and 8.1. Even 8.1. is miles ahead of windows 10, because it has consistent interface without having meme win RT styled OS facilities.
>>
>>57352282
>proprietary
>>
File: Screenshot_2016-11-02-18-23-15.jpg (962KB, 1440x2560px) Image search:
[Google]
962KB, 1440x2560px
>>
>>57351095
I am imagining a return of the web 1.0, with websites that don't need js and async, that don't need 2gb of ram, where people share cool stuff and not their shitty private life.
>>
>>57359636
The UMN's server was proprietary, but is now under GPL, and nobody uses it anyway because you'll use something modern like pygopherd or Bucktooth.
>>
>>57359543
The premise is to build a web 1.0 page with all static content using only HTML and CSS, while using only one line to include reoccuring text and another single line to recall/append that include. Manually copy and pasting a navigation or footer code is not acceptable for the sake of this "project". Once anyone suggest "why don't you install this" or "use this modern hacky thing" it's going into bloat territory or just simply way too unneededly complex for such trivial things. Javascript is not clean but the reality is, the document.write code is one single line and so far it is the preferred solution though it is not perfect.
tl;dr if it isn't one line, don't bother suggesting it
>>
>>57359791
the server side include is one line, and its entirely transparent to the client unlike using Javascript.
>>
>>57359791
I understand your premise, perhaps even better than you do. Either read or stop responding.
>>
4chan is underrated in this respect. It's one of the few sites that works without JavaScript. Sure, you won't get the NEET features like seeing the post by hovering over it like >>57359755 you just did now, but it works overall.
Do websites NEED JavaScript? Seems like people use it carelessly and without purpose. If you disable it things break.
Is it possible to build a website without JavaScript? Are there any alternatives? Something like Twitter obviously won't work without it, but 4chan is a prime example. Adds to it, but you're not missing out without it.
If someone where to make a website right now with just information, such as Apple.com, what would be the best way to go about it? A static website essentially with a bit of NEET features.
>>
File: tumblr_og0i0rCC9C1rlkewbo1_1280.png (270KB, 800x600px) Image search:
[Google]
270KB, 800x600px
>>57359755
>where people share cool stuff and not their shitty private life
>not their shitty private life
So you just ruled out the most defining aspect of shitty web 1.0 sites?
>>
>>57359791
In the real world you would do this by writing your website in a simple language like Markdown and using any of 10298234 available static site generators to generate the HTML/CSS pages that you end up serving
e.g. https://jaspervdj.be/hakyll/
>>
>>57356377
>to support IE6
No web developer should even attempt to support IE6. People who continue to use that browser should be dragged into the current decade kicking and screaming.
It's fine if you want to serve a site without Javascript. But you should nonetheless be using the latest HTML5 and CSS3 standards.
>>
>>57359919
But what of their computer is too old to run anything paste windows 2000?
>>
File: pasteycakes.jpg (47KB, 425x340px) Image search:
[Google]
47KB, 425x340px
>>57359931
>paste
>>
>>57359919
I genuinely don't understand why people support older browsers. Who cares? We shouldn't have to conform to them just because they're being autistic. You should always use the latest and greatest standards. Plus, why does it matter if they're not included? You think anyone still running Internet Explorer 6 has any value? Honestly? Clearly they're not going to buy your expensive product. They're not going to be able to interact with your website properly... The only thing they might be good for is trying to scam.
>>57359931
Tell them to fuck off then? Who cares if their computer is too old to run paste Windows 2000? That's not our problem. Get a new computer. You can literally get a new computer working a day of minimum wage. They're dirt cheap. How the fuck are you still on Windows 2000? If you are then you suffer the consequences.
>>
>>57351095
this is one of my old professor's website
it is perfect
http://mlcollard.net/
>>
>>57359835
I am not him, but I found pages like this (maybe not this one) are way more interesting than a Facebook profile because they could be laid out however you wanted and it could really be about anything you could think of.
Even MySpace was better than Facebook with the layout regard.
>>
>>57351518
>Disables fundamental part of the web
>WEB IS DEAD!!!
/thread
>Next you're going to be saying that Windows 10 is shit when you had never actually installed it
But Windows 10 is a pure garbage!
>>
File: 1465351931917.png (317KB, 796x712px) Image search:
[Google]
317KB, 796x712px
>>57351518
>JS is a fundamental part of the web
i want off this planet
>>
>>57360327
DELET
>>
>>57351095
Wegmans' website used to have only one script to allow. They changed that all today with a new website. I think you need like 6 scripts for it to display properly and everything is much slower. Why do companies do this?
