DEAR FIREFOX
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Yeah, I was wondering who needs "undo close tab" anywhere, not just in context menu? Don't you have:
History (with that closed tab being the latest entry on top)
Recently closed tabsI use undo close tab all the time. Using history sounds miserable. I have no idea what the other thing is or where I'd find it.
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@error So, if people are forming habits so easily, with the advent of "undo philosophy" soon (when we become total Idiocracy) they will start thinking that there's Undo for everything, including when you get ran over by a car because you were not paying attention to that red warning light across the street.
Damn, and I thought I was the anti-
.
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
who needs "undo close tab"
I reopen an accidentally closed tab, or one that I realise I needed some more information from, far more often than I need to reopen something further down the stack. It makes perfect sense to have a quick mnemonic to do that rather than having to go into another menu
-
@Jaloopa said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
who needs "undo close tab"
I reopen an accidentally closed tab, or one that I realise I needed some more information from, far more often than I need to reopen something further down the stack. It makes perfect sense to have a quick mnemonic to do that rather than having to go into another menu
Additionally, undo close tab restores far more than the URL. Things like SPA state, form values, and that tab's back/forward lists.
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@El_Heffe said in DEAR FIREFOX:
An operation that requires both mouse and keyboard?
There is this key on the keyboard you know...
Ah yes. THAT key. Which just further proves my point.
That key (I don't even know what it is officially called. The Stupid Pointless Key?) Is even more pointless because whenever you press it, you get a different menu, depending on what program has focus, and depending where you are in the program.
Just because something exists doesn't mean its a good idea.
-
@El_Heffe said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@El_Heffe said in DEAR FIREFOX:
An operation that requires both mouse and keyboard?
There is this key on the keyboard you know...
Ah yes. THAT key. Which just further proves my point.
That key (I don't even know what it is officially called. The Stupid Pointless Key?) Is even more pointless because whenever you press it, you get a different menu, depending on what program has focus, and depending where you are in the program.
Just because something exists doesn't mean its a good idea.
Context menu key? I don’t know, but it opens the context menu, just like right clicking, so it makes perfect sense that the menu depends on, uhm, context.
-
@dcon said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@Sumireko said in DEAR FIREFOX:
You can add a double warning (Are you really sure?), but that will only work for so long. Then you need triple warnings.
With buttons that randomly shift positions each time!
Are you Youtube? Because this is this shit it does when you give feedback why you aren't interested in an ad/video. They actually made the choices in random positions every time.
-
@hungrier That's horrifying.
-
-
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
And when I was complaining about insane defaults in Visual Studio nobody came to say that. Figures.
well, you should have said it yourself, just as i did here.
-
@_P_ said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Are you Youtube? Because this is this shit it does when you give feedback why you aren't interested in an ad/video. They actually made the choices in random positions every time.
If you consider it more like a survey than something that people do frequently, it actually makes some kind of sense, to neutralize any position-dependent effect (I wouldn't be surprised if people were more likely to choose/not choose the first option when they're unsure, etc.)
-
@dkf said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@El_Heffe said in DEAR FIREFOX:
The Stupid Pointless Key
But it's not labelled Scroll Lock?!
I tried it on Google Sheets to see if it toggled arrow keys between scrolling and moving, like in Excel and Calc. But it didn't.
Hours later, after several unsuccessful attempts to drag stuff around by toggling left-drag with my usual mouse button, I learned Scroll Lock on will turn off X-Mouse Button Control.
So thanks for that.
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in DEAR FIREFOX:
In your opinion, does Chrome do it better? For reference, here's the tab context menu:
And here's the relevant section in the main menu:
Your browser history illuminates so much and yet leaves me with more questions.
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in DEAR FIREFOX:
In your opinion, does Chrome do it better
Not if you don't update it. Update Google Chrome. A new update is available. Do you want to update now?
-
@Applied-Mediocrity said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@Tsaukpaetra said in DEAR FIREFOX:
In your opinion, does Chrome do it better
Not if you don't update it. Update Google Chrome. A new update is available. Do you want to update now?
I like the pretty color it has turned the main hamburger menu, so probably not until Windows forces a reboot.
