Do websites need to serve browsers that don't have Javascript?

Question

Why do many professional web developers always insist on developing sites that are suitable for browsers with Javascript disabled?

In addition to technical managers and developers, most "normal" users do not even know what it is.

Answer 1

Who uses browsers older than Firefox 2 or IE6?

Invalid question. This is not the age of the browser, that is the problem. There are many new browsers that do not support javascript or do not support it well, and they can be as important as the latest safari or firefox.

Others mentioned smartphones or lynx, but the main thing in my book is Googlebot . This is a browser like any other, and it will not run much of your javascript. In addition, even if you have firefox, you can use a plugin such as NoScript. This is not the same as working with javascript disabled, but if you do something wrong you can really mess up for these users (i.e. Detect javascript state once at the start of a session or create an account and then no longer serve javascript pages at all, even if they would like to include it for you). Finally, if you are doing any work for the US government, you need to legally maintain certain accessibility standards, which include working with javascript disabled.

Answer 2

A few months ago, I tested a user population on a main website with millions of users that I worked on, and about 10% of unique users did not execute Javascript.

Consider the opposite: is it worth developing a site that works only for users who support Ajax? Do you really ignore the search engines, most mobile phones and a bunch of other users?

Back to the basics. First, build your site using bare-bone (X) HTML , according to REST rules (at least to the extent that POST requests are required for state changes). Simple semantic markup and forget about CSS and Javascript.

Step one is to get this right, and have your entire site (or as much as it makes sense) working this way for search engines and Lynx-like user agents.

Then add a visual layer: CSS / graphics / media for visual polishing, but do not significantly change your original (X) HTML markup; Allow the source text site to remain intact and function. Keep your markup clean!

Third, add a behavioral layer: Javascript (Ajax). Suggest things that make the process faster, smoother, more enjoyable for users / browsers with Ajax JS support ... but only for those users. Users without Javascript are still welcome; as well as search robots, visually impaired, many mobile phones, etc.

This is called a progressive improvement in web design circles. Do it this way, and your site works in some reasonable way for everyone.

Answer 3

I think it’s a well-known fact that ~ 10% of people turned off JavaScript, so it’s important to consider this. If you feel that you can safely ignore up to 10% of your audience, then dumping it is good.

Answer 4

Many of the text browsers, such as Lynx , which are used by people with braille terminals do not support JavaScript. It would be very rude to exclude these people from access to sites.

Read more about Website Accessibility Initiative .

Edit: Do Not Confuse Lynx Text Browser With Links Graphic Browser

Answer 5

Phones would be the primary ones I can think of from my head. Many mobile devices just don't work very well on a heavy javascript site. And considering that mobile devices are quickly becoming one of the best Internet access points, you can reconsider your position ..;)

Answer 6

This is more of a personal pet, but ...

I really don't like when web pages load additional pages using AJAX calls and provide no way to open a window on another tab. For example, in gmail, if you want to open your draft folder in a new window, you can right-click it and open it in a new window. There are no problems.

On the other hand, if you want to open the contact window, there is no method other than javascript for this. Therefore, you cannot right-click and select "Open" in a new window. The parameter does not exist!

Answer 7

Wow ... I think I'll be the first to say that, but ... "To hell with all the people who turned off JavaScript." If your site requires JavaScript to run, forget all those people who have disabled it. Jokes aside. If your site is really good enough to worry about losing a significant audience, it is probably good enough for people to enable their JavaScript.

In particular, go to Facebook, YouTube, Google Docs, Google Maps or Digg (hell, try doing some of the coolest things with SO) when JS shuts down and sees what you can do (not a whole lot).

A web browser is turning into a more cloud-based operating system than a portal to "websites". There are so many good reasons to run JavaScript and IMO, so there are few reasons not to. For me, disabling JS is akin to, for example, enabling UAC in Windows Vista. Yes ... it's there to help you make a mistake, but having it on sooooo is annoying (but the inverse logic ... :-).

So, anyway ... I can get a lot of trouble for this answer, but I feel that my reasons are sound and backed by many incredibly successful websites and web applications.

Just make sure the pages you want to index Google (and most other spiders) can be accessed without JavaScript.

Answer 8

Many people turn off Javascript due to security issues with plugins like NoScript .

Answer 9

The simple fact is that forcing JavaScript limits your audience. Someday someone will try to run your site without JavaScript. If they cannot do this, they will either turn on, or be upset, or leave. If they leave, they may very well never return.

Answer 10

Think outside the PC ... many mobile phones have browsers that do not support javascript. If you want your site to be visible to them, then he might think about how the non-javascript experience will be for these clients.

