I Hate the Modern Web

[m1maverick]

Not sure if this is the appropriate forum but given its focus is on older systems I thought I would express my frustration here.

Trying to review a new car and on the J.D. Power website reading information about it. Every 30 seconds the page refreshes! Which means I'm reading along and boom! A page refresh causes me to lose my place and I have to relocate the information I was just reading. By the time I do that I read another partial or, if lucky, another sentence and boom! A page refresh. This is ridiculous! It's like you're reading a book, someone comes and rips it out of your hands, and then hands it back to you. Only to repeat the process again.

Also what's with the cookie alerts? Yeah, I know...it's a rhetorical question. Does anyone actually do anything other than click dismiss, OK, or what have you so they can move on to the content. This is with almost every website these days.

Have website developers forgotten what the purpose of a website is for? To convey information. I remember the good old days when one could go to a website and actually read the content without annoying interruptions. The J.D. Power website is one of the worst I've ever experienced. The constant, frequent refreshes make if almost impossible to keep a train of thought.

/rant

 

[BotchQue]

I've never come across a website that refreshes that often (don't read CNN anymore), try hitting "Reader View" next time, see if that stops it.

 

[Nermal]

Also what's with the cookie alerts? Yeah, I know...it's a rhetorical question. Does anyone actually do anything other than click dismiss, OK, or what have you so they can move on to the content. This is with almost every website these days.

Have website developers forgotten what the purpose of a website is for? To convey information. I remember the good old days when one could go to a website and actually read the content without annoying interruptions.

Indeed. The DHL website is pretty bad; if you have a tracking link (something like tracking.dhl.com/123456789 with the number already in the URL) then you'd expect that clicking that link would show you where your package is. But nope, they decide that you want to "set your cookie preferences" or whatever they call it before you can see the tracking. Even worse, instead of using standard UI elements they've customised them so that you're toggling between grey and red. Does red mean on or off? I don't know, and it's not documented anywhere on the page.

 

[Raging Dufus]

Have website developers forgotten what the purpose of a website is for? To convey information.

Well, that's what it used to be for, but those days are long gone. Now it's about money, how much they can get directly from you or how much information they can get from you to sell to others.

Nonetheless, I certainly feel your pain. This discussion going on in the Early Intel forum may be of interest to you. I find the add-ons mentioned there, particularly for use in script-blocking, are an enormous help.

 

[m1maverick]

I've never come across a website that refreshes that often (don't read CNN anymore), try hitting "Reader View" next time, see if that stops it.

Here's the exact website I am having problems with while viewing it on my iPad Air 4:

2023 Subaru Outback Review Update

At its core, the 2023 Subaru Outback is a safe, practical, comfortable, and useful vehicle ready for nearly any weather on any road. But the devil is always in the details, and Subaru has a few to refine.

www.jdpower.com

 

[TheShortTimer]

Here's the exact website I am having problems with while viewing it on my iPad Air 4:

2023 Subaru Outback Review Update

At its core, the 2023 Subaru Outback is a safe, practical, comfortable, and useful vehicle ready for nearly any weather on any road. But the devil is always in the details, and Subaru has a few to refine.

www.jdpower.com

I've accessed the page using Firefox and left it at a particular position for around ten minutes and it hasn't refreshed or reset once. Perhaps your browser is triggering refreshes? By the way, I share your frustrations with the modern Web - just checking the online bus timetables would cause one particular browser to freeze and lock up my computer: with the only solution being to initiate a hard reboot.

 

[Nermal]

I share your frustrations with the modern Web - just checking the online bus timetables would cause one particular browser to freeze and lock up my computer: with the only solution being to initiate a hard reboot.

I'm getting a bit off topic here, but that sort of thing really annoys me. When Apple first announced Mac OS X twenty-something years ago, one of the headline features was something like "since it's Unix, a rogue app can't take the whole system down". Over the years Apple's managed to "break" the OS so much that we're back in the land of apps killing the whole OS again.

 

[DearthnVader]

Not sure if this is the appropriate forum but given its focus is on older systems I thought I would express my frustration here.

Trying to review a new car and on the J.D. Power website reading information about it. Every 30 seconds the page refreshes! Which means I'm reading along and boom! A page refresh causes me to lose my place and I have to relocate the information I was just reading. By the time I do that I read another partial or, if lucky, another sentence and boom! A page refresh. This is ridiculous! It's like you're reading a book, someone comes and rips it out of your hands, and then hands it back to you. Only to repeat the process again.

Also what's with the cookie alerts? Yeah, I know...it's a rhetorical question. Does anyone actually do anything other than click dismiss, OK, or what have you so they can move on to the content. This is with almost every website these days.

Have website developers forgotten what the purpose of a website is for? To convey information. I remember the good old days when one could go to a website and actually read the content without annoying interruptions. The J.D. Power website is one of the worst I've ever experienced. The constant, frequent refreshes make if almost impossible to keep a train of thought.

/rant

I feel you and agree!

It's crazy, the web is not better than it was in 2005, in many ways it's just a lot worse.

Too much CPU, Memory, and GPU power that web developers just got sloppy.

Sure 8k video is nice but not really necessary most of the time.

Pop over auto play videos, and stupid cookies EULAs.

But it does help computer manufactures sell new machines because the old ones can't even browse the web anymore, and I think that has a lot to do with it.

 

[TheShortTimer]

I'm getting a bit off topic here, but that sort of thing really annoys me. When Apple first announced Mac OS X twenty-something years ago, one of the headline features was something like "since it's Unix, a rogue app can't take the whole system down". Over the years Apple's managed to "break" the OS so much that we're back in the land of apps killing the whole OS again.

The browser is Vivaldi and the website is Transport for London and the freeze is triggered by viewing any timetable for live arrivals. Here's one for a bus stop on Sundays. I had to abandon the browser because of this issue - as I rely on the timetable information on a daily basis.

I can only speculate that there's something within the site's code that wasn't tested for full cross-browser compatibility and tough luck if that causes you problems. Yeah, it is annoying that the OS doesn't possess a robust protection against these incidences - especially given the mockery of Apple against Windows' fragility in their "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" advertising campaign.

 

[Danfango]

I think everyone has got the wrong end of the stick here. The web browser is a generic runtime for any old proprietary garbage that you choose to visit. The browser, regardless of the vendor, does the best it can under the constraints it is given. If you find a web site falls to bits, does weird stuff or breaks then that's up to whoever built it and their QA team to sort out.

Ultimately though, the web is a burning trash heap from a technology perspective. It was originally designed to send simple documents down only. Eventually people extended it over and over and over again and now we have an overcomplicated document model with the worst scripting language in the universe smeared on it to cover all the edge cases and then a layer of abstracted styles which evolved into its own Turing-complete Cthulhu nightmare.

This toolbox of bent screwdrivers, blunt knives and rusty spanners lead to three rather undesirable outcomes.

Firstly, the people kicking the sites worked out that the content is worth nothing, only the clicks are worth something so they structure everything with an island of content in a lake of garbage. The garbage just hurts everyone and makes stuff slow because it's designed to be attractive and shiny to the vast majority of people who haven't yet become automatically blind to it or installed an ad blocker.

Secondly, a whole new class of "genius" (quotes for facetious effect) decided the best approach was going to be to make another layer of abstraction over the top (now the idiots have two problems) to make life easier of this and introduced JavaScript frameworks. These concoctions of bile and vomit serve nothing other than us having to shovel more coal into power stations everywhere to power our machines and turn blisteringly fast web sites with little to no content into slithering snails. Recent web developers don't actually know how to make a web page; just these awful Angular and React turds.

