Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | asiando's comments login

8 hours of work already mean about 10 hours dedicated to work, including commute and preparation. It’s 18 hours if you include sleeping and you only have 6 hours left for “recreation,” which must also include personal errands, cooking and cleaning.

If you work 10/12 hour shifts you have no life. No wonder people await the weekend like it’s air.


Not everyone can be a professional. Companies like Amazon, Walmart and Monsanto squeeze out “mom and pop stores” so they can no longer compete and end up working for the man.


Service itself is pretty good compared to the EU. Consumer protection for goods however isn’t. Most products in the EU must come with a 2-year consumer warranty for example.


Can’t wait for them to block stepbrother and BBC


Following the payment blockade on pornhub, some players in the industry are doing this kind of policing themselves. For example visit xvideos and you’ll find many words shortened to a single letter and also censored on search so they return no results.


Daddy I wanna watch bambi


I had to start running my DNS traffic through a kid safe filtering service after someone searched for "pictures of brown bunnies"...


Doesn’t that already happen? Chrome currently survives thanks to advertising either way. Splitting Google would just make it a little more indirect.


On iOS it just changes the UA. This means that regular CSS-only responsive sites don’t change at all, unlike what the other 2 comments are suggesting. Maybe on Android it’s different.


The author is actually complaining about narrow viewports and not about portrait orientations, without even realizing it.


Even then - when I set my resolution to the same 1080 × 1920 the author states, The Guardian still renders the "desktop" layout. The more compact layout from the doesn't kick in until 739px.

Maybe it's their font-scaling settings are getting in the way and changing the viewport resolution?


It’s not that hard to display a few paragraphs. It’s hard to display complex pieces of information while also making them look good to the client (which, we should remember, pays our bills)


Agreed completely. One mistake that designers/developers do though is to completely give up under 1000px so we get this swaths of whitespace and a hamburger. That’s a waste of estate and a waste of my time.


I've emailed one of YC's huge successes multiple times over years about how it's frustrating to have horizontal scrolling on a browser that's half of a 1080p display wide (i.e., nearly 1000px).

Unfortunately, the horizontal scrolling UX with substantial wasted whitespace on the sides remains.


It could be worse. One particular web app I use daily has horizontal scroll bars even when full screen (and has some off the main info at far right).


This is the unmitigated disaster that is the Azure dashboard isn’t it?


Name and shame. That's the only way it gets better.


Sounds like the Azure Dashboard, but I haven’t used it in years


I've found sites using Material UI guidelines (heavy use of cards and navbar hamburger) especially culpable to this. Huge gap of greyish whitespace with a hamburger in the left.

Someone else mentioned bootstrap in the other thread too.

Maybe because these Frameworks are hugely popular, their defaults amplify the impact. Definitely these values are tweakable.


Users of CSS frameworks do it to cut corners and follow whatever the framework suggests.

“The small breakpoint is 768px wide? I guess below it it’s a phone, I hope you like burgers”


Yeah, I still very often get "here is the desktop design, here is the mobile design". Depending on who is developing the designs depends how that's going to translate.

I have all the time in the world for developers that reflow the page and remove/adjust elements at different breakpoints (based on the design) between 'desktop' and 'mobile' so the experience is good for everyone. Sadly, most people don't bother.


I believe true webdesigners are in decline. You have lots of people who do this as a side gig after reading a few tutorials. In a way that’s a nice compliment for the accessibility of the tech, but not accessibility for the end user.

Same with “We only tested this on Chrome.” of sites/apps, of which are there are many, as I can attest, as I never use Chrome.


It's just plain hard to keep up with front-end tech. Most people use front-end dev work as an entry point. They quickly realize there are more sane jobs available on the backend and migrate there.


> I believe true webdesigners are in decline. You have lots of people who do this as a side gig after reading a few tutorials.

In decline from when? Picking it up after reading a few tutorials has always been a common way to get into web work, and if anything I feel like it's been getting more professionalized over the last twenty years.


