Does anyone have javascript disabled

The way you combine these three amigos can have a significant effect on your web page layout. Not just the way you combine them, but also the way you actually write them. This means if you are using a feature in CSS or HTML that's not supported in all browsers; What will happen to users that use a browser that does not support the feature you've implemented? Another scenario is when JavaScript is a core part of your application and you change or modify some page elements with it; What will happen to users who have JavaScript turned off in their browser?

I decided to find out. Rather than choosing some random sites to test, I handpicked some top websites on the Web today and opened their Home page with JavaScript turned off in my browser using the NoScript browser extension.

In my research, for a website to be categorized as good that means the home page or at least the website is still usable with JavaScript disabled. I am pretty sure you are not surprised with this selection. When you have JavaScript turned off in your browser Google redirects you to a mobile version of the page optimized for browsers with no capability to render JavaScript.

You will also get the same view when you visit Google's homepage with Opera Mini. Google's home page with JavaScript disabled. The online encyclopedia , seriously I was not expecting it to fail and it did not disappoint me.

The home page is identical with or without JavaScript enabled in the users' browser. Have you ever heard of that name Netlify? Something tells me you have. There is only one significant difference in their homepage when JavaScript is disabled in the user's browser. Compare the images below and see if you can spot the difference. Netlify's homepage with JavaScript enabled. Netlify's homepage with JavaScript disabled. The homepage looks solid with JavaScript disabled and almost no noticeable changes compared to when JavaScript is enabled.

Facebook home page with JavaScript disabled. Microsoft search engine is quite awesome with JavaScript disabled. Compared to Google it does not redirect to a no JavaScript version of the site.

The least I can say about this is: resilient. Bing Home page with JavaScript disabled. Bing search result with JavaScript disabled. Smashing magazine without JavaScript. Smashing magazine with JavaScript. When you land on Yahoo! Homepage with skeleton.

A web with no ads, no endlessly scrolling pages, and no annoying modal windows begging you to share the site on social media or sign up for a newsletter. The best part is that you don't need a special browser extension or an invite-only app to access this alternate reality.

All you need to do is change one little setting in your browser of choice. Just un-tick the checkbox that enables "JavaScript" and away you go, to a simpler, cleaner web. JavaScript is a programming language that can run inside nearly all modern web browsers. In the early days of the web, the language was used to create simple scripts that did handy things, like check to make sure you filled out all the "required" fields on a form before you hit submit.

But as Internet connections got faster and browsers got more sophisticated, JavaScript evolved into a tool for building all sorts of complex web-based apps. Some, like Google Docs, even rival desktop apps in size and functionality. The trouble is, when you visit a website, the JavaScript programs embedded on that site run automatically.

It can be difficult to know exactly what some of those scripts actually do, leaving you vulnerable to pranks and malicious behavior. JavaScript is also a key ingredient of most obnoxious online ad behavior, both visible and below the surface. Many people have turned to ad blockers in recent years, whether out of concern for privacy and security, or simply because they're fed up with advertising.

Just last week, no less an authority than NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden said in an interview with The Intercept that you have not only a right but a duty to block ads online, at least so long as publishers and internet service providers are leaving readers open to malvertising and the planting of zombie cookies on their phones. A small but growing number of people, however, are taking ad-blocking a step further and just disabling JavaScript altogether.

Earlier this month I resolved to join their ranks, at least for one week, and see what life was like without JavaScript. I voted it down because of the assumption inherent and self-righteous tone: you're choosing to not use a particular technology, and then you're annoyed when sites don't work?

You can only expect a site to reasonably degrade so far. The real problem for us NoScript users are site which actively destroy the site if you don't enable javascript. Show 4 more comments. Totally depends on who you're aiming at. Don Neufeld Don Neufeld I just want to add this so people not aware know this, W3Schools' statistics are for visitors of THEIR site, which is generally those looking for web tutorials web developers so that page is not representative of the general population.

