>open a website in 2017 >it requires adobe flash player

File: 1486150395467.jpg (297KB, 536x640px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 536x640px

>>59765975
>open website in 2017
>it requires nonfree JavaScript

>>59765975
>Open website in 2017
>Die from unoriginality

It's like they are all parody of themselves.

>>59765975
>open a website in 2017
>loads slower than an entire OS

Reminder that there are no music streaming services that run on HTML5

>>59766162
And what are Soundloud and Yandex Music?

File: 1428881219651.jpg (92KB, 557x495px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 557x495px

>open news website in 2017
>huge bottom bar reminding me of cookies
>huge window in the middle asking me to subscribe
>huge popup asking me to disable adblock
>infinite scrolling loading news I don't care about
>video of unrelated news starts automatically playing

>>59766202
>unreadable hueg font
>no high-resolution pictures
>tl;dr quotes here and there
>no useful info in the article

>open a website in 2017
>video starts to play automatically and there is no close button for the player

>>59766177
Yandex music isn't usable in third world countries like America.

File: Chteigen.jpg (139KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 600x450px

>Reminder that HTML5 literally means death of adblockers and endless fucking cucking of the Internet.

>open website
>it requires flash
>close website

>open website
>it asks me to disable adblock
>close website

>open website
>it's a """news""" (read: clickbait) website
>close website

wew, not being retarded sure is great

>>59766276
>i'd rather spend my time closing websites instead of pushing for less shittiness in general online
thanks for making me feel better about my own IQ bro

>>59766221
>>tl;dr quotes here and there
This annoys me so fucking much!

Also, sites that have a giant top header "frame" that takes up half the page.

>>59766295
And how exactly do you think you can "push for less shittiness"?
Do you send angry emails to website owners asking them to remove flash and stop clickbaiting?
The only thing they care about is ad revenue, so logically the only way to make a statement is to stop giving it to them

>>59766311
...which sometimes reappears by itself when you scroll up
Annoying as fuck

>>59766320
Not implying protesting, but building up a sort of a blacklist and cutting off the views for these kinds of sites

>>59766320
I still don't get why old-style side and bottom banners hosted on newspaper's website are conidered worse than bloated javascript botnet from google and 1000 marketing companies behind it.

File: 1485442586693.png (1MB, 1273x922px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1273x922px

>open a website in 2017
>it requires captcha

>>59766361
Ad companies pay more for more precise targeting and tracking. If you go full botnet on your site you can use real-time bidding, where you offer a bunch of ad brokers a user with a particular profile and the ad slot goes to the highest bigger. Static banners pay approximately three-fifths of nothing nowadays.

Basically both the website and the company buying the advertising have a financial incentive to sell you out, and the ad brokers are of course happy to facilitate that.

>>59766162
Google play music