• SGGEnglish
    3•1 month ago

    I am thankful I’ve never seen this (or at least, have not seen it yet).

    I have however seen plenty of “app” style webpages over the years, but for a lot of them it makes sense, good examples would be Gmail and web based communication programs (discord in the browser as an example). They have to load a bunch of JavaScript and other resources to function.

    • @[email protected]
      2•1 month ago

      Discord I get because it’s real time chat. Gmail I get less so, it has some real time chat stuff but the core functionality could be done with far less JS IMO. Maybe I just feel that way because I’m a JS minimalist. Unless the website’s core function needs JS(real time chat etc) I’m a firm believer you should be able to disable JS and the website should not break.

      • qazEnglish
        1•1 month ago

        It’s easier to just make one static web app that makes API calls so that’s what’s done.

        • @[email protected]
          2•1 month ago

          Is that really easier than just responding to clicking things server side? Again I fully understand there are some use cases where that’s just not possible but in my, admittedly limited, web development experience you can get a whole heck of a lot done server side with no JS at all