302 Fuck You



  • Go read this article (or at least pretend to): http://blogs.msdn.com/b/embedded/archive/2006/03/04/543141.aspx

    Spoiler: After the page finishes loading completely, it sends you off to a completely different page. I can't even figure out how it does this. It's not a HTTP 3xx code (obviously), nor JavaScript, nor any <meta http-equiv="Refresh"> that I can find.

    Either way it's an immensely satisfying user experience. A+ would link again.




  • @Faxmachinen said:

    nor any <meta http-equiv="Refresh"> that I can find
    Line 36:
    <meta http-equiv=refresh content="0; url=http://blogs.msdn.com/b/windows-embedded/" />
    Pretty stupid thing to put in a page, when the page actually contains a proper article not contained on the subsequent page. Perhaps it's an annoying SEO trick; lots of articles pointing to the desired target page, search engine results bring people to the original pages by actually having what they are searching for, screw the user, at least they are now your captive audience.

    P.S. try disabling automatic redirection in your browser, if there is a way to do so.



  • @TarquinWJ said:

    @Faxmachinen said:
    nor any <meta http-equiv="Refresh"> that I can find
    Line 36:
    <meta http-equiv=refresh content="0; url=http://blogs.msdn.com/b/windows-embedded/" />... try disabling automatic redirection in your browser, if there is a way to do so.

    I feel like browsers should prompt you if they're going to redirect. I guess it's something nobody thought of.



  • @Shoreline said:

    I feel like browsers should prompt you if they're going to redirect.
     

    I don't know about IE or Chrome, but Firefox has that option, and while it's enlightening to see how many banners do a redirect of some sort which is of course foiled; it gets annoying for regular systems that you log in for which usually have redirects as well. So I turned it off again.



  • @Shoreline said:

    @TarquinWJ said:
    @Faxmachinen said:
    nor any <meta http-equiv="Refresh"> that I can find
    Line 36:
    <meta http-equiv=refresh content="0; url=http://blogs.msdn.com/b/windows-embedded/" />... try disabling automatic redirection in your browser, if there is a way to do so.

    I feel like browsers should prompt you if they're going to redirect. I guess it's something nobody thought of.

    I suspect that excluding images, CSS and scripts, at least 40% of all HTTP requests are actually redirects. It's not just SEO: I also blame smartphones and Facebook.



  • This is a new low for Microsoft. Usually they wait to switch the pages around for when you aren't looking.



  • Interestingly, it didn't seem to work for me (Safari). So I had a quick glance at the article and comments, opened up the source, looked at the line with the refresh, and wondered "why isn't this working?". Only then it forwarded me to the other page. I guess it simply took that frigging long for all the resources to be loaded. Great speeds, at Microsoft.



  • @Evo said:

    I guess it simply took that frigging long for all the resources to be loaded. Great speeds, at Microsoft.
     @Evo said:
    (Safari)
    I think I found your problem.



  • @Shoreline said:

    @TarquinWJ said:
    @Faxmachinen said:
    nor any <meta http-equiv="Refresh"> that I can find
    Line 36:
    <meta http-equiv=refresh content="0; url=http://blogs.msdn.com/b/windows-embedded/" />... try disabling automatic redirection in your browser, if there is a way to do so.

    I feel like browsers should prompt you if they're going to redirect. I guess it's something nobody thought of.

    Plenty web apps use timed refreshes like this to do things like keep content up to date where ajax isn't convenient such as 3rd party cross-domain craziness where the the 3rd party doesn't have a JSONP callback ability. Likewise any of those "the browser will redirect in 5 seconds" on payment gateways also use this. It would be annoying if you were prompted every 2 seconds about being redirected.



  • @Soviut said:

    @Shoreline said:
    @TarquinWJ said:
    @Faxmachinen said:
    nor any <meta http-equiv="Refresh"> that I can find
    Line 36:
    <meta http-equiv=refresh content="0; url=http://blogs.msdn.com/b/windows-embedded/" />... try disabling automatic redirection in your browser, if there is a way to do so.

    I feel like browsers should prompt you if they're going to redirect. I guess it's something nobody thought of.

    Plenty web apps use timed refreshes like this to do things like keep content up to date where ajax isn't convenient such as 3rd party cross-domain craziness where the the 3rd party doesn't have a JSONP callback ability. Likewise any of those "the browser will redirect in 5 seconds" on payment gateways also use this. It would be annoying if you were prompted every 2 seconds about being redirected.

    I can't think of a single situation where refreshing the page automatically is better than JavaScript or doing nothing at all. As for the "your browser will redirect in 5 seconds" pages, I have yet to find a reason for their existence.