>>
>>57352130
Don't waste your time man. Windows 10 is great if you are not a fedora guy. If you want privacy, you lose productivity and opportunities, this is how it works. I'm very hapoy with Windows 10, Linux is too fragmented and they can't fucking focus on one DE and fix the damn bugs. Every DE excepting the shit old Xfce is shit for me and Xfce is shit too because Windows does a whole lot more than it. Nouveau shits itself with multiple monitors for me and the proprietary driver is buggy.
>>
>>57360570
who is "they"? you know Linux isn't a company right? Have you ever actually used it or are you just parroting opinions?
You don't have to answer, I already know btw
>>
>>57351095
>Pure HTML
If it didn't fucking blow for more than your static reading they would exist more
Stick to gopher you purist and get off my internet
JS has been around since mid-late 90s... good luck finding something not JS based.
>>
>>57352282
All gopher is missing is like input support and it would have been way better (for what it was i mean)
>>57352302
Are you sure? we now use basically client side rendering to lower network bandwidth and have pushed heavilly better design methods.
I deal with old websites and API Driven, SPAs are wayyy better than 5kb Viewstates and WebKitBoundaries ..
>>
>>57357180
for you
>>
>>57360598
dont talk to the pajeets
>>
>>57359931
I've got a computer that is 15 years old and came with Windows 2000, and it nonetheless runs Debian alright, and can run Iceweasel fairly alright. You don't need IE6.
>>
>>57353465
Absolutely. I don't know why they don't do this. I'm tired of people not giving a fuck. You shouldn't be rewarded for using for shitty Wordpress meme site.
Reminds me of one of my favorite quotes...
>Did you seriously load 100kb of jQuery UI just so you could animate the fucking background color of a div? You loaded all 7 fontfaces of a shitty webfont just so you could say "Hi." at 100px height at the beginning of your site? You piece of shit.
You're rewarding shitty behavior. Until people respect the web, we won't get anywhere. Plus, Google even has a guide to help you... There's no reason not to do the right thing aside from being a keep money grubby Jew which in that case you don't deserve customers anyways.
>>
>>57360681
>All gopher is missing is like input support and it would have been way better (for what it was i mean)
This is true, its really only intended to be read-only.
There is a little bit of input via search queries (resources of type 7 will ask for a line of input to send to the "search server" but this could also be a mole) and its certainly possible to use this in other ways (gopher://gopher.su/1/board) but its obviously limited.
Gopher+ intended to add more complex input queries with +ASK forms but Gopher+ was never really finished and has basically no support.
>>
>>57356701
you should use Server Side Includes for that, not javascript
>>
>>57362040
Is there a way to do SSI using normal shit similar to >>57357111 where it doesn't require some sort of prerequisite of using a different language like >>57359844 or >>57359543?
>>
>>57359834
It doesn't work anymore without Javascript.
>>
>>57351518
Why? Why do we need an interpreter for a turing complete language in order to view documents and submit forms? Do you have any idea how much power is wasted every minute on javascript?
>>
>>57362091
>>57357190
Apache/nginx includes are just<!--#include virtual="/footer.html" -->
You can technically say this is a "different language", its a special syntax inside an HTML comment, but that's all there is to it.
This is "normal shit" to anyone that actually does web dev, it seems like you just haven't really looked at the full picture yet and have mostly been focused on the client side (HTML, CSS, Javascript). Both are important, you can do some things on either side (like these includes, even though server side is recommended) but there's things you must do on one or the other (if you're doing authorisation client side.........)
>>
>>57353871
Yes I member too.
>>
>>57362091
>where it doesn't require some sort of prerequisite of using a different language
you are fucking retarded and beyond helping
please go buy a copy of the ECMAscript standard and bash it against your skull until you don't have enough brain cells left to open up a web browser
I fucking hope you die in your sleep you piece of shit
>>
File: berners-lee-570x366[1].jpg (46KB, 570x366px) Image search:
[Google]
![berners-lee-570x366[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/36fLN7X.jpg "berners-lee-570x366[1]")
46KB, 570x366px
>>57351095
>mein nigger
>>
File: mlzobxalgzjz2aslmizc.jpg (62KB, 652x365px) Image search:
[Google]
62KB, 652x365px
>>57351095
<html>
<marquee>
Today OP was not a faggot
</marquee>
</html>
>>
Anonymous, let's build web 0.0
>Minimal binary headers
>UDP
>Markdown instead of HTML
>No CSS
>No JS
Also, I'll make the logo. Don't worry about that.
>>
>>57362281
I'll stick with web -1.0, Gopher
>>
>>57362281
>UDP
But how do we get FLAC soundtracks for our cartoon pornography?
