Thread

wasn’t 37signals a design firm specializing in usability and ui before they wrote all their apps?

disclaimer ... i’m a 37signals fan.

but i went to log in to highrise just now and shut my JS off prior, just so i can see how well they degrade and what kind of functionality remains with it off ... well ... apparently none!

i’m a bit put off by this, maybe their “take it easy on yourself” attitude is going a little overboard here. i’m not a usablity stickler, but man ... the web is getting into all kinds of devices these days ... and apps like highrise are supposed to keep you on top of things, that means PDAs for one. ever use an ajax heavy site on your blackberry? it kinda sucks.

check this out ...

You need to change a setting in your web browser
Highrise requires a browser feature called JavaScript. All modern browsers support JavaScript. You probably just need to change a setting in order to turn it on.
Please see: How to enable JavaScript in your browser.
If you use ad-blocking software, it may require you to allow JavaScript from highrisehq.com.

Once you’ve enabled JavaScript you can try loading this page again.

      Thank you.

now, for a small shop with 1 developer, maybe if you need to provide the ajax tricks the stripped down version can come later (although it should be reverse), but 37signals?

is this moving forwards or backwards?

I agree that a small (or tiny) dev shop can relax and require JS if they desire.  Because it is some work to support older browsers or browsers with JS turned off.

On the other hand, a well-established company with millions of users should know better.  But, I have to say, I never turn off JS.  Too many sites break when you do.

————————-
CI driven search
http://bitcircle.com

I’m a big proponent of degrading websites, but I think on some it is forgivable.

Particularly sites like this one (this forum needs javascript), 37s, assembla, and every other site whose user base consists mainly of web developers.  Javascript can make a huge difference in user experience, and every web developer knows how to turn it on.

That said, I do believe noscript tags should be mandatory.  I do sometimes turn it off when I’m developing and forget to turn it back on.  It causes a moment of confusion every time.

I’m also totally fine with sites that say feature x needs javascript.  That is a sensible way to develop - going the extra mile for every ity-bity feature only bloats your code.

Why does this forum needs javascript? For hiding textareas, Hiding the ten last item from the thread, adding markup and smileys? It isn’t necessary. I even think if they show the fast reply textarea all the time there will be more responses because the textarea lures you to write a response.

I agree with you javascript can make a big difference in user experience but most of the time the user experience targets the people that are less tech savvy. For instance multi select items in a list (nice article and jquery plugin).
I think the reason why powerhouse websites use javascript is because they want to join in on the hype. Ajax isn’t always needed. It makes the development of the site even harder because it needs 2 programming languages and a browser functionality.

Denying people from accessing your site because javascript isn’t enabled is as bad as only allowing surfers with a particular browser. Shutting out people is always bad. I think you should at least offer the basic functionality of the site. 

The main reason why so many sites break without javascript is because developers are unwilling to think about solutions. An example of my own unwillingness; until recently i didn’t provide a php way to warn the users they were going to do a non reversible action, javascript has nicer ways of doing it. The solution i ended up with is simply removing the identifier from the url and checking for it to show the warning or do the action.

Why does this forum needs javascript? For hiding textareas, Hiding the ten last item from the thread, adding markup and smileys? It isn’t necessary.

I don’t know a lot about the EE forum module, but I certainly agree that it should be possible to post with js disabled.

I think the reason why powerhouse websites use javascript is because they want to join in on the hype. Ajax isn’t always needed. It makes the development of the site even harder because it needs 2 programming languages and a browser functionality.

The hype is a misconception.  Javascript has been around since the days of the blink and marquee tags.  The XMLHttpRequest object has been around since 2002.  It certainly isn’t new technology.

Google, the company that pretty much started the whole ajax epidemic, has website parts that don’t degrade.  Their solution has always been to just build another app.  Anyone who has tried to use gmail without javascript knows that while it’s usable, it’s not very sexy.  Not a lot of development companies can afford to maintain two versions of every app they create.  It just isn’t feasible if you don’t have Google’s developer base.

The main reason why so many sites break without javascript is because developers are unwilling to think about solutions. An example of my own unwillingness; until recently i didn’t provide a php way to warn the users they were going to do a non reversible action, javascript has nicer ways of doing it. The solution i ended up with is simply removing the identifier from the url and checking for it to show the warning or do the action.

I’ll one up (progressively enhance 😛 ) you on that - intercept the click, ajax request the link, drop the results in a modal window, and voilá: degradable confirmations.  That’s what I did with Linkster with quite a simple helper (the template library doesn’t serve header,footer, etc for ajax requests).  So I agree that there are solutions to most of the problems.