Thirdly, the emergence of the marketoid, a true specialisation of human scum along the lines of realtors, politicians and grave robbers. These guys want to know every time you emit gas from either end and where your eyes are pointing if they could so they can prescribe to the morons I've already mentioned exactly how to sell you something you don't want, don't need and probably shouldn't exist. The tooling to do this requires hefty Javascript built on the flaming pile of horse dung above and constant network access, surveilling you wherever it can.

Ergo don't blame the browser vendors when a web site misbehaves. Stop right there and refuse to do business with the web site. They either don't care enough to do a good job or are maliciously doing something bad for the planet and you. Don't grace them with any attention and they will wither and die.

Now I'm older than time. I still think that the web was a grave mistake (thanks Tim) and that we should still be using a slightly more evolved version of Gopher as a global access client. Documents should be documents still, preferably PDF. And applications should be exactly as they are on iOS, mostly a fresh breath of air away from the steaming mess above.

Anywhere here's where it all started. I looked at this exhibit with both admiration of what could have been but with ire at what it is.

 

[TheShortTimer]

I think everyone has got the wrong end of the stick here. The web browser is a generic runtime for any old proprietary garbage that you choose to visit. The browser, regardless of the vendor, does the best it can under the constraints it is given. If you find a web site falls to bits, does weird stuff or breaks then that's up to whoever built it and their QA team to sort out.

You missed this part of my post...

I can only speculate that there's something within the site's code that wasn't tested for full cross-browser compatibility and tough luck if that causes you problems.

Ergo don't blame the browser vendors when a web site misbehaves. Stop right there and refuse to do business with the web site. They either don't care enough to do a good job or are maliciously doing something bad for the planet and you. Don't grace them with any attention and they will wither and die.

Some browsers are superior to others in their design and efficiency and unfortunately, whilst a boycott of rogue sites could have an impact, it's simply not a realistic choice for many people and scenarios.

 

[Danfango]

You missed this part of my post...





Some browsers are superior to others in their design and efficiency and unfortunately, whilst a boycott of rogue sites could have an impact, it's simply not a realistic choice for many people and scenarios.

To be fair I didn't miss it. I was replying to the global state of the thread. I agree with you.

Boycotting websites is perfectly feasible unless there's a monopoly. As for TFL, worth using the TFL app instead or the popular "Bus Times" app if you use the bus. The web site is horrible and always has been so anything that leverages the background feeds is somewhat better.

TFL is actually the canonical example of my point. The app is a better tool for that kind of utility.

 

[headlessmike]

I've accessed the page using Firefox and left it at a particular position for around ten minutes and it hasn't refreshed or reset once.

It’s working just fine on my iPad mini in Safari as well (iPadOS 16.3).

 

[riverfreak]

The hilarious thing about the cookie disclosure notices is that they’ve been used as another node for browser fingerprinting.

 

[Amethyst1]

Pop over auto play videos, and stupid cookies EULAs.

NoScript puts an end to that. I don’t have it on my iPhone, which helps reminding me of how invaluable it is. I just plain hate browsing on my iPhone.

 

[Amethyst1]

[…] the sheer amount of […] pornography boggles the mind.

“Adult Entertainment” is a thing because there’s demand for it.

 

[eyoungren]

I'm getting a bit off topic here, but that sort of thing really annoys me. When Apple first announced Mac OS X twenty-something years ago, one of the headline features was something like "since it's Unix, a rogue app can't take the whole system down". Over the years Apple's managed to "break" the OS so much that we're back in the land of apps killing the whole OS again.

Yeah, it is annoying that the OS doesn't possess a robust protection against these incidences - especially given the mockery of Apple against Windows' fragility in their "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" advertising campaign.

I think this ship has long sailed.

Apple used to be the disruptor. To some extent they still are, because that culture was built into their corporate image. But at a certain point they became simply a business, like all businesses eventually do. Yes, they still do some things better and they still have some vision. But, where people run into problems is that they think Apple's vision is for the customer. It's not. It's for Apple and it's designed to sell them more product.

