@Lensflare These synchronization services can usually store only up to one session per account, because they are just intended for what their name implies. Synchroniztation across devices. Not for backups.

@Lensflare So does Safari let the user create a text file containing opened tabs, history, and bookmarks?

@electrineer This is not my screenshot, I got it from web search.

@Lensflare Yes, for exporting browser tabs and history to a file.

Without exporting ability, the data dies along with the phone.

@Lensflare If it is like that on iOS, I acknowledge it as a benefit. But iOS also is severly locked down.

Admittedly, after Google added so many restrictions since 2014, Android isn't much different anymore. 2024 Android is closer to iOS than to 2013 Android.

And here comes superior TouchWiz!

This screenshot is from 2013, the golden age of Samsung, before they became cucked in 2015.

@SidTheITGuy This Jody guy is a complete genius!

@cafecortado I left Wirth's Law out of the post to see if someone would bring this up. Thank you for bringing it up!

@calmyourtities (part 2)

"i can’t emphasize how much i miss the <marquee> tag."

Ah yes, marquee and blink.

But those are not critical to functionality. A site that used the tags will still render in modern browsers, because HTML and CSS are fail safe.

Also, blinking text would be an annoyance to me anyway. The functionality of marquee and blink can be replicated using CSS animations. But better shouldn't be.

However, one unsupported JavaScript function and a blank page or some other kind of error appears. But no useful content.

@calmyourtities

"that’s a slight improvement in readability that could happen thousands of times in a big project"

Valid point. Then the worse loading performance on the user side simply is collateral damage.

However, HTML-based sites depend less on JavaScript to begin with. More stuff is done on the server side.

"depending on the scenario, the difference between loading without react or with react could be 250ms and 500ms respectively"

When Twitter switched to React in 2019, it took two to three times as long to load. Similarly, YouTube switching in 2017 from HTML to Polymer, a multi-megabyte JavaScript bomb, tripled the time until anything useful appeared on screen.

"if your project requires old browser support, then you plain and simply can’t use react. don’t argue that the framework can’t do what it doesn’t claim to do."

Agreed.

@calmyourtities Indeed, however, for a slight improvement of readability in code, one gets much worse loading performance and worse compatibility with older browsers.

React JS also is at the mercy of Facebook… excuse me, I meant Meta. This means some update might break functionality.

Also, the feed can be referenced from a variable.

var feed = document.getElementById('feed');

@calmyourtities I don't think so. One can have a function to handle the AJAXing (requesting information from the server), and a function to insert or append the new data on the visible page.

For loading additional content when scrolling down, the server can either send HTML content that can be inserted at the bottom (archive.org did this before they switched to web app), or send JSON content which is then converted to HTML by a script on the client side.

@Demolishun Haven't tried it yet. Perhaps they use Firefox "Developer Edition".

@joehughes4041 Hey, spammer.

Kindly go fsck yourself.

Thank you very much.

@Demolishun Since version 43, the flag to turn it off apparently does nothing.

@calmyourtities Components such as AJAX functions can just as well be re-used across an HTML-based page.

@ars1 Admittedly, I am currently too comfortable with Firefox to make a switch.

But the next time they pull off their add-on remote kill switch trick, like they did in May 2019, I will not hesitate to jump over to LibreWolf or Brave.

@calmyourtities JavaScript can just as well update content on an HTML-based page.

YouTube did it with real-time live streaming view counts since at least 2016.

The problem is with pages that are loaded entirely through JavaScript.

@Demolishun Is there a Sager with 6 USB ports like some MSi gaming laptops from the early 2010s?

@ars1 Sadly, Mozilla's hands are not clean either.

https://digdeeper.club/articles/...

@tosensei

> soo we should make a law that enforces web developers to make everything compatible with internet explorer 1.0?

No, but Chrome 74. That's the last version before they enforced the pull-to-refresh cancer upon us.

> it's called "progress". you can love it, you can hate it, but you can not stop it.

Mandatory add-on signing and pull-to-refresh and shadow DOMs are anti-progress. They rob control away from the user.

For example, shadow DOMs disable custom CSS and content inside shadow DOMs can not be downloaded as HTML, only screenshotted. It's digital right management lite. Disney's dirty little wet dream for the Internet.

@black-kite Indeed, and that content can be loaded by JavaScript. However, there is no reason to have the initial page load through JavaScript.

Come on, just one letter too little is forgivable, isn't it?

He thought he could link to a local file to let someone else see it?!

@jestdotty You are referring to homescreen shortcuts. Nothing is preventing an HTML-based site from having a homescreen shortcut.

@black-kite Already addressed in the paragraph that starts with "I get it, some things such as…".

@shovethisrant As I said, some stuff is not possible without JavaScript. If the JavaScript fails to load, a lightweight non-interactive version needs to be shown.

@tosensei Fair point. But this one doesn't require much paranoia. Now, Google is tackling content blockers. Honestly, I am surprised they didn't do that a decade ago.

Perhaps because they knew the minute they do this many users would have fled to Firefox.

@Demolishun Wasn't add-on signing made mandatory in version 43?

@usr--2ndry

>"so SD cards are like GitHub but available offline?"

Well, both can store information, but GitHub is for text and code, not for your photos and videos.

> "But when they steal my stuff and I have to get a new laptop, I hope that I can still access GitHub eventually."

Eventually? Why should you not be able to log in immediately?