Quite funny. I attempted to load this in Chrome and I still get 'This site is running only on the world's best browser' with a link to download, ironically, Chrome.
I don't understand how the number of people who viewed this yesterday goes up. Shouldn't that be a fixed metric? If it's just a demo, maybe some better number to demo would be better.
Took a while to load but it scroll surprisingly smoothly. The sign-up button takes me to a wikipedia page about contextual advertising. Is that intentional?
So I started writing something about how we were supposed to get away from the awfulness of flash, and it's stupidities like long loading screens, with CSS3 and HTML5. But I viewed the source and this is flash. Well the loading screen is. You see it's currently downloaded 4Mb across 2 .swf files and it's only about... a third of the way through, although it's hard to tell on the "fill in the word" progress bar.
My third-world 2Mbit internet connection doesn't seem to be up to scratch. At least my web browser is if the browser checking code has already run. This is like c2001 except then we did "if (ie) {} else if (ns) { }"
I hate to complain without actually having seen the subject matter, but flash, loading screens and "if (chrome) else { fail }" is harking back to a bad past.
Edit: I think the download died at just under 5 Mb. I guess my 2Mb internet really isn't up to scratch.
yeah, going back to that now. HTML5 fanciness has replaced animated .gifs, too. And modal dialogs have replaced popups.
[rant]seriously, why do a third of the sites linked to HN open up with a meaningless modal dialog / popup asking me to join a mailing list or fill in a survey. I'd fill in a survey if you'd actually let me visit your site to see what the survey questions are about![/rant]
That's because when you load it in Firefox it will redirect you to another URL. Then you copy/paste that in Chrome and you see the same message. I hate when websites do this...
Holy shit WTF is going on here? This was a terribly annoying presentation in pretty much every way. The most annoying thing for me was that navigation was haphazard and proceeded in unpredictable directions.
Also, why do the soundtracks for these type of things sound like crappy indie movies from 2006? Fuck my life this shit makes me want to die.
And yeah, by the way, who the fuck thought that a 1+ minute wait for this thing was acceptable? As soon as I saw that Canon-like font and the really slow progress (20Mbit FIOS over here, ppl) I was already set to hate. Unreal. And then, per my other comment, what I got was truly hateworthy.
Why is this even on the first page of HN? Who are you people who voted this up? Am I missing the point of the word "craziness"—like, was this supposed to suck really hard? I wish that was made clearer if that's the case. I hope more things like this aren't made.
a message like that is a tipoff that what you're seeing was made by amateurs, just be thankful they gave you the warning and move on to things worth your time
Runs fine in Arch Chrome... though Contad Presents (the first bit) is centered based on window height. I didn't even see it until I made my Chrome window wider.
User-agents can be abolished once all browsers are created equal; same HTML standards support, same performance. Pretty sure it only works in Chrome because it has good support for the latest HTML technologies, good performance, and good developer tools.
Sites that do autodetect and ban access on the result are BAD BAD BAD. You can detect them and add a banner to inform the user the site might not work, and even explain why.
44 comments
[ 5.9 ms ] story [ 88.6 ms ] threadAnd for those who can't view the project, try the post about it (from their homepage) : http://www.freeger.com/project.php?projectid=174
My third-world 2Mbit internet connection doesn't seem to be up to scratch. At least my web browser is if the browser checking code has already run. This is like c2001 except then we did "if (ie) {} else if (ns) { }"
I hate to complain without actually having seen the subject matter, but flash, loading screens and "if (chrome) else { fail }" is harking back to a bad past.
Edit: I think the download died at just under 5 Mb. I guess my 2Mb internet really isn't up to scratch.
"Only in [browser name]" is so 1997.
shakes fist
[rant]seriously, why do a third of the sites linked to HN open up with a meaningless modal dialog / popup asking me to join a mailing list or fill in a survey. I'd fill in a survey if you'd actually let me visit your site to see what the survey questions are about![/rant]
Other than that, nice piece of work!
You mean this? https://www.dropbox.com/s/o9wb9k0bbqfc2bw/IMG_20130718_17103...
Loaded it in Chrome and was told I needed to download... Chrome.
Guess my Chrome isn't bling enough.
Also, why do the soundtracks for these type of things sound like crappy indie movies from 2006? Fuck my life this shit makes me want to die.
Why is this even on the first page of HN? Who are you people who voted this up? Am I missing the point of the word "craziness"—like, was this supposed to suck really hard? I wish that was made clearer if that's the case. I hope more things like this aren't made.
http://dabblet.com/gist/6046779
Made by Verou: https://twitter.com/LeaVerou/status/358726425454444545
It's like complaining that someone built a proof-of-concept app and only made it work on a Mac.
Now if it had been a production website that only worked in one browser, then you'd be right.
Wow. Why don't people use feature detection or something? I don't understand the rise in vendor locking websites to Chrome.
I think we should just outright abolish the user-agent.
And the site doesn't work for me in Chrome Canary (that supports everything that stable Chrome does and more).
Author of that site is just a troll/fanboy or incompetent at using latest web standards.
Also bad is using flash to detect it!