Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="forgottenuser79643" data-source="post: 962852" data-attributes="member: 88069">I think it&#039;s still relevant to a point. Most websites don&#039;t adapt as fast to a new programming or have (or had) a need for certain types of scripts and iframes for a specific purpose. I have come a cross quite a few websites that, despite their viewer count, still adopt old (obsolete?) iframes and 3p-scripts instead of fully integrating HTML5 for example. Lots of services, companies and their corresponding websites are guilty of this to a point. Lack of adapting the websites in favour of removing third-party scripts and frames, while still having a reasonably higher viewer count. On one hand I can agree. Why fix it, if it isn&#039;t broken, right? But on the other hand, lack of adaptation of new programming can mean that you may be running a third-party script or service that you otherwise could have run on a first-party basis without additional spending.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="forgottenuser79643, post: 962852, member: 88069"] I think it's still relevant to a point. Most websites don't adapt as fast to a new programming or have (or had) a need for certain types of scripts and iframes for a specific purpose. I have come a cross quite a few websites that, despite their viewer count, still adopt old (obsolete?) iframes and 3p-scripts instead of fully integrating HTML5 for example. Lots of services, companies and their corresponding websites are guilty of this to a point. Lack of adapting the websites in favour of removing third-party scripts and frames, while still having a reasonably higher viewer count. On one hand I can agree. Why fix it, if it isn't broken, right? But on the other hand, lack of adaptation of new programming can mean that you may be running a third-party script or service that you otherwise could have run on a first-party basis without additional spending. [/QUOTE]

Verification