OT: What going on these days??

[osgood_]

As its been quiet around here for a few days I thought I would try and generate a discussion as to what the hell is going on these days in terms of website building.

Once upon a time I could go to any website, pull up the source code and I had a pretty good idea of what was going on, now I'm encountering more and more websites where I  have zero idea of what is happening.

Take this webpage for example:

https://www.ncgtp.com/resources/Pages/news.aspx

A fairly inocculous looking layout and presentation, one which could be produced in about and hour or two of hand-coding. It doesn't do anything, no movement, swipers, slideshows etc a simple form, yet look at the source code.

It has literally dozens of links to resources and dependencies - I can't even begin to count them. There is scripting injected all-over the place.

I'm totally confused as to why, what and how this has been produced and for what purpose it serves.

So the question on my lips and has been for a couple of years now - what kind of era are we in now as regards to consideration of the output of what is running and produced behind the facade. It this cutting-edge techniques, a developer with very little knowledge or a hell of a lot of knowledge or just some kind of build tools that are generating all this what seems to me like excessive coding to produce a simple page. Are we into the era of using a sledgehammer approach to crap a nut because no one has the ability and skills any longer these days beyond a click and shoot, over zealous framework approach?

Can anyone justifiably provide a good reason for such a bloated and convoluted appproach to deliver a simple page?

[pziecina]

I don't participate often in forums anymore, not because I am not interested but because I see sites like the one you linked to becomming the norm for small buisneses, (btw -the w3c classifies medium sized buisnesses and organisations as having a revenue of $50 million to $500 million).

It has become obvious since the demise of Muse, that very few small buisneses and the builders of sites for them do not want to know or even care about the code behind the site. There was even a post in the Muse forum about alternative products that said how good the alternative was, because it now uses absolute positioning.

Just to throw in a little item for a possible controversial discussion, has anyone thought that forums such as this are partly responsible for the 'sorry state of web development' when it comes to smaller sites? After all most answers use or point to pre-built solutions, and just like validation and accessibility now, no mention of the code uses by the solutions is of importance anymore.

[osgood_]

pziecina  wrote

I don't participate often in forums anymore, not because I am not interested but because I see sites like the one you linked to becomming the norm for small buisneses,

I don't blame you - I think I'm slowly losing the will to live over the last year or so, given the state of where we are currently at. It seems to be these days as long as the facade looks ok it doesnt really matter what the underlying code is like any longer. Its complete madeness and lack of consideration by what I guess is a new generation of developers who just don't care any longer or are so much under pressure they haven't got time to consider or care, but only to make money for their pay-masters who generally have no-skill or morales, other than counting pennies.

pziecina  wrote

It has become obvious since the demise of Muse, that very few small buisneses and the builders of sites for them do not want to know or even care about the code behind the site. There was even a post in the Muse forum about alternative products that said how good the alternative was, because it now uses absolute positioning.

Simply mind-boggling.

How many developers actually now care about their clients needs any longer. It seems to me they are buidling websites with anything and anyhow which will get the work done quickly without the need for much skill, other than to follow a set of instructions/pre-defined templates and leaving their client with a white-elephant which cannot be easily transported to any other developers.

I thought I would look further into the Vue CLI way of producing a website recently instead of CDN delivery only to find you have a set of production files and at the end of the build process these files are somehow complied into another set of files which you then deploy to the server - what happens if another developer is required to work on that website and doesnt have access to the production files - I dont know if its even possible in any way to uncompile the complied files back into a Vue production workflow, if not what can be done would be very limited.

It seems developers are now 'locking' down websites only to be able to be managed at local level by those with access to the original production files. That can't be good for a client who has invested 5-10k plus.

pziecina  wrote

Just to throw in a little item for a possible controversial discussion, has anyone thought that forums such as this are partly responsible for the 'sorry state of web development' when it comes to smaller sites? After all most answers use or point to pre-built solutions, and just like validation and accessibility now, no mention of the code uses by the solutions is of importance anymore.

Very sad state of affairs.

[cdeatherage]

Looks to me like the example website was developed using Joomla or Drupal. Calling it "bloated" seems an understatement.

Chris

[osgood_]

cdeatherage  wrote

Calling it "bloated" seems an understatement.