Answer 11

I will disable and reuse JavaScript several times a day depending on which site I’m going to visit. For example, news sites that resemble pop-ups and resize my window stay with us.

For the average user, little is needed to find out that these things are being performed by something mystical, called "JavaScript", and where to disable it in the browser.

Answer 12

Disabling all scripts by default, allowing them only for the sites they need, is at least recommended for any Internet user. I would even go so far as to say that it is reckless and careless to. There are several good plugins that allow you to selectively select scripts for selected sites.

This means that you must assume that visitors who first visited your site will not allow scripting in their browsers . Thus, your site should be able to provide a useful interface for collecting information about what it is without requiring script permission from the user .

In my opinion, JavaScript should only be used to provide additional features that go beyond simply displaying information.

My behavior is this: when I come across a site that simply displays “You need to enable JavaScript,” I instantly overestimate my interest, which brought me there. In some cases, I just close the tab.

Answer 13

Should I worry about a small percentage of people or strive for better methods? An elegant setback is something that web developers should shoot, regardless of the affected user base. John Resig talking to Yahoo "DOM is Messy" is a good example for hosting users of all browsers and configurations.

Answer 14

No definite answer Yes or No; it all depends on the website and how you use JavaScript.

Basically, if your site should be indexed by Google (or any other search engine), you want the content of the page to be just plain HTML so that anyone can read it easily; the same thing happens for creating regular link hyperlinks, and not for some "window.navigate" scripts so that they can follow accordingly. However, if your “website” is actually a more complex web application, then you can provide a much better experience for the user if you need JavaScript support; Also in this case, you may need to create a "mobile" version that will be used by mobile devices that do not support JavaScript, if this is a problem.

In most cases, this is fine if you need JavaScript support, but you still want to keep in mind the percentage of your users (and potential users) who can disable JavaScript or not have JavaScript support at all.

In addition, for example, StackOverflow.com uses JavaScript for the things you do when you log in, but does not require JavaScript support, just to view individual pages or hyperlinks to other pages.

Answer 15

Most users are not technical, and therefore they do not know / do not care about what javascript is, so if it is enabled by default, then this is what they use. So, if they see your site and it doesn’t work, they are not going to come back.

Answer 16

Common reasons:

• Good SEO practice that provides content analysis and proper connection by search engines.
• Some modern web phones do not handle the client side of the script correctly
• Compliance with 508, in addition to helping SEO, is to some extent required by most government projects.
• Some people just turn it off for any reason.

The general rule is to provide enhanced functionality, but competently degrade for those who cannot use the advanced feature set. This means that all navigation should be accessible without scripts, as well as all content for parsing search engines.

Think about it. Questions and answers are processed on the server side and sent to the browser. Until recently, comments were received on request through javascript to invoke a web service. This means that no matter how wonderful the comment is, it will not be analyzed by the search engine.

Answer 17

Think about mobile phones, not about whether people include JS. There are millions of people who browse the Internet on their phones (not exclusively, of course). This in itself is a reason to serve non-JS users.

Answer 18

Older than IE6? A few percent. Older than Firefox 2? About the same.

You should always expect people who have Javascript disabled to have those with it turned on.

Answer 19

For me, this is more like a decision that a product manager makes — it's up to PM to decide what the product looks like and what its target audience is. Since I need a developer, this requirement "should work in every browser" or "should work in most browsers." This should not come from a web developer, unless he has decided what your product should look like, which makes it PM. And this is not to argue about it.

The corporation that uses your SaaS and pays for it is one thing: in one project we explicitly declare that only IE 6-7 is supported, and everything is in order with the clients. A website that can be visited in a mobile browser is a different story. But in a mobile browser, it may not be enough just to work without JS; you may need to simplify the page layout and reduce the use of graphics. If you really need mobile users, you might consider creating two versions of the website, a full-featured desktop with JS support, and a simplified, smaller version for mobile users.

Of course, you should never rely on JS client-side security.

I usually prefer to provide most of the features without JS. For example, read-only access to SO is not really needed by JS. And it’s not so difficult for the user to enable JS if he really wants to post a question. Posting a question without JS is also not that difficult, just forget about automatically loading such questions.

Some things can be done both on the JS side and on the server side, and still often this is a product feature and not a technical decision on how to use it. For example, voting in SO can be done without JS, but this will require a page reload - more frustration for the user and more traffic.

Answer 20

I usually don’t post people who have javascript, but I’m sure that they know that since they are disabled, some functions will not be available to them.

I think its unacceptable to “break” your site if there is no javascript, but its acceptable, imo, to have a minimum level of what is required to use your site.

For my sites, this works ... your audience may have different needs.