Just the general gist over the last few years. I am not saying there are no really skilled professionals, I am just seeing a lot of lower par work from jobs I take over. Plus just by surfing the web and noting the quality.


I’ve been doing web development since 2007, and I’m struggling to think of an era that had more professionals doing front end than we have now. I’m not sure my experience agrees with you


You’re getting better. :)


> sites/apps

I don't think apps are as relevant to current discussion. For apps (not public websites), there are different requirements depending on the target audience.

I wouldn't be mad at a B2B web app being desktop only, no mobile CSS.

But I agree that web apps should still be compliant with safari + FF + Chrome.


IMNSHO, more or less the case since they stopped using tables for layout.


Convincing a client to pay for time to spend checking the design and tweaking it in the space between the breakpoints can be more hassle than it's worth.

That said, sane breakpoints can usually avoid unexpected hamburgers on the desktop.


Agreed, Tablet is the only intermediate I consider. The rest is just not worth the time investment.


What tablet? Aren't we talking pretty much anything between about ~500px and ~1200px here? That's pretty much tablet zone...


You caught me, for me that means col-md with Bootstrap ;-)


You convince them in the same way you convince a PM to give you time to write tests for your work: you don't give them an alternative. "You want this done? That'll be 20 billable hours." And your estimate includes the time needed to do work you're willing to sign your name to. When I hire a plumber or an architect, I tell them what needs doing, but I expect and trust that they'll put in the work (and bill me accordingly) to ensure that it gets done properly, even though I don't understand all of the specifics of what doing those jobs properly entails.


If desktop + mobile make up >95% of your audience it's hard to justify the cost of creating a third set of rules for the rest.


That makes sense on the surface, but you should design for all possibilities, current and future.

I learned this lesson the hard way. The client was on desktop. The users were 40% phones. Everything was great for months and months.

Then one day the owner of the company that owned the company tried to look at the web site on her grandkid's iPad. Fan met shit that day.


that's something I don't understand. the Dev tools in Chrome and Firefox make it really easy to test through every resolution without problems. every UI change I make I view in all possible resolutions and its quite obvious of something breaks and I adjust accordingly.


The tooling isn't the problem, time is. Every device and resolution you support takes time and at some point you hit a point of diminishing returns.


If it takes too much time, you are probably doing something wrong like having hardcoded layouts for different resolutions instead of using reflow as much as possible.


Even with all reflow it's hard. Should I reduce a width a little bit more so that it become 3 columns instead of 2 on iPad vertical at risk of having some line wrapped? Things like that.


For my day job working on a UK e-commerce site that gets roughly 100,000 uniques a day, our split is 70/30 for mobile/desktop. Unfortunately within the company it’s closer to 1/99. So no matter how many times I repeat the phrase “mobile first”, the higher-ups just don’t get it. Luckily I can make rational decisions for them!


I like to start on the desktop but build in a way I know the objects will flow. Then I set up a tester with a bunch of breakpoints and check as I go and make micro adjustments to each element that is "off". Then you can set the element inspector to the side and just keep shrinking the screen to make sure nothing is awry as the width gets less and less. I don't really have X sets of 'rules', just elements adjusting at the point it feels right to adjust them.


For some reason people adopted 1040px-1080px as a default - I think it’s twitter Bootstrap’s fault. 980 or even less is much more reasonable.


There’s a good reason why there are no real DPI media queries: You should not decide how big things appear on the screen, that’s up to the user. The user has the ability to change resolution or to change the website’s zoom level, you should never access the real size and decide that a button must be exactly 1cm wide in real life on every screen for everyone.

Just design for the default and then people will zoom or change resolution if the default isn’t enough.


What about the min-resolution media query?

  @media only screen and (-webkit-min-device-pixel-ratio: 1.3),
 only screen and (min-resolution: 120dpi)
 {
  /* High DPI code */
 }


Consider applying for YC's Summer 2025 batch! Applications are open till May 13

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: