Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Unusable without Javascript

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Al Zander
    replied
    Originally posted by noox View Post
    Search engine visibility is a really important factor when you want to earn money with your forum. ..

    And I'm really curious if the speed of vB 5 will become near to the speed it should be.
    Speed, I for one am not worried about, atm. So far, the track record has been getting better (after the initial vBB4 wake up).

    SEO... this little area I am in a wait and see mode. I have no doubt vBB and IB will pull all stops to make it happen. The only hitch, IMO, is the completely rewritten URL structure upon initial upgrade to vBB5. Yes yes, I am fully aware of the rewrite workaround, so we know what is under *our* control. How about Google and other search engines, who are constantly changing *their* algorithms? We can't count on that part of the equation to remain static. Therefore, IMO, we can't count on our rewrite workaround to be the end all and be all of solutions.

    Time will tell... but we've been here before, so all is good for now. On with the show, I say. Time will tell...

    Leave a comment:


  • noox
    replied
    Search engine visibility is a really important factor when you want to earn money with your forum. At the moment I would not trust that search engines see what I want them to see when Ajax is used for basic navigations. And how should the search engines know which URL to provide in the search result to get the user to the content the spider found after doing numerous ajax requests - all on the same url?

    I've never used the archive as I wanted the users get right to the thread. And I used SEO-friendly URLs since I started with a forum over 10 years ago.

    If you want to monetize your page the number of page impressions is a really important factor. With all this AJAX-stuff we are loosing a lot of PIs.

    vBulletin basic functionality should stay like a web site. For additional functionality AJAX is appreciated if it improves user experience.

    And I'm really curious if the speed of vB 5 will become near to the speed it should be.

    Leave a comment:


  • rob83
    replied
    Well this thread contained some pretty depressing news :/

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul K
    replied
    I really hope that I'll be able to get links like http://www.vbulletin.com/vb5demo/for...n-answer/page2 and so on again, same for the posts, I want to be able to send like http://www.vbulletin.com/vb5demo/for...=1234#post1234

    Leave a comment:


  • oldz442
    replied
    I disable JS frequently for various reasons. On the demo recently... encountered an unexpected 'bug' while JS was disabled. Apparently it is all better now.

    Leave a comment:


  • Riasat
    replied
    Originally posted by feldon23 View Post
    A programming buddy and I spent 6 months writing a 3rd party website in our free time. We did it almost entirely server-side with a minimum of AJAX. During that same time, a division of Sony produced an official website with the same purpose built on the same data API. They built an extremely thick client website based entirely on AJAX and Javascript. Not only is their website extremely slow, but it is missing a ton of the functionality that we built into our site. Our site gets something like 10 times the traffic of theirs.

    I vigorously stand by my statement that thick client websites built on mountains of AJAX are a passing fad. We'll see 5 years from now who was right.
    I never said flash is the future or something. Personally, I hate flash.

    Your example only proves they hired incompetent engineers.

    You can stand by whatever you like. Browsers will be regarded as thick client more and more; whether you/I like it or not.

    Leave a comment:


  • feldon23
    replied
    Originally posted by Sushubh View Post
    discussion on this thread tells me some governments have to take initiative to enforce accessibility related regulations on the web at least on companies that are operating in their jurisdiction.

    because people do not seem to look at the bigger picture. the web is not only for able bodied people with the latest technology at their disposal. ignoring them does not solve the problem. cannot believe we are being mocked for asking for a more accessible product.

    just because the technology allows you to make something flashy does not mean you have to take that route. i wonder how many people here hated Adobe Flash only websites.
    Originally posted by OhioDave View Post
    I'm sure they're all well aware of the side effects that relying on so much JS has.

    Like it failing to meet certain usability/accessability standards for governments across the world so they won't be able to use the software, and excluding sites for people who are visually impaired also who won't be able to use it.

    It's their software, and they made the decision to exclude those segments of the market for whatever reason. Let them bear the fruits of those labors and live and learn.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_acc..._accessibility
    I think there is way too much government regulation. And I laugh at initiatives like the EU requiring websites to provide a message that they uses cookies. Um... every website uses cookies. Next they'll require websites to announce that they use HTML, colors, letters and numbers.

    However I wouldn't be against some kind of labeling on the Accessibility of software. vBulletin 5 would get a D-. vBulletin 5 is completely unusable with any kind of screen reader software or other accessibility tools. Heck you can't even save a bookmark to a thread on a certain page, so it's really inaccessible to everyone on the planet not just the visually impaired.