  • @Ben L. said:

    I can't think of a single situation where refreshing the page automatically is better than JavaScript or doing nothing at all. As for the "your browser will redirect in 5 seconds" pages, I have yet to find a reason for their existence.

    When you have a web page that is a basic form used to update stuff like profile information, using the "your browser will redirect in 5 seconds" (paired with a shortcut link) approach is a low-cost solution to give feedback to the user and let them know the update was successful. It's not the best thing in the world but it's a quick and dirty solution that does the job.



  • @Ronald said:

    @Ben L. said:
    I can't think of a single situation where refreshing the page automatically is better than JavaScript or doing nothing at all. As for the "your browser will redirect in 5 seconds" pages, I have yet to find a reason for their existence.

    When you have a web page that is a basic form used to update stuff like profile information, using the "your browser will redirect in 5 seconds" (paired with a shortcut link) approach is a low-cost solution to give feedback to the user and let them know the update was successful. It's not the best thing in the world but it's a quick and dirty solution that does the job.

    As opposed to, I dunno, returning them to a page that contains the information they changed. In the case of a password change, you obviously wouldn't show the new password. Is it really that hard to add ?success=1 to the URL and show a message?



  • @Ben L. said:

    @Ronald said:
    @Ben L. said:
    I can't think of a single situation where refreshing the page automatically is better than JavaScript or doing nothing at all. As for the "your browser will redirect in 5 seconds" pages, I have yet to find a reason for their existence.

    When you have a web page that is a basic form used to update stuff like profile information, using the "your browser will redirect in 5 seconds" (paired with a shortcut link) approach is a low-cost solution to give feedback to the user and let them know the update was successful. It's not the best thing in the world but it's a quick and dirty solution that does the job.

    As opposed to, I dunno, returning them to a page that contains the information they changed. In the case of a password change, you obviously wouldn't show the new password. Is it really that hard to add ?success=1 to the URL and show a message?

    Why "as opposed to"? You said you have yet to find a reason for that refresh approach, I provided one. In the absence of a specific requirement, arguing that it's better to redirect the client to yet another page to show a message instead of showing him a message then redirect him automatically just shows once again that you are a narrow-minded contrarian with sub-par skills.

    ?success=1. Really? When you want to get technical, you should stick to golang links that nobody clicks on, at least that would make it less obvious that you are an idiot.



  • @Ronald said:

    @Ben L. said:
    @Ronald said:
    @Ben L. said:
    I can't think of a single situation where refreshing the page automatically is better than JavaScript or doing nothing at all. As for the "your browser will redirect in 5 seconds" pages, I have yet to find a reason for their existence.

    When you have a web page that is a basic form used to update stuff like profile information, using the "your browser will redirect in 5 seconds" (paired with a shortcut link) approach is a low-cost solution to give feedback to the user and let them know the update was successful. It's not the best thing in the world but it's a quick and dirty solution that does the job.

    As opposed to, I dunno, returning them to a page that contains the information they changed. In the case of a password change, you obviously wouldn't show the new password. Is it really that hard to add ?success=1 to the URL and show a message?

    Why "as opposed to"? You said you have yet to find a reason for that refresh approach, I provided one that made no sense and was refuted in the next post.

    FTFY


  • @Ben L. said:

    @Ronald said:
    @Ben L. said:
    @Ronald said:
    @Ben L. said:
    I can't think of a single situation where refreshing the page automatically is better than JavaScript or doing nothing at all. As for the "your browser will redirect in 5 seconds" pages, I have yet to find a reason for their existence.

    When you have a web page that is a basic form used to update stuff like profile information, using the "your browser will redirect in 5 seconds" (paired with a shortcut link) approach is a low-cost solution to give feedback to the user and let them know the update was successful. It's not the best thing in the world but it's a quick and dirty solution that does the job.

    As opposed to, I dunno, returning them to a page that contains the information they changed. In the case of a password change, you obviously wouldn't show the new password. Is it really that hard to add ?success=1 to the URL and show a message?

    Why "as opposed to"? You said you have yet to find a reason for that refresh approach, I provided one that made no sense and was refuted in the next post.

    FTFY

    It has not been "refuted". You simply brought up a different approach that was in no way disproving anything. That's like saying: it's not possible to use POST because you can use GET. So if we were to locate your post in the Graham's hierarchy of Disagreement, it would go in the "Contradiction" layer.

    Which is not that bad in the context of this forum, and probably the best we can expect from you. Keep going, every post you make is increasing the relative quality of other people's comments so you are actually helping the community.