-
@DogsB said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@Tsaukpaetra said in DEAR FIREFOX:
In your opinion, does Chrome do it better? For reference, here's the tab context menu:
And here's the relevant section in the main menu:
Your browser history illuminates so much and yet leaves me with more questions.
Feel free to ask me anything!
-
@Zerosquare said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@_P_ said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Are you Youtube? Because this is this shit it does when you give feedback why you aren't interested in an ad/video. They actually made the choices in random positions every time.
If you consider it more like a survey than something that people do frequently, it actually makes some kind of sense, to neutralize any position-dependent effect (I wouldn't be surprised if people were more likely to choose/not choose the first option when they're unsure, etc.)
That'd make it even more of a WTF:
- Why is selecting "not interested in this ad" a survey? What's happening to your """omnipotent""" AI algorithms? They can't even figure out I'm not a plebian hence I don't want the 500th ad on the 30th mobile phone cleaner/optimizer app?
- There are 3 options in the "not interested in this ad" feedback and one of them is "inappropriate". Basically they've made it so that you can't report an ad that's violating copyright or even outright scam. That's why you get shit like ad that plays Baby Shark as background music, or ad about fake Fortnite/God of War mobile client.
- Youtube also has "not interested in this video" feedback, and the options on that window are not randomized. It's why I immediately deduce that they just decided to make the options random on the ad feedback one just to screw users (can't let them build the muscle memory to clear our ads! We must disrupt their flow!).
- Also, on the mobile client, there's also used to be another view that asks you to rate a video's usefulness, in the scale of 1-5 star. Independent of the like/dislike system. Like, what?
Oh, also, Youtube's official mobile client is full of bugs/misfeatures and new ones keep popping up every month or so. I'm amazed that at how they keep innovating on the weird shit that can happen on their app.
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
And when I was complaining about insane defaults in Visual Studio nobody came to say that. Figures.
Mostly because you're the special snowflake and it has sensible defaults.
-
@_P_ said in DEAR FIREFOX:
I immediately deduce that they just decided to make the options random on the ad feedback one just to screw users (can't let them build the muscle memory to clear our ads! We must disrupt their flow!).
I don't like defending Google, but people who don't want to see ads don't use the feedback feature anyways (which, at best, gives you different ads but the same amount) ; they use an ad blocker. To me, it's more likely to be a misguided idea. That wouldn't be the first time from them.
there's also used to be another view that asks you to rate a video's usefulness, in the scale of 1-5 star. Independent of the like/dislike system. Like, what?
A video can be likeable because it's fun, even if it's not useful.
And a video can be useful because it contains good information, but not very likeable (too long, poorly edited, bad video/sound quality...)
-
@levicki Just evangelize about vim, why don't you.
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
tell me how to think and what to do
You seem to let your IDE tell you what to do…
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
all of them gone because of Microsoft and IBM playing all kind of dirty games to sell their shoddy hardware and software engineering.
Yeah, it's 100% MS and IBM's fault. The fact that their competitors shot themselves in the foot (terrible management for Atari and Commodore, firing Steve Jobs for Apple) has absolutely nothing to do with it.
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Everything we have today is an utter, wasteful, barely cobbled together, donkey shite
Well, memory protection and modern OSs and hardware aren't all bad. Nowadays when a program crashes, we can just relaunch it and maybe only a few seconds-worth of work has been lost; often, we can have our programs tell us where our bugs are automatically. Back in the bad old days, you'd have to reload everything from tape, and debugging was much harder.
-
@levicki Thank you, that's not quite what I requested but it's close enough.
It's a shame you and blakey haven't interacted more, but he's never on the forums. Maybe check out our Discord?
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
I wrote ... in 1982 when neither ... were around ..., and I did just fine.
We had those things called books, ... We studied those books hard ...
Everything we have today is ...Sheesh, I thought I waved my stinky
around. :old_man_yells_at_cloud:
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Everything we have today is an utter, wasteful, barely cobbled together, donkey shite and Microsoft and IBM are the ones to blame because every alternative to them was better thought out be it Atari, Amiga or dozens of other systems available at the time, all of them gone because of Microsoft and IBM playing all kind of dirty games to sell their shoddy hardware and software engineering.