    Any company with visually impaired customers should avoid vBulletin 5.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Originally posted by feldon23 View Post
    I personally believe AJAX-centric websites are a fad that will die out like Flash splash/intro pages and Flash navigation bars.
    Originally posted by Riasat View Post
    Think again. As web moves forward, browser will be regarded as thick client more and more.
    8 years ago, Flash was the future of web development. Since then, Adobe has officially abandoned it for mobile development after failing to deliver a mature Android client despite years of effort and Apple wisely kicking them to the curb. Since mobile is the future, that means Flash is for all intents and purposes dead.

    A programming buddy and I spent 6 months writing a 3rd party website in our free time. We did it almost entirely server-side with a minimum of AJAX. During that same time, a division of Sony produced an official website with the same purpose built on the same data API. They built an extremely thick client website based entirely on AJAX and Javascript. Not only is their website extremely slow, but it is missing a ton of the functionality that we built into our site. Our site gets something like 10 times the traffic of theirs.

    I vigorously stand by my statement that thick client websites built on mountains of AJAX are a passing fad. We'll see 5 years from now who was right.
    Last edited by feldon23; Tue 9 Oct '12, 7:31am.

    Leave a comment:


  • OhioDave
    replied
    I'm sure they're all well aware of the side effects that relying on so much JS has.

    Like it failing to meet certain usability/accessability standards for governments across the world so they won't be able to use the software, and excluding sites for people who are visually impaired also who won't be able to use it.

    It's their software, and they made the decision to exclude those segments of the market for whatever reason. Let them bear the fruits of those labors and live and learn.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_acc..._accessibility

    Leave a comment:


  • jluster
    replied
    Originally posted by Sushubh View Post
    the web is not only for able bodied people with the latest technology at their disposal. ignoring them does not solve the problem. cannot believe we are being mocked for asking for a more accessible product.
    THIS. IB and the IB employees commenting here essentially gave a big ol' "up yours" to:

    • visually impaired users
    • users in low income situations such as the users perusing a vB install to discuss housing and job searches from libraries where JS is usually disabled
    • users in countries with less technological availability such as the users perusing my site from Kenya, the DRC, and Somalia
    • users who just don't want to run JavaScript


    To essentially mock anyone who isn't running around like a kid in a 2012 candy store and starts thinking about how they can JS-ify everything, even if it doesn't need​ to be changed... that's disingenuous.

    Leave a comment:


  • BelLion
    replied
    Originally posted by lukerobi View Post
    I really don't see why people who require sites that operate without javascript just continue to use 4.2? Would it help if they named v4.2 to v5^0.89166814966 or something?




    Someone needs to be fired over that... Do your computers look like this: http://smallbusinessexpert.com.au/wp...d-computer.jpg
    Much more people than you think don't have access to javascript/AJAX at work :/
    There should be some kind off fallback mechanism for those people imo.

    Leave a comment:


  • Sushubh
    replied
    discussion on this thread tells me some governments have to take initiative to enforce accessibility related regulations on the web at least on companies that are operating in their jurisdiction.

    because people do not seem to look at the bigger picture. the web is not only for able bodied people with the latest technology at their disposal. ignoring them does not solve the problem. cannot believe we are being mocked for asking for a more accessible product.

    just because the technology allows you to make something flashy does not mean you have to take that route. i wonder how many people here hated Adobe Flash only websites.

    Leave a comment:


  • lukerobi
    replied
    I really don't see why people who require sites that operate without javascript just continue to use 4.2? Would it help if they named v4.2 to v5^0.89166814966 or something?


    Originally posted by Stallyon View Post
    The place I work for still uses Internet Explorer 6
    Someone needs to be fired over that... Do your computers look like this: http://smallbusinessexpert.com.au/wp...d-computer.jpg

    Leave a comment:


  • oldz442
    replied
    ub tell em sheriff

    Leave a comment:


  • Paul M
    replied
    Ha ha. Trainee Comedian.

    Dont give up the day job just yet.

    Leave a comment:


  • AlexanderT
    replied
    Originally posted by Zachery View Post
    We have to make cutoffs in outdated technologies.
    Could you clarify what technologies you're referring to?

    I think I am finally getting it. You're trying to raise the bar for competitors. vB 5 - the community software with the most demanding soft- and hardware requirements. Lawrence could add this to the list of features.

    Leave a comment:

Related Topics

Collapse

Working...
X