You know those kinds of people who always used to say a thing and then time passed and they don't say it anymore? It's because things changed. And they don't want you or others to remind them about what they used to say. That's Apple now. They aren't mentioning the things they mentioned in the past because they can't stand behind them anymore.

Look at Starbucks. Back in the 90s people went there not only for the coffee, but the experience. Some people, such as myself, drove 45 minutes just to get to the few stores that existed then. It was good coffee.

What now? They are on every corner and the only thing Starbucks has is speed and consistency. Do you go to their stores for a good to great cup of coffee and good atmosphere? No. They have become the McDonalds of coffee.

Again, that's Apple. What Apple still has and they are trading on, is that past reputation. Eventually they will run out and people are going to realize that Apple is just another device/computer company.

 

[Wowfunhappy]

I'm getting a bit off topic here, but that sort of thing really annoys me. When Apple first announced Mac OS X twenty-something years ago, one of the headline features was something like "since it's Unix, a rogue app can't take the whole system down". Over the years Apple's managed to "break" the OS so much that we're back in the land of apps killing the whole OS again.

I'm as ready as anybody to lament what modern macOS has become, but I don't think this is fair. Apple was very specifically referring to OS X's preemptive multitasking. OS X apps run in separate memory spaces, and CPU time is allocated to each app by the kernel. This is in contrast to Mac OS 9, which used cooperative multitasking and ran apps in a shared address space.

Modern macOS still uses preemptive multi-tasking. However, because the OS isn't free of bugs—and never was—rebooting remains a quick and easy way to reset the state of everything.

Ironically, many of Apple's more recent changes are intended to further prevent apps from interfering with each other and the rest of the system, but have also made the OS less UNIX-like, not more. While these initiatives do prevent poorly-behaving third party software from decreasing stability, I mostly dislike the changes because they (A) make apps less useful and/or more annoying, and (B) give me as the user less insight into what is going on when something inevitably does break and I need to fix it.

 

[m1maverick]

It’s working just fine on my iPad mini in Safari as well (iPadOS 16.3).

My iPad is running iPadOS 15.7.1 (it looks as if I need to update). I just looked at the page and it is no longer behaving as I described in my original post. Perhaps it was some piece of content, such as an ad, which was causing the refresh. Whatever the reason it's no longer doing it now.

 

[riverfreak]

1. I’ve never experienced what you’re describing with JD Powers. It could be one of the many annoyances built in to the public articles. Are you a paid subscriber?

2. Much, if not most of the web today is tracking with cookies and other nonsense. When I get an “accept cookies” box, I usually hit “No”. If the site fails to load and I have work there, I’ll accept the cookies and then delete them when I’m done.

3. The web is no longer a place designed for information; it’s an extension of the computer as many companies are moving to online-based apps. This is, IMO, a good thing as:

i. The web, by design, is cross platform.
ii. This moves the processing from your computer to their server.
iii. If you have more than one computer, there is no need to manually sync your workflow.

Of course the big downside of the modern web is that many people don’t update their site as often as they should and things don’t work. That plus the sheer amount of utter trash and pornography boggles the mind. If 2/3 of the web disappeared, we’d be better off as a society.

Most modern web design is almost entirely client side. Hardly any processing happens on the server anymore, unless you are referring to tracking.

 

[B S Magnet]

True. Lots of things are legal and have high demand: cigarettes, cannabis (where permitted), high calorie sweets, social media, the __________ political party (fill in the blank); that doesn’t make them beneficial.

I’m not advocating internet censorship, which would be very harmful to society; rather, just adding to the OP that, indeed, much of the web is not necessarily beneficial or promotes a bettering of society. Much of the web is, in fact, not necessary at all.

/me, fitting onto my head the royal crown as Queen of the Internet for as long as this reply takes…

< 👑 _queen_mode >

“In my solemn duty as Queen of the Internet, I hereby ban 100 per cent of all e-commerce activity from the internet, effective from this proclamation. The commercial realm are now tasked, immediately, to invent their own interlinked, networked system which does not and cannot rely on inter-networking-based technologies derived by or descended from the original DARPAnet/ARPAnet, research arising from Tim Berners-Lee, CERN, or that of the IEEE.

