has anyone noticed the 'openness blog' where there's a custom scroll bar where if you want to scroll you have to DRAG it --- hey maybe it's because am using Firefox, maybe i should try it on IE :)
edit: maybe this will get me more down-votes --- has anyone noticed how on the 'About Openness' menu, something pops up on hover but you can't click it --- PS: to notice this wonderful effect you have to use Firefox 31
yeah, am pretty sure this site is not just for show ;)
also the copyright year is 2013 - maybe they are serious after all
To be fair, their javascript mousewheel hackery breaks mousewheel scroll on all three major browsers. I guess they think people still click and drag scroll bars, so didn't run into the scroll wheel problem during cursory "testing".
There's another interesting bug, if you click on the thin part of the scroll bar, below the thick bar representing visible content, the bar centers on where you click. If you then click above the thick bar, the top of the bar moves to where you clicked, rather than centering on where you clicked. Apparently the developer(s) believe that consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds (either that or testing is).
On mobile (android), that scrolling section is disabled and all the content displays normally.
@dimitry it's not 1px, even in IE, when I view the page. They shouldn't have tried to make a custom scrollbar without more testing, but they evidently thought the stock scrollbar look didn't measure up to the grandeur of the rest of the microsoft openness page.
Shame that mouse wheel doesn't work, but you can click on the scrollbar (which is not obvious, because it looks like it's 1px wide). And I used IE.
Makes me wonder why did they want a custom scrollbar in the first place.
Microsoft's web developers are pretty notoriously horrendous in both their approach and execution.
One common mistake across ALL Microsoft sites is not bothering to embed their fonts, or declare fallbacks. So it looks great on their boss' computer but everybody else gets goddamned Times New Roman.
And before it was built-in there were plugins - should really mention 'git diff margin' here. Most editors have this kind of functionality to show little git diff stats directly in the editor, but this one is really top notch as it can actually show the diff and let you revert to or copy the original lines. Can't live without it anymore.
They have treated developers (like myself) badly over the years, many are moving away.
So they've released some throw-away products as open-source, on different project collaboration site to their own. While other larger members of the industry have had their core products open source for years.
When debugging, you usually want to see the exact code that's being run - not a "reference" version which may not have the certain bit of code that you're trying to workaround/call.
The only advantage that the reference code is the variable names are original, and there's a few comments (but no XML documentation?).
FWIW, I have the feeling that the best exit for Github is getting acquired by Microsoft. Github is a large, savvy, community, constantly sharing interesting and valuable projects. I think MSFT needs that public perspective of being 'open', valuable community, new technologies, etc. The enterprise side of Github also plays nice with MSFT.
I love how microsoft.github.io redirects to microsoft.com/openness which instantly brings back the feel of webdesign from the 90s. In my opinion they could've made a statement here, actually demonstrating by example that they're moving away from their previous corporate image, with a nice landing page, ala facebook react's github.io page.
I'd rather they focus their time on actual open source technologies and tools, as opposed to landing pages. In the end, the quality of the things they put out should be what is being judged, not some landing page.
Part of me is very excited to see such an advancement. The other part of me (the one that has been "beaten" by MS for so many years) just doesn't trust them. I would most certainly check their code but I would be extra-super careful before using their code! I would consider even using an anonymous or home account to login github and download their source!
Microsoft and also IBM now feel sorry about their wrong behaviour, but it is really ridicolous that they say in the TypeScript project "if you want to help us, go to GitHub" ... come on, they have a lot of money and they ask help? Hiring people would be smarter! I went to an IBM meeting talking with the IBM Cloud Leader in Italy and all that hi profile people. All of them use Firefox (no one uses Chrome), did they sponsor Firefox? It seems they are a poor company that now need help.
> come on, they have a lot of money and they ask help?
They are not going to be able to buy community buy-in that they want, no matter who they hire and what other money they throw around.
Asking the wider populous for their input early (assuming the filtering and acknowledging of that input is done right, and they continue to "play nice" once they've got what they want) is a good thing for both them and the end user: they'll more likely be able to release something right earlier (rather than everyone hating it until version 3).
> did they sponsor Firefox?
I'm going to have to ask you to explain the IBM connection here as I'm just not seeing a logical link between these statements and your point about Microsoft. How is IBM people preferring to use Firefox instead of something else? I wan't aware that IBM had any particular axe to grind in the current browser game.
It's probably just an IT thing. Many companies opted to deploy Firefox internally as an alternative to IE because it played well with their software management tools (as opposed to Chrome, which only got centralized version management later). In IT/helpdesk settings, you want to know what specific browser version your users are running to ensure intranet apps are compatible.
Because, you know, legacy. Anyone who's used Siebel, Oracle intranet apps, etc. knows what it's like.
I know why a browser would be install across the board - the thing that confused me was why the person I was replying to thought it was significant to this thread - there was an implication that it was the same sort of thing as "MS asking for help", which I don't see.
61 comments
[ 4.6 ms ] story [ 150 ms ] threadedit: maybe this will get me more down-votes --- has anyone noticed how on the 'About Openness' menu, something pops up on hover but you can't click it --- PS: to notice this wonderful effect you have to use Firefox 31
yeah, am pretty sure this site is not just for show ;)
also the copyright year is 2013 - maybe they are serious after all
There's another interesting bug, if you click on the thin part of the scroll bar, below the thick bar representing visible content, the bar centers on where you click. If you then click above the thick bar, the top of the bar moves to where you clicked, rather than centering on where you clicked. Apparently the developer(s) believe that consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds (either that or testing is).
On mobile (android), that scrolling section is disabled and all the content displays normally.
@dimitry it's not 1px, even in IE, when I view the page. They shouldn't have tried to make a custom scrollbar without more testing, but they evidently thought the stock scrollbar look didn't measure up to the grandeur of the rest of the microsoft openness page.
.mCSB_draggerRail { width: 1px; }
One common mistake across ALL Microsoft sites is not bothering to embed their fonts, or declare fallbacks. So it looks great on their boss' computer but everybody else gets goddamned Times New Roman.
Interesting that they lead with an apology.
No apology there (nor should there be).
They have treated developers (like myself) badly over the years, many are moving away.
So they've released some throw-away products as open-source, on different project collaboration site to their own. While other larger members of the industry have had their core products open source for years.
Most of them are on CodePlex today.
https://github.com/msopentech https://github.com/OfficeDev https://github.com/Azure
http://github.com/aspnet
(I know you know that, but I'm just saying)
Also, it provides nothing more than ilspy does (and ilspy shows the actual code on your machine)
The only advantage that the reference code is the variable names are original, and there's a few comments (but no XML documentation?).
[1]: Disputed, as discussed here http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi#Disputed
Shame on you Microsoft and IBM!
They are not going to be able to buy community buy-in that they want, no matter who they hire and what other money they throw around.
Asking the wider populous for their input early (assuming the filtering and acknowledging of that input is done right, and they continue to "play nice" once they've got what they want) is a good thing for both them and the end user: they'll more likely be able to release something right earlier (rather than everyone hating it until version 3).
> did they sponsor Firefox?
I'm going to have to ask you to explain the IBM connection here as I'm just not seeing a logical link between these statements and your point about Microsoft. How is IBM people preferring to use Firefox instead of something else? I wan't aware that IBM had any particular axe to grind in the current browser game.
Because, you know, legacy. Anyone who's used Siebel, Oracle intranet apps, etc. knows what it's like.
Is someone flagging this as off topic?