>>
>>57362311
Peer to peer fragmented transfert
>>
>>57361641
It's not their fault. They learned it in bootcamp.
>>
>>57362237
>thread about wanting pure HTML sites
>complain about bloat and dozens of languages
>get triggered that someone only deals with HTML
Are you off your meds today? I don't think you are understanding what's going on in this thread.
>>
>>57362213
Thanks for the informative answer. Apache and nginx tells me that it probably needs some kind of special backend on the web server, which is normal shit to web devs, but the context is for a web 1.0 page (think Geocities) so I don't think these nitty gritty stuff are applicable. Most answers given in this thread assumes it's a fully equipped web dev doing this for a big corporate gig, but that was never implied.
>>
File: 1457017290439.gif (2MB, 500x282px) Image search:
[Google]
2MB, 500x282px
>>57351518
op confirmed right
>>
>>57360365
Because hardware is cheap just buy a new computer go-I mean, guy.
>>
How bout you suck my fucken dick faggot?
>>
>>57362839
If you're a lone agent making their own small site of a few pages (or many pages posted infrequently), then there's really no harm in having a template which includes the header and footer and such, and just filling it in.
>>
ITT: a bunch of faggots trying to say that technology is terrible while using technology
>>
>>57364897
No one is saying that "technology" is bad. Stop being insane.
>>
>ITT /g/ at its peak autism
It's all fine and dandy to complain about such trivial things because most of you idiots are just stuck in your room all day to ponder such pointless arguments.
Yeah, some people suck at making websites. But you can fuck right off with this ideas that 99% of websites are unusable, and if that is the case then you're the problem with your garbage PC or internet connection.
There's a conversation to be had about bad practices in web development. But this is just typical /g/ going 110% in one direction with absolutely no nuance at all. This place is such a fucking dump.
>>
>>57351518
The only fundamental parts are listed here:
https://www.w3.org/TR/html4/intro/intro.html#h-2.1
URI
HTTP
HTML
These are usually used with TCP, with IP.
>>
This is one of the reasons the only news site I browse on my phone is HN
It's literally faster to read comments on there to get the gist of an article than it is to actually try to click on the news website with the article.
>>
>>57352282
What's a good gopher client? What's a good gopher server?
>>
File: 1475644545935.jpg (33KB, 337x600px) Image search:
[Google]
33KB, 337x600px
>>57351095
https://a.pomf.cat/ifzqfp.mp4
>>
>>57364946
>your garbage PC or internet connection.
>"The WorldWideWeb (W3) is a wide-area hypermedia information retrieval initiative aiming to give universal access to a large universe of documents."
>universal access
>UNIVERSAL ACCESS
>>
>>57365172
Just fuck off dude. You still using a Pentium III or some shit?
>>
>>57364988
>gopher client
Either Lynx or you can use the Overbite plugin for Firefox.
I prefer Lynx because saving a page renders it as pure text.
>>
>>57353987
It also fails to validate even as transitional HTML.
>>
>>57365190
So what if I am? So what if anyone is? The web doesn't belong to those in the first world with super-fast broadband and shiny new devices.
>universal access
>>
>>57355833
>tumblr themes
The majority of themes on tumblr crash your browser.
>>
>>57351624
They're retards who never used a language that wasn't interpreted.
>>
>>57351518
I've installed windows 10 and used it for 6 months so my opinion counts more than someone who hasn't experienced it.
Ahem... WINDOWS 10 IS SHIT! Catastrophic crash made me rethink my life choices thus far.
>>
>>57362704
There is a gigantic fucking world of difference between a pure HTML site and actually writing HTML by hand.
If you want a static site, use a static site generator. What you are trying to do is the equivalent of trying to rewrite your program program in straight assembly so you can avoid having to use a VM, instead of just using something like C instead that also has those properties but doesn't come with the insane cost of writing ASM/HTML by hand.
Said cost which you actually encountered, because you found yourself running into the template problem. A static site generator would not have this problem, yet you refuse to use one and instead use shitty bloated client-side JavaScript. You are literally doing the exact opposite of what you set out to do.
You are fucking beyond helping. Either learn to use the right tool for the right job or leave web tech so I never get confronted with your shitty websites breaking because I have javascript disabled on them
>>
>>57362839
>Apache and nginx tells me that it probably needs some kind of special backend on the web server, which is normal shit to web devs, but the context is for a web 1.0 page (think Geocities) so I don't think these nitty gritty stuff are applicable.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. You want to be using a static site generator.
