• herrvogel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 year ago

    I stopped doing frontend work when responsive design became important. Super unpleasant work. Now I’m happier at the backend where I don’t have to worry about how my shit looks on the 7 million possible screen sizes people are likely to use. Life is more peaceful here.

    • traches@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      Alright hang on now - responsive design is about not excluding people based on the device they’re using. Many people do everything in their lives from a low end cell phone and cutting them out is a shit thing to do. Responsive design and progressive enhancement are objectively good things.

      The tools have gotten better over the past several years, it’s not as hard as it used to be.

      • herrvogel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        1 year ago

        ? Who said anything about excluding anything or anyone? I’m just saying I don’t like the work that has to go into making sure nobody’s excluded. In a way, I’m not excluding anyone by excluding everyone now. I quit frontend altogether, left other people to deal with it. At the backend I don’t have to worry about what kind of screen the other end might be using to view the JSON string I sent them. You don’t get “I just looked at your response headers on my 32:9 monitor that I divided into 9 randomly sized tiles and it looks like shit, please fix” calls when you work backend.

      • nyan@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Better? Not really. My experience is that sites have gotten “better” for mobile at the cost of making them nearly or completely unusable for people using desktop browsers with non-default settings (especially additional security lockdown, but even forcing a specific colour scheme can break some sites because some idiot calling himself a designer used css background-image for images that are content). Which means a fair number of sites are broken to some degree for me.

        The more things change, the more they stay the same.

        • traches@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Those things are completely unrelated? I said the tools for responsive design have gotten better, which they objectively have.

          You’re not wrong that most css in the wild is trash, and I love dark mode as much as the next guy but you can’t complain that sites break when you’re fucking with styles. It’s the cost of tinkering.

      • Kichae@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        Have you considered just forcing everyone to access your sites via Internet Explorer 5.5?

          • Cabrio@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Ahh the old Nutscrape Aggrivator. Refused to update with Microsoft standards and spent the next 8 years being a pain in the ass for website compatibility.

                • martinb@lemmy.sdf.org
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  No. I was just looking for an example of when Microsoft created standards for IE that other browsers could adopt, given that they were tied into IIS and undocumented in order to give them an uncompetitive advantage. Let’s also think about how they deliberately downgraded performance, or broke functionality on non Microsoft browsers, again for anti competitive behaviour.

                  They were called browser wars for a reason, and Microsoft is very well documented indeed regarding their fuckerry. But you go ahead trolling.

                  • Cabrio@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Yes, everything you said is correct, ipso facto Microsoft won and was setting the standards at the time.

                    The competitors still had significant market share and thus their obstinance to follow the leader lead to a large portion of users that had to be catered to by web developers for compatibility due to corporate requirements for access to these market shares.

                    Thus because these competitors weren’t the key demographic, in the context of a developer, they were an additional burden due to the severe lack of uniform standards between major platforms.

      • MagicShel@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        As recently as 6 or 7 years ago I maintained some apps that forced 5.5 compatibility mode. Because they were poorly architected in a shitty framework and no one was willing to do or pay for or train for a rewritten version. They were finally migrating to .NET when I left. It was the govt so they are likely wrapping up that migration now.

    • candyman337@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      Modern frameworks make responsive design easier but yes it is still a lot to wrap your head around. I remember building my hs robotics team website in high school right as responsive design was becoming a thing. “WHAT DO YOU MEAN I HAVE TO NEST A CONTAINER IN A CONTAINER I ALREADY HAVE ONE!!!”

      Bless those who came up with flexbox

      • LeafEriksen@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        I love to see the occasional flexbox appreciation, since at least for me (someone just getting into Design/Web dev) flexbox changed responsive design from being a totally unfeasible project to being genuinely fun to work on, and sometimes the most exciting part!