  • @Ronald said:

    @Ben L. said:
    @Ronald said:
    @Ben L. said:
    @Ronald said:
    @Ben L. said:
    I can't think of a single situation where refreshing the page automatically is better than JavaScript or doing nothing at all. As for the "your browser will redirect in 5 seconds" pages, I have yet to find a reason for their existence.

    When you have a web page that is a basic form used to update stuff like profile information, using the "your browser will redirect in 5 seconds" (paired with a shortcut link) approach is a low-cost solution to give feedback to the user and let them know the update was successful. It's not the best thing in the world but it's a quick and dirty solution that does the job.

    As opposed to, I dunno, returning them to a page that contains the information they changed. In the case of a password change, you obviously wouldn't show the new password. Is it really that hard to add ?success=1 to the URL and show a message?

    Why "as opposed to"? You said you have yet to find a reason for that refresh approach, I provided one that made no sense and was refuted in the next post.

    FTFY

    It has not been "refuted". You simply brought up a different approach that was in no way disproving anything. That's like saying: it's not possible to use POST because you can use GET. So if we were to locate your post in the Graham's hierarchy of Disagreement, it would go in the "Contradiction" layer.

    Which is not that bad in the context of this forum, and probably the best we can expect from you. Keep going, every post you make is increasing the relative quality of other people's comments so you are actually helping the community.

    That's a pretty nice example of an Ad Hominem you have right there. Also, you posted the wrong image. In a previous thread, we decided on this:



  • @Ben L. said:

    @Ronald said:
    @Ben L. said:
    @Ronald said:
    @Ben L. said:
    @Ronald said:
    @Ben L. said:
    I can't think of a single situation where refreshing the page automatically is better than JavaScript or doing nothing at all. As for the "your browser will redirect in 5 seconds" pages, I have yet to find a reason for their existence.

    When you have a web page that is a basic form used to update stuff like profile information, using the "your browser will redirect in 5 seconds" (paired with a shortcut link) approach is a low-cost solution to give feedback to the user and let them know the update was successful. It's not the best thing in the world but it's a quick and dirty solution that does the job.

    As opposed to, I dunno, returning them to a page that contains the information they changed. In the case of a password change, you obviously wouldn't show the new password. Is it really that hard to add ?success=1 to the URL and show a message?

    Why "as opposed to"? You said you have yet to find a reason for that refresh approach, I provided one that made no sense and was refuted in the next post.

    FTFY

    It has not been "refuted". You simply brought up a different approach that was in no way disproving anything. That's like saying: it's not possible to use POST because you can use GET. So if we were to locate your post in the Graham's hierarchy of Disagreement, it would go in the "Contradiction" layer.

    That's a pretty nice example of an Ad Hominem you have right there.

    No it's not. The problem is that you've been raised as a little spoiled prince by your mom who probably still tell you how wonderful you are every day, and because of that you are unable to entertain the notion that people who disagree with you may be right.

    I don't think this forum is the right medication to fix this flaw in your character, but I am confident that after you hit a few roadblocks in the workplace (if you ever work with other people) you will know better. Good luck.



  • @Ben L. said:

    That's a pretty nice example of an Ad Hominem you have right there.
     

    That's not Ad Hominem, it's clearly Responding To Tone.



  • @Ronald said:

    No it's not. The problem is that you've been raised as a little spoiled prince by your mom who probably still tell you how wonderful you are every day, and because of that you are unable to entertain the notion that people who disagree with you may be right.

    I don't think this forum is the right medication to fix this flaw in your character, but I am confident that after you hit a few roadblocks in the workplace (if you ever work with other people) you will know better. Good luck.

    That's, uhm... tenth thread in the last couple of weeks that has (d)evolved into Ronald and Ben trading insults? Do you guys have some kind of secret gay romance you're vehemently in denial of?



  • @Maciejasjmj said:

    @Ronald said:

    No it's not. The problem is that you've been raised as a little spoiled prince by your mom who probably still tell you how wonderful you are every day, and because of that you are unable to entertain the notion that people who disagree with you may be right.

    I don't think this forum is the right medication to fix this flaw in your character, but I am confident that after you hit a few roadblocks in the workplace (if you ever work with other people) you will know better. Good luck.

    That's, uhm... tenth thread in the last couple of weeks that has (d)evolved into Ronald and Ben trading insults? Do you guys have some kind of secret gay romance you're vehemently in denial of?

    If you were paying attention you would know that Ben L's vision of romance exclusively involves brutally ass-raping cats (he pays a monthly bribe to the cat shelter lady so she looks the other way while he's "playing" with the cats).