Be the change you want to see in the world...
-
@Zerosquare said in DEAR FIREFOX:
but people who don't want to see ads don't use the feedback feature anyways (which, at best, gives you different ads but the same amount)
That's actually not true, because Youtube only has two settings: push you non-customized (read: lowest common denominator, aka plebian) ads, or customized ads. I chose the former because I drastically change my viewing habits like every 1 or 2 months, so customized ads is gonna be terrible no matter what.
Well, the former are no better either; all the plebian shit are around there and you can just feel how much of a plebian-oriented practice these companies have been pushing through (as another example, there's an "hurt the ragdoll" mobile game ad that has an annoying cartoon ragdoll keep saying "you're gay" and "you suck" while being hanged on a guillotine).
Moreover, giving them feedback does no shit on the former. I keep denoting those partial-scam mobile phone cleaner app ads as "irrelevant" and they're still pushed to me multiple times every day. So I think it's safe to assume that the AI just doesn't care about the feedbacks.
@Zerosquare said in DEAR FIREFOX:
they use an ad blocker.
There are no ad blockers for mobile clients. You'll need at least an unofficial client to do that. I might do that at some point.
@Zerosquare said in DEAR FIREFOX:
A video can be likeable because it's fun, even if it's not useful.
And a video can be useful because it contains good information, but not very likeable (too long, poorly edited, bad video/sound quality...)Convince Youtube's AI about that. Or their management, who seem to think that the only problem they have are PR issues, and their AI hammer will solve all these nails in no time.
-
@_P_ said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Convince Youtube's AI about that. Or their management, who
seem to think that the only problem they have are PR issuesdon't even care about PR, as long as the ads are generating enough revenueFTFY
-
@_P_ said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Moreover, giving them feedback does no shit on the former. I keep denoting those partial-scam mobile phone cleaner app ads as "irrelevant" and they're still pushed to me multiple times every day.
What do you think non-customized means?
-
@_P_ said in DEAR FIREFOX:
as another example, there's an "hurt the ragdoll" mobile game ad that has an annoying cartoon ragdoll keep saying "you're gay" and "you suck" while being hanged on a guillotine
I almost want to see that ad now...
-
@Rhywden said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@loopback0 said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@sh_code The lucas1 method. Gotcha.
What does it matter, we're all just boomzilla anyway.
What happened to lucas1 anyway? Did he successfully drink himself into an early grave?
He tried to be @sweaty_gammon and failed. He'll probably try again soon.
-
@_P_ said in DEAR FIREFOX:
There are no ad blockers for mobile clients. You'll need at least an unofficial client to do that. I might do that at some point.
DNS66 blocks ads via DNS on Android, though I'm not sure how well the YouTube app behaves with it installed.
-
@Choonster No problems yet.
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@Zerosquare said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Yeah, it's 100% MS and IBM's fault. The fact that their competitors shot themselves in the foot (terrible management for Atari and Commodore, firing Steve Jobs for Apple) has absolutely nothing to do with it.
That contributed for sure, but MS and IBM played the vendor lock-in game then, and they are still doing it to this day.
Yeah, that's why I can only use visual studio code on windows... Oh, wait
That's why my .net core apps aren't cross platform... Oh, wait
That's why it's impossible to run Linux applications on windows... Oh, wait
That's why Microsoft have a browser that uses their own proprietary rendering engine instead of a standard one... Oh, wait
But yeah, Microsoft definitely are all in on vendor lock in. As soon as I think of an example I'll get right back to you
-
@Jaloopa said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@Zerosquare said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Yeah, it's 100% MS and IBM's fault. The fact that their competitors shot themselves in the foot (terrible management for Atari and Commodore, firing Steve Jobs for Apple) has absolutely nothing to do with it.
That contributed for sure, but MS and IBM played the vendor lock-in game then, and they are still doing it to this day.
Yeah, that's why I can only use visual studio code on windows... Oh, wait
That's why my .net core apps aren't cross platform... Oh, wait
That's why it's impossible to run Linux applications on windows... Oh, wait
That's why Microsoft have a browser that uses their own proprietary rendering engine instead of a standard one... Oh, wait
But yeah, Microsoft definitely are all in on vendor lock in. As soon as I think of an example I'll get right back to you
To be fair it's not for a lack of trying. I've worked for two companies where it was part of the business plan and my current company are paying a fortune because of it. It's a good plan.