I guess 99% of those <script> tags could be removed without any ill effect on the website itself but what a mess if that website ever got handed off to you to decipher what was needed and what was not. I find this kind of practice unacceptable, particularly for the sake of the client, who obviously is none the wiser, beyond looking at the 'wrapper'.

Sadly I see this 'corrupt' way of working starting to infiltrate more and more as 'automated' workflows/templating systems are touted as the way forward, mainly being used by the underskilled.

[WolfShade]

pziecina  wrote

..has anyone thought that forums such as this are partly responsible for  the 'sorry state of web development' when it comes to smaller sites?

Oh, absolutely.  But it's not as simple as "hey, look at this.. we need this."  I think it's a combination of inexperienced developers and clueless clients.

We've seen evidence of it in these forums, by questions asked by developers who clearly don't know how to hand edit code properly, supplying sample code that has dozens of includes - jQuery, jQuery-UI, BootStrap, W3, and various other libraries (either directly or via CDN) that potentially conflict with each other, or are just redundant libraries because the developer clearly didn't know that one of the libraries already loading can do what the extraneous library does.

It comes from laziness, or objection to actually _LEARNING_ what code does, or being hooked into an IDE (such as Muse) that helps facilitate that willful ignorance.

"Why should I learn what code does, when I can just drag-and-drop this and get what I want?"  Well, then things don't go as planned, and they come in here crying, "Why doesn't this work???"

It doesn't work because you don't work.

Sorry.. I'm off my soapbox, now.

V/r,

^ _ ^

UPDATE:  Y'know, I went away for about half an hour and came back and re-read what I wrote, and just in case.. I'd like to clarify one of the last sentences.

I meant it doesn't work because you didn't push yourself to learn how to work.  Does that make sense???

[rayek.elfin]

As Nancy OShea​ pointed out, that horrible mess of a website is a MS server-based Sharepoint site. As for the reasons why a company would choose such a "solution" for a simple website? Well, the executive director is visited by a group of Very Professional Looking Sharepoint Suits, shown a super-duper presentation why their company MUST use a convoluted needlessly complicated "business solution", and the poor people in the lower bowels of said company's system admin department are there to pick up the pieces. No matter how practical-minded, no matter how the system admins tell their managers that that new snazzy "business solution" is a tar-filled pit of doom, once the execs made their minds up, Sharepoint it is.

On a more positive note, I am returning to a simpler workflow lately. No more Bootstrap, no more Foundation, no more ridiculously over-thought frameworks. I am in love with the CSS grid, and simple vanilla javascript. As flat a html structure as I can get away with.

Throwing away all that fluff is rekindling my passion for front-end work once more. Simplicity, simplicity.

And I am not the only one. I know many more developers who have had it with the over-reliance on over-complicated frameworks for whatever. I understand the need for those when dealing with a complicated (web)app, but for most work vanilla simplicity works better and is more flexible. And far more efficient.

PS I hear Bootstrap's popularity is faltering. Good riddance, I say.

[BenPleysier]

Are you are implying that CSS Grid is a replacement for Bootstrap/Foundation? Does CSS Grid include modals, cards, carousels etc. etc.?

[pziecina]

BenPleysier  wrote

Are you are implying that CSS Grid is a replacement for Bootstrap/Foundation? Does CSS Grid include modals, cards, carousels etc. etc.?

I'm not trying to start a disagreement, but that reads as though the inclusion of modals, cards, carousels, etc. is not possible without using a framework.

Perhaps that is part of the problem now, in that too many people think that in order to include such items in a web site, they have been told, (or even taught) that they must use a framework to do so?

[BenPleysier]

Hi Paula, it is meant to read that a Bootstrap/Foundation library is more than just a grid, so not sure where you get the impression that including different components can only be achieved by using Bootstrap/Foundation.

[pziecina]

Hi Ben, I think we are talking x-purposes.

When I read css grid, I think of css grid layouts, (the w3c spec) not the 'designer' type of grid layout that frameworks use. 

[rayek.elfin]

BenPleysier  wrote

Are you are implying that CSS Grid is a replacement for Bootstrap/Foundation? Does CSS Grid include modals, cards, carousels etc. etc.?

No, of course not.

