When I try to test my broswer for a security flaw, the flaw requires javascript.

I have tried turning javascript on for a day. I met scripts that enter an infinite loop. Plenty that just do not work. Plenty of javascript provides a simple link, or does some pointless validation before copying form data into place. If you want to waste time on client side validation, that is your own problem, but please do not require javascript for simple tex input.

The vast majority of javascript does nothing useful whatsoever. Like flash, it is just an expensive way to drive away customers.

For sure. I totally agree, both as a webmaster and as a user.

As Cosey and others said, as a web-user I use the NoScript Firefox extension, and opt-in to Javascript. No hassle, less ads, more security.

Whilst Javascript can, undoubtedly, make certain operations much more easily achieved, and create a degree of interactivity to a web-page without reloading, it has disadvantages. Several security flaws have been discovered, and unpleasant people have been writing scripts that do quite unpleasant things to the user’s computer.

Subsequently, many users turn off Javascript in their browser, and quite a number of major corporations use proxy servers that actually strip out Javascript before serving the pages.

1.) What about disabled people? Are you the ones who decides a blind person is not allowed to extract information from the Web (2. fucking 0)? What about your Granny? About you, when you become old or have an accident…? Now who’s the bastard? I know who’s the idiot here, man.

2.) As a responsible webmaster I see what other webmasters do. That’s why I am a hardcore no-.js’er in my Apps for so long, and that’s the reason my Opera has JS switched off by default. Because I know what good i can do with JS. But when surfing the web, I am confronted with hundreds of thousands of web”masters” who don’t understand what they’re doing, some of them even trying to harm me (JS overlays on eBay and whatnot). No, I trust noone by default, because I cannot control the web (And I’m not constantly surfing YOUR page). But I can control my browser.

3.) If your selling solution forces me to enable JS to give you my credit card number, your product is most likely to not be worth it. I’ll find and support a more sensible seller.

4.) JS is NOT as important as HTML. HTML can live pretty well w/o JS, what about the other way round? I’m not saying JS is not worth being considered at all. But it always was (and for long will be) a mere enhancement to (hopefully already working) HTML markup. Call me a nerd, but my pages (even my webapps) can be accessed without CSS, too. They work on my smartphone :-)

5.) Know why I never liked to play with the cool kids? They’re most often the stupid kids, too. Now that school times have passed, the “uncool” kids are the ones who pay your wages… (That’s the only sympathy I have for Bill Gates).

BTW: Guess whether I have my Flash Plugin activated by default…? I love my web experience. Less ads, quick loads, calm pages… ;-)

It’s a case by case basis whether I offer an alternative non-javascript way to fulfill the functionality of the particular element or form or whatever is on the site I’m making.

Audience, the importance of the feature, the build time, all this factors into whether I cater for non-JS people. Ideally everything works with or without JS. But aiming for ideals costs money and time.

I’m all for making a site accessible to all devices, but accessibility should not restrict usability. That is, the usability of a site should not be limited to the lowest common denominator of the user agent.

If Javascript in a webpage is relied on like an engine in a plane, it’s probably too much reliance. Instead aim for a glider, which has an efficient hi-tech motor attached which optionally kicks in for an extra boost. :-)

stuart:
IE is to blame for most everything that makes web design suck as a career. We all should be convincing as many users as we can to move to using a GOOD browser. Sure we can’t do anything about the corporate users with IE5 but we should be trying to convince the rest of the world for their sake and ours.

doneright:
Web Apps vs. Web Pages – here’s my thoughts
Pages offer searchable information. Full blown Web Apps offer functionality.
Information about what functionality my web app offers will be available on regular web pages. My complex ajax driven app is probably members only anyway so google can’t even see those pages.

Tell your nonprofit IE5 users to do themselves a favor and use firefox or something. It’s better and safer and will save them from some virus troubles. Should probably also tell them to not use Norton and instead use something that will actually protect them. And in a few years when they’re finally realizing their old systems are totally worthless crap and they start planning to purchase upgrades you should tell them about Linux Distros (Like Sabayon, maybe Ubuntu etc).

“Why the hell should I have to have JS on to submit a form?”
It makes selecting the Country-State-City easier. It allows you to switch the price range of property your searching for on a real estate site depending on if you are looking to buy or looking to rent….but not it should not prevent the form from submitting.

Kris Zyp said something about “moving the web ahead into the next generation of applications….raising the levels of user interactions should not be impeaded because HTML is “good enough”.”
I don’t believe html is good enough. Obviously lots of people (used to) agree with me because they created javascript and css. But to truly move the web ahed into the “next generation of APPLICATIONS” we need more improvemets. CSS as it is now has yet to be -fully- implemented. And beyond that is still needs improvement in my opinion (truly stylable scrollbars! – i know you hate me now :) if we are ever going to truly make descent applications that rival what’s on the desktop.

Westworld:
If you’re building a web page – content is King.
If you’re building a “web gadget” – the gadget is king (widgets anybody?)

But there are some common problems that javascript is used to solve that really should be a part of HTML itself. Javascript can perform the duties of CSS’s :before/:after/content functionality but they still added those things to css because it would make things easier for their users (us the developers). Stuff like combo boxes need to be added to html and I’m sure there are other things you can think of.

Am I the only one who envies the huge amount of progress and improvement flash has enjoyed over the years compared to the decade we’re going to spend waiting for css3…

Alexei:
I used a screen reader once. When windows popped up an error, the reader read it to me. They should be updated to realize when a new element has been added to a page’s DOM or an element switched from display:none to be visible and read it too. That should help a lot with the accessibility problems of ajax.

Jeff:
That is the BEST definitions of Web2.0 EVER!
“It is a line in the sand where we tell people that “your browser is not compatible with this version of the web”

Gary R Boodhoo:
“This is an interactive medium as much as it is a data delivery medium.”
I felt it needed repeating.

The key to flash (besides animation) is that anything can be made to interact with the user. Until we have this same freedom in xhtml/js/css we will never stop getting requests for all flash sites.

Douglas Crockford:
thats how I feel about anyone not using firefox or opera (or any other modern Non-IE browser)