-
@Jaloopa Microsoft has two valuable possessions:
- WinAPI
- MS Office formats
Both have billions (maybe trillions) of dollars worth of content that requires them, and both are locked-in tighter than a clam with lockjaw. You can't run non-trivial Windows apps without buying Windows and you can't open non-trivial MS Office documents without buying MS Office (even after they "opened" the format! Isn't that odd?).
Everything else they have and do is filler and failures. That's why they can afford to be nice and open about it.
-
@anonymous234 said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Everything else they have and do is filler and failures.
Yeah, it's not like half the software on my computer including the games depends on .NET or anything.
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@Jaloopa said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Yeah, that's why I can only use visual studio code on windows... Oh, wait
And what good it does on other platforms? It's a glorified editor for fuck sake.
That's why my .net core apps aren't cross platform... Oh, wait
Yeah, those .net core apps are really running smooth on other platforms with no UI problems whatsoever.
GitHub - AvaloniaUI/Avalonia: Develop Desktop, Embedded, Mobile and WebAssembly apps with C# and XAML. The most popular .NET UI client technology
Develop Desktop, Embedded, Mobile and WebAssembly apps with C# and XAML. The most popular .NET UI client technology - AvaloniaUI/Avalonia
That's why it's impossible to run Linux applications on windows... Oh, wait
You could have done that with cygwin ages ago when microsoft still wasn't "loving Linux".
And?
That's why Microsoft have a browser that uses their own proprietary rendering engine instead of a standard one... Oh, wait
You mean they don't still have IE11 which dominates corporate applications and now keeps popping up nag... sorry, "welcome" page asking you to reset your settings to use Bing?
Yes. Why?
But yeah, Microsoft definitely are all in on vendor lock in. As soon as I think of an example I'll get right back to you
How about Office? Sure you have Libre Office but who uses that shit? What government agencies are using Linux? Oh wait...
Not that LibreOffice works on windows or anything. Hell it's even on the Microsoft store. Also did you know that DOCX, XSLX, etc. are open standards?
Who shipped (and still ships) bundled browser and claimed (and still claims) it can't be removed because it's part of the OS? Oh wait...
Google Chrome OS.
Who paid vendors to preinstall Windows and prohibited them from installing any other OS if they wanted to get "discount"?
Was this relevant?
We had Microsoft audit last year and they found one "non-compliant" SQL instance (compliance rules not disclosed). In order to forget about it they asked my company to buy Azure services on the tune of 50,000€. They literally forced us to give up on our own physical hosting and move shit to their cloud.
Maybe don't violate the TOS.
Yeah right, no vendor lock-in at all.
Correct!
-
@pie_flavor said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Also did you know that DOCX, XSLX, etc. are open standards?
Those "open standards" tend to be undecipherable in some places if you don't have the Office source code to look it up (a lot has to do with further dependencies on vector formats and how the old Office formats used OLE structured storage).
The guys behind OpenDocument raised quite the stink when the ISO committee was proposing approval of the Office Open XML standard. However, the majority of the committee agreed that the right process was followed and the standard thus became fact.
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
GitHub - AvaloniaUI/Avalonia: Develop Desktop, Embedded, Mobile and WebAssembly apps with C# and XAML. The most popular .NET UI client technology
Develop Desktop, Embedded, Mobile and WebAssembly apps with C# and XAML. The most popular .NET UI client technology - AvaloniaUI/Avalonia
And? Does that make other .net apps which don't use it magically not look and work like shit/
Why are you asking this? It's not what he claimed. He was only talking about .Net Core.
-
@pie_flavor said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Also did you know that DOCX, XSLX, etc. are open standards?
Yeah, except for all the non-standard extensions that are allowed by those standards and that Microsoft has been making heavy use of since before the formats even became standarized, making the standard essentially useless. Not to mention deceptive marketing by calling the standard "Office Open XML" (any similarity to OpenOffice is completely accidental, for sure.)
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Who paid vendors to preinstall Windows and prohibited them from installing any other OS if they wanted to get "discount"?