Many Bootstrap and Foundation modules are extremely simple: cards, buttons, tables, drop-downs, modals, breadcrumbs, and so on, and so forth. Why would I rely on a large, mostly redundant, front-end framework library to have access to simple GUI elements, of which the markup and class structure in Bootstrap and Foundation is (dare I say it) rather behind the times as well.

16 months ago I created my last project based on Foundation, and absolutely hated the classes and markup. I prefer a different class naming approach, but with a framework like Bootstrap or Foundation you're pretty much stuck in that regard. Rewriting the classes and markup structure is just not an option, of course. It's their way, or the highway. Frameworks like Bootstrap and Foundation are incredibly biased, which makes sense of course, because they were written by teams who have their own workflow and coding preferences.

I began to hate it all, and took a break from web dev.

Since then I've gone back to writing my own modules which make more sense to me. Better structure, simpler code, easier to maintain, and much more flexible and adaptable. No more unnecessary fluff. Same for simple web and mobile applications. Less is more, I find. And more fun.

And I am not saying that we should return to the stone age and write everything ourselves. I like the HTML5 boilerplate. I like normalize.css. I just think that we as coders become more conscious and not just mindlessly jump on the bandwagon of each new 'thang' that is louded as the best new toy ever to help you solve problems you never knew you had before. Or rely heavily on "standard" frameworks just because they are "standard" for every single project that comes our way.

Anyway, just my thoughts about the topic. If Bootstrap presses all the right buttons for you, use it. And I can see the advantages of React or Vue for larger team-based projects. So depending on the situation larger frameworks may make sense (otherwise someone wouldn't have bothered to create them 😉  ).

What ticks me off, though, are all those articles and framework zealots on the web that coders no longer seemingly have a choice: you MUST use a framework, and you MUST choose Vue, Angular, or React. Crazy.

But I am seeing a backlash to this type of thinking lately. I suppose I am not the only one who feels that it's a self-defeating approach.

[BenPleysier]

This is what you said barely a year ago https://pinegrow.com/blog/pinegrow-for-dreamweaver-users/.

A product like Pinegrow needs a library (read: framework) to be able to deliver their visual approach to web design. In their case, they have not chosen to create their own library, but to go for the leaders in the field, namely Bootstrap and Foundation. The use of programs like Pinegrow is growing (excuse the pun) all the time, because, and I quote "(it) is aimed at front-end developers with good code sense to speed up development."

Yes, there are many other ways to create a website, be it hand coding, be it copying and pasting, be it using extensions or one of the plethora of other ways. Fortunately, there is no-one that can remove our choice.

In my case, I have chosen a program called Wappler that utilises Bootstrap, ServerConnect and AppConnect. For those that are not familiar with Wappler, it is very similar to Dreamweaver with DMXzone extensions.

[osgood_]

BenPleysier  wrote

This is what you said barely a year ago https://pinegrow.com/blog/pinegrow-for-dreamweaver-users/.

A product like Pinegrow needs a library (read: framework) to be able to deliver their visual approach to web design. In their case, they have not chosen to create their own library, but to go for the leaders in the field, namely Bootstrap and Foundation. The use of programs like Pinegrow is growing (excuse the pun) all the time, because, and I quote "(it) is aimed at front-end developers with good code sense to speed up development."

Maybe a light bulb switched on......it does for many a developer, after some years, who has become tired of wading around in mud where it has become no more than using someone elses code, which entails less skill and I believe less job satisfaction, leading to stagnation, frustration and lack of motivation. Since a year ago Grid has gained a lot of ground.

BenPleysier  wrote

In my case, I have chosen a program called Wappler that utilises Bootstrap, ServerConnect and AppConnect. For those that are not familiar with Wappler, it is very similar to Dreamweaver with DMXzone extensions.

I think Wappler is ok for end of life developers like you or me and those that have infrequent use for deploying or managing websites. In that respect its probably one of the best products but for serious web development where someone wants to take a view to a long term career they are walking blindly into a dead-end alley. Once sucked into a niche way of working your options become hugley limited if you ever want to transport your development skills else elsewhere.

I think it might get more exposure if the framework was open-sourced and better documented and there was a larger support system surrounding it, which may come in time, but just at he moment the only place you can get any help when stuck is its own forum and many over there don't seem to know how it really works, even those who have been using it since the start. I doubt that will happen anytime soon as once open sourced Wappler becomes marginalized for back-end work only which is not really what the developers would want. For everything front-end Wappler would not be required. Having said that its a good product for a select group of people, much admiration for the people behind the project. Its interesting seeing it unfold and what it can do in the right hands.