    Also:



  • @dhromed said:

    @Ben L. said:

    That's a pretty nice example of an Ad Hominem you have right there.
     

    That's not Ad Hominem, it's clearly Responding To Tone.

     

    No it's not, ass hat.

     



  • @Ronald said:

    If you were paying attention you would know that Ben L's vision of romance exclusively involves brutally ass-raping cats (he pays a monthly bribe to the cat shelter lady so she looks the other way while he's "playing" with the cats).
     

    You keep dropping tiers on that piramyd. Pyramid. Pryramyd. Pryamdid. Dirpryammyid. ipritupmaid. rpirymrpirym

    prpr myrpr  i ypr iymrpyiryipmpriymrydprimydrpiryd rdpimr

     

    prmryjku

     

    asdfj



  • @Ben L. said:


    That picture made me realize that morbiuswilters is gone again.

    Sometimes we don't notice the good things we have. We take them from granted, not realizing that tomorrow they could be gone. Take some time to appreciate them.



  • @Ronald said:

     

    FTFY

     



  • @Ronald said:

    @Maciejasjmj said:
    @Ronald said:

    No it's not. The problem is that you've been raised as a little spoiled prince by your mom who probably still tell you how wonderful you are every day, and because of that you are unable to entertain the notion that people who disagree with you may be right.

    I don't think this forum is the right medication to fix this flaw in your character, but I am confident that after you hit a few roadblocks in the workplace (if you ever work with other people) you will know better. Good luck.

    That's, uhm... tenth thread in the last couple of weeks that has (d)evolved into Ronald and Ben trading insults? Do you guys have some kind of secret gay romance you're vehemently in denial of?

    If you were paying attention you would know that Ben L's vision of romance exclusively involves brutally ass-raping cats (he pays a monthly bribe to the cat shelter lady so she looks the other way while he's "playing" with the cats).

    You know, I can hook you up with a costume...

    prpr myrpr i ypr iymrpyiryipmpriymrydprimydrpiryd rdpimr

    prmryjku<br >

    asdfj

    I'm wondering how high "spewing random gibberish" is on this pyramid.


  • Winner of the 2016 Presidential Election

    @Maciejasjmj said:

    @Ronald said:
    @Maciejasjmj said:
    @Ronald said:

    No it's not. The problem is that you've been raised as a little spoiled prince by your mom who probably still tell you how wonderful you are every day, and because of that you are unable to entertain the notion that people who disagree with you may be right.

    I don't think this forum is the right medication to fix this flaw in your character, but I am confident that after you hit a few roadblocks in the workplace (if you ever work with other people) you will know better. Good luck.

    That's, uhm... tenth thread in the last couple of weeks that has (d)evolved into Ronald and Ben trading insults? Do you guys have some kind of secret gay romance you're vehemently in denial of?

    If you were paying attention you would know that Ben L's vision of romance exclusively involves brutally ass-raping cats (he pays a monthly bribe to the cat shelter lady so she looks the other way while he's "playing" with the cats).

    You know, I can hook you up with a costume...

    Only "gently" used?


  • @joe.edwards said:

    Only "gently" used?

    Fresh as new, not even a single stain*



  • @Maciejasjmj said:

    @joe.edwards said:
    Only "gently" used?

    Fresh as new, not even a single stain*

    Is that you in your costume? Your parents look thrilled by your lifestyle.



  • @spamcourt said:

    That picture made me realize that morbiuswilters is gone again.

    Sometimes we don't notice the good things we have. We take them from granted, not realizing that tomorrow they could be gone. Take some time to appreciate them.

    He's not gone, he's using another account. He told a bunch of us at the latest GT on the east coast. There is a pretty obvious hint in the thread about Firefox.



  • @Maciejasjmj said:

    I'm wondering how high "spewing random gibberish" is on this pyramid.
     

    You should talk, with a name like that.



  • @spamcourt said:

    That picture made me realize that morbiuswilters is gone again.

    Sometimes we don't notice the good things we have.

    So, where do non-sequiturs come on that pyramid?



  • @DaveK said:

    So, where do non-sequiturs come on that pyramid?
     

    It's a different pyramid next to it.



  • @Ronald said:

    @Maciejasjmj said:
    @joe.edwards said:
    Only "gently" used?

    Fresh as new, not even a single stain*

    Is that you in your costume? Your parents look thrilled by your lifestyle.

    [removed saucy image]

    Hey guys, what's going on in this thread?


  • @Ronald said:

    Is that you in your costume? Your parents look thrilled by your lifestyle.
     

    Maybe I just know to many weird old bearded dudes, but I think those people look familiar.

    ...

    Don't know what that says about anyone involved. :|


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.