Firefox beats IE in their stats Duplicate There's at least one category where the answer is definitely "no". Community Bot 1 1 1 silver badge. Joel Coehoorn Joel Coehoorn k gold badges silver badges bronze badges. Marko Dumic Marko Dumic 9, 4 4 gold badges 28 28 silver badges 33 33 bronze badges. James James k 28 28 gold badges silver badges bronze badges. Accessible, yes Not really.

This advice about degradation being ideal is somewhat dependent upon your target audience as well as what your website or web application is supposed to do.

You have to weigh whether the amount of effort spend in that vein is going to be worth it. This question has been asked before. Mark Ransom Mark Ransom k 40 40 gold badges silver badges bronze badges.

Down-voted: AJAX is not a silver bullet. Do not use AJAX willy nilly to prove a point. For small updates where it is suitable, sure, use AJAX. For major page updates, unless you already have AJAX as an absolute requirement , use http, respecting other's valid security concerns. Either you mis-read or I mis-wrote, but I'd never advocate superfluous use of any technology - all I'm trying to say is, browsers support what people use, and if you never use the new tech because it isn't as readily supported, then it'll never be readily supported.

This is a catch we can break. You don't need to ignore old behavior to push technology forward. You can always make a simple version of your website for users without JavaScript and a complete version with JavaScript.

And I don't mean separate sites, you can make one that degrades completely. Ali Ali 2 2 gold badges 11 11 silver badges 17 17 bronze badges. Gabriel Isenberg Gabriel Isenberg Dave Smylie Dave Smylie 2, 3 3 gold badges 24 24 silver badges 31 31 bronze badges.

Pablo Fernandez Pablo Fernandez Drew Stephens Drew Stephens It's reasonable to assume your visitors have javascript enabled! CyberFonic CyberFonic 3, 1 1 gold badge 20 20 silver badges 21 21 bronze badges. Daniel Honig Daniel Honig 4, 5 5 gold badges 23 23 silver badges 24 24 bronze badges. I think you're very very far from realitiy — Pablo Fernandez. No, I'm not. But admitedly no, I don't have the evidence to hand, can't remember where I found it but I'm sure its accurate.

On the whole, I was actually pleasantly surprised just how well the site worked without JavaScript. It could just as easily have been a blank white page. At first, the site looked indistinguishable from the JavaScript-enabled version.

Unfortunately, the price history chart did not render. It did provide an alt text fallback, but the alt text did not give me any idea of whether or not the price trend has been going up or down. General suggestion: provide meaningful alt text at all times. Specific suggestion for this use case: show the image. I take my hat off to you, Camel Camel Camel!

At this point in my day, I received a phone call out of the blue: A friend phoned me and asked about meeting up this week. So I went to Google Calendar to check my availability. Google had other ideas! Interested in seeing how Google manages other products, I had a quick look at Google Spreadsheets:. In this case, the site fails a lot more gracefully. I have no suggestions to improve Google Spreadsheets!

It does a good job at informing the user if core functionality is missing from the noscript experience. Now, back to my potential Amazon purchase. I wanted to look at some third-party reviews before making a purchase. Google search works really well without JavaScript. It just looks a little dated, like those old desktop-only sites at fixed resolutions.

The images view looks even more different, and I actually prefer it in a few ways — this version loads super quickly and lists the dimensions and image size in kilobytes underneath each thumbnail:. One of the search results took me to a review on YouTube. I clicked, not expecting much. I was right not to get excited:. YouTube requires advanced streaming capabilities, not to mention that it would open itself up to copy theft if it provided a standalone MP4 download as a fallback. In any case, no site should look broken.

I stared at this screen for a few seconds before realizing that nothing else was going to happen. Suggestion : If your site is not able to provide a fallback solution for noscript users, at a minimum you should provide a noscript warning message.

This was a page that looked like it loaded fine, but only when you read the content would you realize you must actually be missing some key information.