Incidentally on a lighter note why do some threads in the Wappler forum suddenly disappear, become 'unlisted'. One yesterday I was following before George unlisted it for some reason. Perhaps beacuse the link to the server-connect api just showed raw sql/debugging data rather than json data. I guess that being exposed could compromise the security of the website but there have been a few ocassions where I have been following threads and they suddenly get taken down. Sometimes it appears they are taken down as a 'protective' measure towards the product itself but maybe not, just seems strange especially in those threads which seem fairly innocent. Maybe I'm just analysing too much....we'll someones got to do the boring stuff

[rayek.elfin]

osgood_  wrote

Maybe a light bulb switched on......it does for many a developer, after some years, who has become tired of wading around in mud where it has become no more than using someone elses code, which entails less skill and I believe less job satisfaction, leading to stagnation, frustration and lack of motivation. Since a year ago Grid has gained a lot of ground.

In a way it did over the past two years. If either Bootstrap or Foundation is going to be at the core of your site code base, a visual tool like Pinegrow will speed up things, because (let's face it) as a coder you are merely parroting someone else's biased assumptions how to code the front-end stuff in the first place.

Instead of copying code, as a Bootstrap or Foundation coder, who cares if you used a visual tool like Pinegrow or Wappler to produce the darn thing? Right, no-one. Because whether we use that visual tool, or clone-type according to the framework docs, the resulting code is pretty much identical, barring some content decisions and minor markup differences.

It becomes mind-numbing dull. What was once a convenience after having to deal year after year with float-based work-arounds and browser inconsistencies, javascript issues, and so on, it became indeed a motivation killer. Pinegrow helped alleviate this somewhat for me in my work, because I did not have to touch the actual framework code, which bored the heck out of me. And as such, Pinegrow became a temporary saviour of sorts, I suppose. And I still do love Pinegrow while coding front-end as a super-duper inspect element replacement.

Things have progressed browser-wise, and I fail to see the relevance of most parts of either Framework at this point in many scenarios. Or at least, I enjoy NOT having to use them 🙂

[osgood_]

rayek.elfin  wrote

Things have progressed browser-wise, and I fail to see the relevance of most parts of either Framework at this point in many scenarios. Or at least, I enjoy NOT having to use them 🙂

If most 'serious' developers were honest they would most likely echo your feelings. I feel it's largley to do with being pressurized into using these workflows, the fear of not being able to get a job because of getting left behind, your boss, if you are employed, who is only interesed in how long something takes to produce, rather than quality and job satisfation. Personally I don't want to work under those conditions but I accept I'm lucky to be able to choose to a certain extent what I do, some just have to go with it or get out of it.

I don't need to be working with something I dont fully understand and if you've ever explored something like the Vue CLI no developer could ever possibly tell you or know what all those dependancies and build files do, most are redundant. Great if you spend months putting togeher a website and your production files, for some reason wont build, it happens and its not something I want to concern myself with as an independent front end developer. I'm not a systems analyst who can sort technical issue out relating to complex workflows. The cdn delivery is just as good in my opinion, simple and you can combime your Vue website with php using just the one development server, whereas with CLI Vue you have to somehow jump through hoops to connect your front-end development environment to you back-end development environment , madness!

Keep it simple, less can go wrong and you'll be a lot happier!

[rayek.elfin]

Correct: I use Pinegrow for two things: quick prototyping and for its live connection to Atom to quickly test stuff. Type code, and Pinegrow updates the views of multiple break points. Works really well on a three-screen system.

The quick prototyping part makes use of Foundation or Bootstrap, and is nice for quickly trying things and create live mockups (way faster than Axure), but I no longer use either for the final result.

One does not exclude the other. I've just decided for myself that I am much happier now that I have dropped both frameworks from my web coding. Not saying I won't have to use them anymore (may depend on the job requirements), but if I am given a choice, I avoid them now. Just over-complicates things in most scenarios, in my opinion.

Yes, I am aware you like Wappler. Like I said, no need to re-invent the wheel. Use whichever tool works best in any given situation. And have some fun too!

[ALsp]

rayek.elfin  wrote

PS I hear Bootstrap's popularity is faltering. Good riddance, I say.