>>
>>57351095
>brother is a web dev
>talk to him about my idea to write a simple script to wget web pages and display them in a clean and simple window
>"but then that would look terrible"
>"well, I just want the primary information without the buckshot"
>"but what if the article doesn't load"
>"if the articles main text is hidden in scripts then it's not a website I want to use"
So many websites are just being pumped out by people using tools like wordpress and a billion different scripts to make text bounce around and shit that don't want.
I'm setting up an orange pi at the moment and Firefox is bloated enough but opening pages is painful
>>
>>57365536
Writing HTML by hand is easy, though.
>>
>>57365583
Why not just disable javascript?
Also, if you really only want the plaintext, use `lynx`. Works a charm.
>>
>>57365588
Enjoy copy/pasting around templates and making O(n^2) changes whenever your navigation menu updates.
>>
>>57351095
>Have script blocker installed (of course)
this is such an archaic way to think. scripted websites are so unilateral nowadays, you are nothing more than curmudgeon for complaining about this. you'd probably even complain with simple html5/css3 bullshit.
if you are going to be such a baby about dynamic web, then sit on your fucking terminal and wget everything to your meme directory.
>>
>>57351095
The problem is people now see the browser as an OS and webpages as apps.
>>
>>57364946
You're right. Only 95% of sites are unusable.
>fucking javascript
>fucking ad trackers
>fucking popups
>fucking slide outs
>fucking 25MB of frameworks
>fucking ad networks with fucking app store redirects
>fucking pajeet with shit on his street
I feel like the late 1990's / early 2000's were peak personal computing and everything has gone to shit since then.
>>
test
>>
>>57351095
thats why I love reactjs, progressive enhancement ftw!
>>
>>57365778
>The problem is people now see the browser as an OS and webpages as apps.
> implying this isn't true
It's 2016, anon, are you still running software locally?
Be like everyone else in the current year, and store everything in the cloud.
>>
if the page is blank, i google the URL and load the cached version
almost always works
>>
>>57366575
>cloud
what did she mean by this
>>
>>57351618
>no DOCTYPE
>>
>>57366339
>I feel like the late 1990's / early 2000's were peak personal computing and everything has gone to shit since then.
This is true, because it is true
>>
File: gopher-300x200.jpg (21KB, 300x200px) Image search:
[Google]
21KB, 300x200px
>>57364988
For servers:
pygopherd - Python-based, comes with a Gopher <-> http proxy built in (i.e. it also is an http server that mirrors your gopherhole). Also available straight from the Debian repositories.
Bucktooth - Perl-based, developed and used by Floodgap for their Gopherhole. gopher://gopher.floodgap.com/1/buck
Gopher2000 - Ruby-based, developed for gopher://gopherpedia.com, which also has https://github.com/muffinista/gophper-proxy for http://gopherpedia.com though the two can be used separately.
Geomyidae - C-based, used by gopher://gopher.su
There are more since the protocol is ridiculously easy to implement, those the ones I've seen most often in the wild under "This gopherhole hosted with..." and similar messages.
I believe all of these support commonly adopted extras like "gophermap" files (for fancy directory menus), "gophertag" (dynamically named directories) and "moles" (CGI), so its up to you. A few may also support special extensions in the language they were developed in (like Gopher2000 has some extra things you can do directly with it in Ruby). I currently use Bucktooth, for no particular reason over any other server though.
>>
>>57365212
>every website should run on my Pentium III
This level of autism my fucking god. I just checked out this board out of curiosity but this thread is all I need to know. Maybe one day some of you will wake the fuck up, set foot in the real world and do something with their miserable lives other than argue among autists and fap to anime girls. You're a joke to real, active developers out there, I hope you all realize that.
>>
>>57367099
>argue autists and fap to anime girls
I'm fine with this.
>>
File: 1475017558774.jpg (37KB, 500x375px) Image search:
[Google]
37KB, 500x375px
>>57367099
You know what?
It's fucking bullshit when the page made of 40 kilobytes of actual information requires 40 megabytes to download.
It's not sane when you need to get 1024 times more information, if this information is any useful for you not. All space take telemetry bullshit so marketers would push their ads "you might like".
>inb4 personalized ads are good
Fuck you, consumer whore
>>
>>57367224
And it's not up to a developer to say no to that. Trying to reduce the damage is all you can ever do. Maybe work in a company sometime, you'll know what the fuck you're talking about then.
>>
File: 1471487343940.jpg (40KB, 550x512px) Image search:
[Google]
40KB, 550x512px
>>57366339
>everything has gone to shit since then.
its always been shit
we've just never noticed it
Thread posts: 249
Thread images: 24
Thread images: 24