“If the e-commerce realm truly and sincerely are what they claim to be and are as essential to everyday life as they contend in their marketing messages, then they shall no doubt find a novel, electronic, networked commerce system whose entire activity will not and cannot encroach upon the internet or rely upon its standards. Abrogators of this proclamation will be subjected to no less than twenty years inside a windowless room and a Pentium desktop from 2004, browsing closed, backed-up archives of commercial sites my Duchess of Archives has organized to have saved to an air-gapped intranet. A second abrogation shall be lifetime consignment to an Amazon warehouse and a bottomless bowl of scrapple porridge. A privy shall be made available. There shall be no recourse for appeal.

“So it is Proclaimed, on this day of our Common Era, the thirtieth of January, Two-Thousand Twenty-Three.”

< /👑 _queen_mode >

 

[B S Magnet]

I think this ship has long sailed.

Apple used to be the disruptor. To some extent they still are, because that culture was built into their corporate image. But at a certain point they became simply a business, like all businesses eventually do. Yes, they still do some things better and they still have some vision. But, where people run into problems is that they think Apple's vision is for the customer. It's not. It's for Apple and it's designed to sell them more product.

You know those kinds of people who always used to say a thing and then time passed and they don't say it anymore? It's because things changed. And they don't want you or others to remind them about what they used to say. That's Apple now. They aren't mentioning the things they mentioned in the past because they can't stand behind them anymore.

Look at Starbucks. Back in the 90s people went there not only for the coffee, but the experience. Some people, such as myself, drove 45 minutes just to get to the few stores that existed then. It was good coffee.

What now? They are on every corner and the only thing Starbucks has is speed and consistency. Do you go to their stores for a good to great cup of coffee and good atmosphere? No. They have become the McDonalds of coffee.

Again, that's Apple. What Apple still has and they are trading on, is that past reputation. Eventually they will run out and people are going to realize that Apple is just another device/computer company.

Expansion and profit were mistakes: neither can continue in perpetuity. There is always a limit. That sidewalk down which the can gets kicked always ends.

 

[m1maverick]

I'm not calling for any censorship on the web. I'm merely stating that web developers should keep in mind the goal of what they're publishing and not put in "features" which detract from that goal.

I wish people could have seen what it was doing. It was really annoying.

Another website I view has videos I watch. Sometimes I want to pause the video so I hit the pause button and it pauses. Only to move on to the next video a few seconds later. What's the point of a pause button if the video pauses and then moves on without user intervention?

Other times I'm writing a response and the page refreshes. Boom, now I have to go find the post I was responding to so I can finish my post. If it's a busy forum sometimes I can't and it's lost.

All of this in annoying and is, IMO, self defeating.

 

[B S Magnet]

I'm not calling for any censorship on the web. I'm merely stating that web developers should keep in mind the goal of what they're publishing and not put in "features" which detract from that goal.

I wish people could have seen what it was doing. It was really annoying.

Another website I view has videos I watch. Sometimes I want to pause the video so I hit the pause button and it pauses. Only to move on to the next video a few seconds later. What's the point of a pause button if the video pauses and then moves on without user intervention?

Other times I'm writing a response and the page refreshes. Boom, now I have to go find the post I was responding to so I can finish my post. If it's a busy forum sometimes I can't and it's lost.

All of this in annoying and is, IMO, self defeating.

< 👑 _queen_mode >

As Queen of the Internet, I do not advocate for censorship!

As for commerce and commercial activity on the Internet and the World Wide Web, I like to remind my subjects of the timeless adage: “Don’t relieve yourself where you eat.”

< / 👑 _queen_mode >

 

[BotchQue]

Mmmm, scrapple porridge! 😋