I've heard the same thing. It should be interesting to see if an open source initiative that should, theoretically, have no financial interest or risks, such as the Bootstrap team, puts up a fight or tries to improve its code. I wonder how many Dreamweaver users have gotten all of their Boilerplate sites converted over to Bootstrap. It's entertaining to watch how these things play out. In any event, it will likely take a few years until the next big thing truly takes hold. And it will. Of that there is no doubt. I mean, you have some people using a bloated CSS library because it has associated support for bloated JavaScript widgets. Go figure.

Glad the forum programmers finally fixed the RSS feeds. Perhaps some folks wish it were still broken 😉

[osgood_]

rayek.elfin  wrote

As https://forums.adobe.com/people/Nancy+OShea  pointed out, that horrible mess of a website is a MS server-based Sharepoint site. As for the reasons why a company would choose such a "solution" for a simple website? Well, the executive director is visited by a group of Very Professional Looking Sharepoint Suits, shown a super-duper presentation why their company MUST use a convoluted needlessly complicated "business solution", and the poor people in the lower bowels of said company's system admin department are there to pick up the pieces. No matter how practical-minded, no matter how the system admins tell their managers that that new snazzy "business solution" is a tar-filled pit of doom, once the execs made their minds up, Sharepoint it is.

Agreed, well said.

rayek.elfin  wrote

On a more positive note, I am returning to a simpler workflow lately. No more Bootstrap, no more Foundation, no more ridiculously over-thought frameworks. I am in love with the CSS grid, and simple vanilla javascript. As flat a html structure as I can get away with.

Again well said. I couldn't agree more. Everything has become over-engineered these days in my opinion on account of a few big organisations using what for them is a justifiable complex workflow, being used by smaller organisations/developers when its not strictly necessary and over-complicates what should generally be a simple process. I predict in a few years the new-generation of web-developers will see the error of the current generations ways and we will go full circle again, especially as the fun has largely gone out of developement on account of so many options and workflows being available.

[Nancy OShea]

osgood_  wrote

I'm totally confused as to why, what and how this has been produced and for what purpose it serves.

One word:  Sharepoint.

I suspect the real nuts & bolts are for a much bigger corporate purpose that the public doesn't see.

[osgood_]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/Nancy+OShea  wrote

osgood_   wrote

I'm totally confused as to why, what and how this has been produced and for what purpose it serves.

One word:  Sharepoint.

I suspect the real nuts & bolts are for a much bigger corporate purpose that the public doesn't see.

If the public has no reason to see why include what is not needed on public pages, it doesnt make any sense at all.

To me it just looks like its a template that many companies deploy these days as a starting point and if the website doesn't take advantage of the scripts the developers don't bother to remove them.

Whatever its a pile of unconsidered horse dung in my opinion - If you click on the form submit button it scrolls you all the way to the top of the page so you have to scroll all the way down again to fill in the fields you missed. As a client I would not accept that and as a developer I would consider myself a poor excuse.

You could be right though - Sharepoint has some input into all of this but for what purpose, other than no one knows what they are doing, I have no idea for such a simple page. No human would write that obtuse coding - only a geeky programmer could have come up with that automated, convoluted, bloated bats crap to cover all eventualities, so yes you could well be right its been produced by something, maybe Sharepoint which would account for the awful outcome.

[Nancy OShea]

A department  wants a public facing web page so they build it with the corporate CMS  because that's what's available to them.   The "developer" isn't a web developer, like you or me.  More likely a department intern or a new hire.   And what do they care about code since they never see it

Have you ever looked at the sourse code from an Adobe Portfolio site?   PF users have no contact with code.   It's all generated by the online CMS.

Adobe Portfolio | Build your own personalized website

[WolfShade]

Heh.. didn't work for me.. smh..

[Nancy OShea]

Try a different browser that accepts cookies and doesn't have script blockers.

[osgood_]

Well that was the whole point of why l posted in relation to all the rubbish solutions currently out there. Its getting worse as more become involved in something they know nothing about, using something developed by a company only interested in making money out of ignorance and not the code their product produces or come to that the end result or those that are involved and should know what they are doing who try to compensate by fooling everyone into thinking this is much more complex than it really is and using equally poor solutions and workflows to justify their existence.