I thought we were talking about "still do". That was years ago
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
@pie_flavor said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Nope, bringing up the editor as a proof on no vendor lock in was
.No, it wasn't. It's a cross-platform text editor. Cross-platform, you know, that thing that means there's no Windows lock-in.
GitHub - AvaloniaUI/Avalonia: Develop Desktop, Embedded, Mobile and WebAssembly apps with C# and XAML. The most popular .NET UI client technology
Develop Desktop, Embedded, Mobile and WebAssembly apps with C# and XAML. The most popular .NET UI client technology - AvaloniaUI/Avalonia
And? Does that make other .net apps which don't use it magically not look and work like shit/
I wasn't aware 'looks like shit' was a moniker of vendor lock-in. Swing frequently looks like shit but that doesn't mean Java has vendor lock-in (in fact the exact opposite - Swing's 'look and feel' has zero native code underneath).
And?
And running Linux apps on Windows is not a proof there is no vendor lock in. On the contrary. They want you to do everything on Windows.
Cross platform is vendor lock in. You can't make this shit up.
Yes. Why?
Why? Why what? Why do you ask stupid questions?
Yes, exactly, that's what was behind 'Why?'. 'Why do you ask stupid questions?'
Not that LibreOffice works on windows or anything. Hell it's even on the Microsoft store. Also did you know that DOCX, XSLX, etc. are open standards?
So what? Anyone doing business with anyone else is using Microsoft Office. It's a fucking standard and Libre Office is shit. File format may be open now after 30 years but people are still locked into using Microsoft Office.
'Everything else is shit' isn't at all meaningful - is this really your first foray into 'it's hard to have quality software that's also FOSS'? Oh yeah and there isn't vendor lock-in even there because MS Office supports ODF and Office is also available on OSX.
Google Chrome OS.
That's not what we were discussing here.
You asked a question and I answered it.
When my computer's internet options also change settings in a particular web browser, and when the 'webpage viewer' UI component of the OS's GUI SDK uses the renderer from that web browser, I'd consider the web browser a system component.Was this relevant?
Of course it was because it is another form of vendor lock in, how can you even ask this with a straight face you fucking Microsoft shill?
Paying you / giving you free/discounted shit is in no way a 'lock in'. It's encouragement.
Maybe don't violate the TOS.
Maybe give us a copy of the fucking TOS so we know when we are violating it?
The entire point of the TOS is that it's a legal document that you agree to. I'm pretty sure no court in the world would uphold a TOS whose content you never had access to.
With Microsoft the TOS is always changing.
Boohoo. They've got to at least notify you that the TOS changed, so where's the problem?
Also, what this has to do with punishment? If we were in breach of licensing for one SQL server instance (and I highly doubt it but whatever), how that translates into not paying a fine but into forcing us to buy Azure credits?
Fucked if I know. I highly doubt the story is true as you have recounted it and you misinterpreted what someone told you. E.g. maybe it was a fine and you got Azure credits for free as a token of goodwill.
Correct!
The only thing correct is that you are a moron.
There isn't a dab emoji and I am sad.
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
, how that translates into not paying a fine but into forcing us to buy Azure credits?
Sounds like your lawyers suck.
-
@pie_flavor said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Paying you / giving you free/discounted shit is in no way a 'lock in'. It's encouragement.
You can argue as to whether it's vendor lock in, but it was certainly abusing their monopoly position and was done to block competition from the market.
The stupidity is arguing something that happened 20 years ago as an example of why they're still teh evulz.
-
@levicki said in DEAR FIREFOX:
With Microsoft the TOS is always changing.
Less often than some companies...
-
@Jaloopa said in DEAR FIREFOX:
The stupidity is arguing something that happened 20 years ago as an example of why they're still teh evulz.
Don't you know? Never forgive, never forget!
-
@Tsaukpaetra said in DEAR FIREFOX:
Never forgive, never forget!
What are we supposed to never forgive?
I've forgotten.
-
@Jaloopa said in DEAR FIREFOX:
That's why Microsoft have a browser that uses their own proprietary rendering engine instead of a standard one... Oh, wait
you seem to have an interesting definition of the word "standard"
