@Aaron said:
...In conclusion: it's 2008, and expecting sites to work without JavaScript is no more logical than expecting a new printer to work without a USB port. New technologies are invented, people shy away from them at first, then they get refined, start to see more widespread adoption, and eventually people come to depend on them. They may not be perfect, they may not be safe or secure, but that fact changes nothing unless and until something better arrives on the market.Ever since the first "Web 2.0" treatise several years ago, we've been living in a JavaScript world. ECMAScript has even started to get taken seriously as a full-fledged programming language. Welcome to Planet Earth. This is the world we live in - get used to it.
Why is Javascript so evil?Because webmasters use it to make:
- Popup windows and Popunders
- Windows presized to some size the user don't want.
- Windows with no functionality, ie. just a frame with contents.
- Full screen windows, again a size the user don't want.
- Forcing windows to front of the screen
- Taking over the status bar
- Alert boxes
- Browser sniffers
- Cursor following animations
- Guessing resolution (irrelevant and often wrong anyway)
- Used for links where a simple HTML link is sufficient
- Used for forms so that they cannot be filled out without Javascript enabled
These reasons, and more, are why I run NoScript. You might think that most of the above are perfectly valid, but I've come a cropper on all of them at some point when some turkey does a WTF because they can't be arsed working out how to write good (X)HTML/CSS. The browser sniffer thing is particularly annoying when it tells me to bugger off because I'm not using something they couldn't anticipate back in 1999 - Fedora 9 with Firefox 3.
As for scripts chewing idle cycles, have you never been to a website with multiple scrolling text boxes driven by poorly written JavaScript that completely consumes your processor? "Why is everything so much slower? What's hogging the processor? Firefox? Ah... WTF-ey JavaScript!" Maybe that problem will fade away now that Google's new JavaScript engine has appeared (and Firefox will work that technology in soon) (And on SWMBO's old P4 with a noisy fan, dodgy JavaScript makes the computer noisier too - I know, should replace the fan!)
When it appears that I'm missing something on a website due to NoScript, and I reckon I actually want something from that website (e.g. TDWTF), then I happily enable scripts for it. Until then, I let NoScript filter out the WTFs for me and generally enjoy a reduced-stress browing experience.
Oh, note that NoScript isn't the only reason why JavaScript might be disabled or ignored:
- some firewalls disable scripts and other active content by default
- some users disable scripts and other active content, and explicitly enable only on "trusted" websites
- some corporate firewalls strip scripts except on "trusted" websites (and some take out the noscript tags too!)
- some users (blind / visually impaired) need screen readers that read the HTML content, pre-JavaScript
Don't tag me as some sort of Luddite fighting against the adoption of new technologies. I'm not saying that websites shouldn't use any JavaScript, just that they need to still work without it.
@morbiuswilters said:
...The only point I disagree on is "nerds afraid of the status quo". I think it's more like "people who like to think they are nerds trying to show off their technical savvy by blocking scripting so that when a site doesn't work without JS they can throw a hissy fit". It's 2008. If your browser doesn't support JavaScript, I have no sympathy for you. It's like running Windows 3.1 and commenting every other day "I tried to install this new application, but it wouldn't even run in 16-bit mode!"
Thanks for tagging me as trying to be a nerd, I'm sure SWMBO will be delighted to hear I'm not really a nerd after all... :-)