And a good reason to solve them is that there are people out there who cannot use a computer the way we use it, and should be accommodated for.  Blind web developers are still very rare though.

Google, the company that pretty much started the whole ajax epidemic, has website parts that don’t degrade.  Their solution has always been to just build another app.  Anyone who has tried to use gmail without javascript knows that while it’s usable, it’s not very sexy.  Not a lot of development companies can afford to maintain two versions of every app they create.  It just isn’t feasible if you don’t have Google’s developer base.

I create a php only version of the app and then i add javascript. I’ve always worked that way why should it be different because ajax an the javascript libraries happen to appear. It’s still addon programming because javascript can’t generate or manipulate data on its own. 

I’ll one up (progressively enhance 😛 ) you on that - intercept the click, ajax request the link, drop the results in a modal window, and voilá: degradable confirmations.  That’s what I did with Linkster with quite a simple helper (the template library doesn’t serve header,footer, etc for ajax requests).  So I agree that there are solutions to most of the problems.

I javascript the action warning without the use of ajax because most of the time the identifier is already found on the page so i only have to fetch it on the first click and add it to the action url, show the warning and if the second click happens the action gets executed.

I don’t think it’s a matter of easy/hard ... it’s easy ... especially with frameworks like jquery and ci which facilitates reusing code (JS? show the JS view, no JS? Show the HTML only view). It’s a matter of desire, time and budget constraints.

Web developers have JS on, I agree with that. My JS is always on unless I’m testing or surfing for guitar tabs ... which typically these sites have so much advertising going on it’s crazy.

But I think to say Highrise is for web guys only ... I disagree ... It’s a tool for the sales process, or customer service process. It’s also a tool you might need access to on the road.

I can live with JS only sites ... but I think this is a time of advancing web technology and all of a sudden there are a growing number of electronics besides computers accessing web sites. I have a now offline Samsung i730 Smartphone ... 3 years ago is kind of old now I guess ... but it didn’t support Javascript. My new Blackberry Curve totally blows at handling Javascript ... not everyone has (or wants) a brand new iPhone.

I came out with a program last year ... it wasn’t for anyone off the web to use, it was a members only tool ... pay to use. That site was my first real experience with jQuery ... and you might think this is funny ... but not 1 request resulted in a new page being loaded ... I used Ajax on everything and I thought it rocked. But this year, I redid the site and made sure it worked 100% without JS and used JS to add flair ... IME ... this is easily the best way to go.

Here’s a problem with Ajax only ... “Open link in new tab” ... then you get a piece of HTML in your window instead of a complete page.

Though they are known for their usability, I don’t believe 37signals was ever too concerned about accessibility.  The simple explanation is that they use Ruby on Rails (RoR), and RoR bakes obtrusive javascript into its applications.  While obtrusive javascript doesn’t make graceful degradation impossible, it does make it a lot more difficult to achieve.

When I’m on the go, sometimes I need to handle my Internet needs with my Pocket PC / PDA / Phone.  Web sites that use large frames or javascript make it very difficult.  I’m about to change banks because I can’t access my account with my Pocket PC.

One of my websites that has a forum (not EE) uses a forum with built in support for mobile phones, and has a special template when displaying data to them.  It disables javascript, most graphics, and sends a very, navigable scaled-down version of the forum that makes it easy to read, reply, and post.  Love it.  Unfortunately, most web developers are so busy trying to put in all the fancy bells and whistles, the new mobile market is being closed up before it can even get off the ground. 

I think in the future, these places will figure out they will lost customer base by cutting off their mobile customers.  Perhaps as surfing the web with handheld devices becomes more mainstream it will be addressed better by all.

i think making sites able to go mobile is going to be a hot trend. for regular sites, that may mean graceful degradation. for service oriented sites, i think a simple textish mobile version is a cool plus. developers just need to realize iphone is still a minority ... and their not having verizon service options is HUGE, so keep things simple!

all of a sudden and everywhere i look, someone has a blackberry in their hands, not just road warriors. i think there is a surge in demand coming.

I think the iTune mela would be soon set with companies looking for widgets and better design websites.

I create a php only version of the app and then i add javascript. I’ve always worked that way why should it be different because ajax an the javascript libraries happen to appear. It’s still addon programming because javascript can’t generate or manipulate data on its own.

I see eye-to-eye with xwero on this one. If you always develop your application, 100% functional with the non-JS user in mind, and then go back and add in all the glits-and-glam unobstrusively you will never have an issue with graceful degredation.