Me too. I've been surfing in IE with all active scripting and ActiveX disabled, and... not only no pop-up windows... but you can easily see what sites the spiders aren't going to be able to penetrate.
How about those rollover divs that attach themselves to your cursor after they become visible! Who ever thought that one up, anyway?
I know I might start a ruckus here, but I have been strongly disliking those "dropdown" DHTML menus. When they're done well - that is, when the menu items make good sense and the IA is well thought out - then they're not too bad. Although, I still miss being able to see all my choices at one time.
But many times these drop-down doo-dads are just a designer's toy, and I end up popping over one item after another trying to figure out which link might hold what I'm looking for. Of course with JS turned off, I just can't get into the pages at all!
come from the "I'm clever, you're not, look what I can do! school of Web Design.
|...popups, image swaps, status bar manipulation, and little flying images chasing your mouse. |
Those "adhesive rollover divs" and DHTML menus were created to serve everyone's "sense of discovery," right? I mean, we all love suprises don't we? Who knows what absolutely wonderful things may be hidden three levels deep in a hierarchal menu!? ;)
I can't see where to disable JS in Internet Explorer or I'd love to try "surfing" without it. Just for fun.
But I think I'll prefer having it on and just staying away from sites with so many tricks as to be annoying. But then, that may include my own! (A calculator that couldn't run without it.)
Thanks for the discussion,
papabaer - You posted this on another thread but I thought it would be best to follow up here. Do you know where can I get further information/ demographics/ etc on this? I'd love to be able to alert clients to this; it's been an ongoing battle.
Also, any stats about percentages with ActiveX disabled?
Robert, here is one source:
From the petty annoyances to the more weighty security matters, the ability to disallow scripting while surfing has its merits.
I have not sought out stats for ActiveX but there should be info available. I am curious myself.
My website has been referenced in articles in three national magazines (that I know of) including Yahoo!; countless newspaper articles including a syndicated one in The Washington Post which was printed in papers all over the U.S.; and on I don't know how many TV news reports.(Please excuse the bragging -- I'm about to make a point.)
I always found it interesting that almost none of the authors checked with me before publication. Now I find it fascinating (or horrifying!?!) that 12% of their readers went to my page only to find it blank!
While I always assumed everyone had JS enabled, I have been very careful to code my pages for IE, Netscape and WebTV; and for both high and lower screen resolutions. And I created a page of counters to see what my visitors were using.
FYI typical counts were:
Low Resolution (< or = 800): 13,400
The last one was the surprise to me and since discovering it I have made my pages look good for the lower resolution as well as the higher one I use myself.
I don't worry too much about percentages - I like solid numbers. As I've said before here, I'll take 88% of 100,000 over 98% of 50,000 any day.
> Low Resolution (< or = 800)
800x600 is not particularly a low resolution. In fact, last I checked, it was the predominant resolution. Since WebTV (now MSN TV) is something like 570 px wide, I'd think that coding for them takes care of almost everyone except the PDA crowd.
Don't condem the tool for the poor judgement of a few craftsmen.
keyplr, I agree wholeheartedly, it is not the fault of the "tool" just as Flash cannot be blamed for those who misuse it.
I doubt if very much traffic is truly lost because of these settings. And most of all, I certainly agree with Tedster's perspective on "net-percentages."
It is very informative doing a side-by-side, especially surfing well known news and information sites! A pop-up on every page with one... nary a whisper on the other.
It's unfortunate for sure, but the customer is always right and if they are turning off js we must respond.
Surfing paradise [cgi-fun.hypermart.net] for me is cruising the web in a under 300Kb browser. It loads up in 1/2 a second (really, I am not exaggerating), and no js! When I want a full on, the works kind of browser I use Galeon [galeon.sourceforge.net], which has built in anti-popup support. Yet, I find my self using the little browser most of the time these days.
the little Browser's homepage. [dillo.cipsga.org.br]
Now, I am surfing the console/game sites, looking to see if anyone can actually name the two (alledged) bonus guns for Halo (Bungie/Xbox), once again, IE is inundated with annoying pop-ups, while I cruise un-assailed with Opera.
I had five straight days of peaceful surfing until today's experiment... Want to guess how my Quick Prefence settings will remain from now on?
This discussion has caused me to make some changes.
I have another page which gets a lot of visitors directly from search engines. It is mostly text and didn't look too bad without JS... so I made a few adjustments to make it look better.
I also put a noscript note on it because from the description in the search engine results they will be expecting a link to my calculator.
Thanks for all your thoughts on this,
(edited by: Xoc at 7:16 pm (utc) on April 15, 2002)
But now it's too late!
Now anyone is able to create pop-up infested, nausating palette rotating background websites, and serenade you while you're trying to back out of their black hole of web trash.