Hacker News Reader

Comment by gaius | Hacker News Reader

Javascript, like Flash, doesn't do anything for the user, only for the developer or sponsor. Never did.

Ok, I'll bite; How would you do Google Maps without JavaScript. (or DDG Maps if you prefer)

Edit: Why downvotes?

The interface would be slightly different but there's no reason why an interactive map viewer couldn't be done in pure HTML and CSS without JS, and then JS added for more enhancements like AJAX loading.

In fact... it's been done eight years ago:

http://www.appelsiini.net/2008/google-maps-without-javascrip...

Look at where the map images are coming from, copy the link, and play around with the URL parameters. Yes, this still works.

I also distinctly remember playing some HTML adventure games with similar pan/zoom/click interfaces before the millenium, and they didn't require JS either (nor took quite as long as the apps of today to load, on hardware that was probably an order of magnitude or more less powerful.)

Quite a few Javascript fanboys downvoting me but let me tell you the truth, users don't care about animated page transitions or whatever. Just want to read the article or buy the product or whatever. Javascript does nothing for them, never did, just developers with too much time on their hands is all.

Users definitely care about scroll-to-zoom and drag-to-move. At least this one does.

Also: auto-complete

Google Maps is a wrong example. It's a (basic) web application, i.e. what is generally an interactive program that happens to be rendered in the browser. It's obvious that most web applications need JS on, because they're literally made of JavaScript.

Web sites, however, don't need almost any JavaScript to work. 90% of it is either unnecessary design that distracts and confuses users, or actively user-hostile scripts (ad popups, trackers, interfaces designed to trick you into buying stuff, etc.).

- in-browser chat

- Google Docs

- infinite scrolling (of course someone is going to say infinite scroll is a bad thing but it's clearly desirable to some)

- input validation (before I click submit I can know that eg my desired username isn't taken)

- others

All of these need Flash or JS. For such a technically inclined community I'm always amazed at how folks on Hacker News insist that the Web remain a circa 1990s document browsing system.

What's so surprising about it? That when I seek to learn information, I want to learn information in the most efficient way, instead of being slowed down by having to deal with all the artsy bullshit some designer put on the site? That, when learning, I don't like to be upsold shitty products and services I don't even need or care about? That when I seek to buy a product, I want a product that has a best price/value tradeoff for me and that I want to be done quick with it?

Ignoring your first two bullets, which pertain to web applications - something completely different than web pages - you've just about listed the proper uses for JavaScript. Most of the JS out there is at best gratuitous design, and at worst actively user-hostile crap. Just visit a few random pages you use and ask yourself, how many JavaScript-powered features are there to actually help you achieve your goal in an efficient manner? Probably close to zero.

Most websites are not designed with user's benefit in mind. They are designed to trick and exploit them. When 99.9% of the page size is hostile bullshit that only wastes electricity by spinning your CPU fan, you're really asking why so many people here ask for the pre-JS Internet back?

The "circa 1990s document browsing system" may have been poorer in visual features, but it was much better a system than what we have today.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com