7 ms·

try browsing half the web without JS enabled and it'll look just as bad

• andreimic 14y ago
  I am, actually, and it's not half as bad as you would think. I don't think that js-less browsing is so uncommon, either.
  • bradleyland 14y ago
    JS-less browsing is either uncommon, or it isn't. It's not something you "think", it's a verifiable statistic. The most recent data I could find (2010) puts it at around 2% in the US. I would venture that 2% should be considered uncommon. http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/ydn/posts/2010/10/how-many-users-have-javascript-disabled/ http://developer.yahoo.com/blogs/ydn/posts/2010/10/how-many-...
    • niggler 14y ago
      How are text browsers (lynx, elinks) counted in the statistic? Strictly speaking, javascript isn't disabled because its not supported in the first place
    • andreimic 14y ago
      Fair point, but still, that's only Yahoo websites, and (to nit-pick) I, for one, don't Yahoo! Another thing to take into consideration regarding this sort of stats is the user base. I _think_ a lot of the NoJS (or the likes) users are of the tech-savvy bunch and more likely to use sites like this one. So, I _think_ a more relevant percentage of people that have JS disabled is higher in this case.