just found out that the javascript would pretty much become a necessity for basic functioning of vb5. and well i am in the camp that browse a lot with javascript disabled. that is my easy way to surf the web 90% of the times. because it is faster, it blocks 95% of the ads that clutter the web. and i can safely say that 90% of the web is still usable with javascript disabled. even gmail has a version that works without any need for javascript. twitter can be used through their mobile.twitter.com edition. i would be seriously frustrated if my own forum stops working for me if i have javascript disabled in my browser.
Unusable without Javascript
Collapse
X
-
Comment
-
Comment
-
As others have pointed out, it's not just about privileged, able-bodied, American users. A forum like the National Water forum in Uganda is used by tens of thousands of Ugandans on legacy devices that do not support some of the technologies you make mandatory.👍 1Comment
-
If that is the case, please continue using the old software that does support those technologies. We have to make cutoffs in outdated technologies.Comment
-
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.👍 1Comment
-
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.jpgComment
-
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.Comment
-
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
There should be some kind off fallback mechanism for those people imo.Comment
-
- 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.Comment
-
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.
Comment
-
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.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
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 - - -
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.👍 1Comment
-
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.
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.Comment
Related Topics
Collapse
-
by SwordyHow do I turn off AJAX paging in 5.1.7?
The manual directs me to Settings > Options > General Settings>Disable AJAX Features but this doesn't exist....-
Channel: Support Issues & Questions
Tue 19 May '15, 10:24am -
-
by dethfireI notice the paging is done without new page load. will google be able to index each page of a thread or will we lose that indexed content?
-
Channel: Support Issues & Questions
Sat 15 Sep '12, 6:48am -
Comment