OUR WEBSITE IS TOO IMPORTANT FOR ALT-TABS!



  • Caps in the title because of this little code snippet:

     

    <body bgcolor="white" onBlur="self.focus()" style="margin=0" > 

     

    This is a loading page while www.findadoc.com processes a super easy query (specialty, zip, state) for like 3 minutes. Basically if you minimize, alt-tab whatever, your browser is nice enough to ensure that the load page is always focused!

     

     



  • TRWTF is that web pages are able to perform window management functions. Especially when not all devices with web browsers even have a multitasking OS.



  •  no issue with Firefox - I can freely focus what i like during the wait-for-the-query-to-be-finished-window

    (as long i'm not too drunk to focus anything, anyway :o)



  •  Someone like me who multitasks on a computer as easily as I breathe would be absolutely driven batshit by this.  If it worked anyway, Firefox 3 apparently would now allow it to (or wasn't capable of focusing itself on the Vista desktop.)

     Twenty bucks on which browser this works on...



  • @IronFist said:

     no issue with Firefox - I can freely focus what i like during the wait-for-the-query-to-be-finished-window

    (as long i'm not too drunk to focus anything, anyway :o)

    same here with IE7



  • I hate sites that use "status=no,menubar=no,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,"   Ugh.



  • @DWalker59 said:

    I hate sites that use "status=no,menubar=no,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,"   Ugh.


    I like Opera: those options don't do anything.



  • @Carnildo said:

    @DWalker59 said:

    I hate sites that use "status=no,menubar=no,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,"   Ugh.


    I like Opera: those options don't do anything.

    That's because Opera doesn't do anything.  Those options don't work on Lynx or telnet, either.



  • @DWalker59 said:

    I hate sites that use "status=no,menubar=no,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,"   Ugh.

    I just hate popups altogether. Thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster for Tab Mix Plus's single-window mode.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    @Carnildo said:

    @DWalker59 said:

    I hate sites that use "status=no,menubar=no,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,"   Ugh.


    I like Opera: those options don't do anything.

    That's because Opera doesn't do anything.  Those options don't work on Lynx or telnet, either.

     

    Wrong, that's because it does everything so fast, you're just too slow to see it...

    i'm not using Opera for other reasons, but opposite to you, I tried it. And there are a good bunch of things one feels missing. the forementioned is one of those. it never does or changes something i don't want.

    you seem to be afraid of everything, that's not thrown at you by default.

    pitty



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    That's because Opera doesn't do anything.  Those options don't work on Lynx or telnet, either.

    @IronFist said:

    you seem to be afraid of everything, that's not thrown at you by default.

    pitty

    Commencing flame war in 5... 4... 3... 2... 1...

    Seriously though, before Morbius answers, could we maybe, just for a change, not derail this thread into yet another a vi-vs-emacs debate? This is starting to get boring.

    As for the OP, interestingly HTML 5 actually changes the definition of window.focus() to prevent such things from happening. (Even though I'd have liked "Zap the responsible lead developer with a high voltage pulse" as a new definition more.) So we can hope that this problem will vanish completely in the future.



  • @PSWorx said:

    could we maybe, just for a change, not derail this thread into yet another a vi-vs-emacs debate?

    <snip>

    I'd have liked "Zap the responsible lead developer with a high voltage pulse" as a new definition .

    But vi is better! :)

    As for punishing the developer, I'd have to go with the old "stab people in the face over the internet" suggestion. Someone publish a RFC already.

     



  • @PSWorx said:

    Seriously though, before Morbius answers, could we maybe, just for a change, not derail this thread into yet another a vi-vs-emacs debate? This is starting to get boring.

    Ha! You Linux users and your eternal VI vs Emacs debate! On Windows, everybody just uses the far-superior-to-either Notepad.



  • @PSWorx said:

    Commencing flame war in 5... 4... 3... 2... 1...
    When using emacs for the first time after using vi for a couple of years, basically had the following reaction: "You mean I can type shit in without hitting i first?  This is surprisingly annoying.



  • @MiffTheFox said:

    Ha! You Linux users and your eternal VI vs Emacs debate! On Windows, everybody just uses the far-superior-to-either Notepad.

     

     The noobs use notepad. Anyone who isn't an idiot uses edit.exe



  • I prefer ed. edlin.exe might work too.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

     @DOA said:

    As for punishing the developer, I'd have to go with the old "stab people in the face over the internet" suggestion. Someone publish a RFC already.
    If I get bored, I'll write one up. Probably do an extension to HTTP so we can have a button in our web browsers.

    The only real problem is that the RFC system these days is hugely self-serving by the IETF - it's nigh impossible for a third party developer to get anything  published in there even if it IS a fully working and implemented protocol.



  • @IronFist said:

    i'm not using Opera for other reasons, but opposite to you, I tried it.

    I use Opera quite a bit, for testing.  I've used it for many years but have never found any feature I wanted that Mozilla and Firefox didn't already have.

     

    @IronFist said:

    it never does or changes something i don't want.

    Base Firefox has options to disable window management features.  NoScript and the rest of my extensions help round it out for me.

     

    @IronFist said:

    you seem to be afraid of everything, that's not thrown at you by default.

    Clearly you know so much about me.  Let's ignore the fact that I compile my own builds of most software and that I've written some of my own Firefox extensions, amongst other things...

     

    @IronFist said:

    pitty

    I guess whatever browser you use doesn't have spellcheck.



  • @belgariontheking said:

    @PSWorx said:

    Commencing flame war in 5... 4... 3... 2... 1...
    When using emacs for the first time after using vi for a couple of years, basically had the following reaction: "You mean I can type shit in without hitting i first?  This is surprisingly annoying.

    vim definitely takes some time to get used to, but I still prefer it to any other text editor.



  • @tOmcOlins said:

    @MiffTheFox said:

    Ha! You Linux users and your eternal VI vs Emacs debate! On Windows, everybody just uses the far-superior-to-either Notepad.

     

     The noobs use notepad. Anyone who isn't an idiot uses edit.exe

     

    I didn't expect that result, but it let me discover that edit.exe is still shipped with Windows XP, complete with (c) 1995 copyright hint, so it can only be good.

    I'll still stay with cat, the one and only REAL real text editor.



  • @PSWorx said:

    I'll still stay with cat, the one and only REAL real text editor.

    I think TYPE comes close. Although it's not even a program...



  • Erm, TYPE can be used in the manner of cat > file ?

    I thought you need to do COPY CON file ...

    One feature of Opera that Firefox doesn't have? Speed. Of course it does matter only here in the Sixth World, where only the best can get something as great as P3-600, and and PII are the norm...



  • @bannedfromcoding said:

    Erm, TYPE can be used in the manner of cat > file ?

    I thought you need to do COPY CON file ...

     

    One feature of Opera that Firefox doesn't have? Speed. Of course it does matter only here in the Sixth World, where only the best can get something as great as P3-600, and and PII are the norm...

    Using Firefox 3.1b3 here and it seems quite fast so long as it hasn't been running for a long time.  That's because it leaks memory like a discount maxi-pad leaks menstrual fluid.  Supposedly the bad memory leaks from FF2 were fixed in FF3, so I'm hoping this is just because it is a beta.  Anyway, it can be fixed just by terminating the Firefox process in the OS and then restarting the browser and having it restore the open tabs and windows.  I have to do that about once every 2 days which is a pain, but hopefully it will be fixed by the time 3.5 is released.



  • @bannedfromcoding said:

    Erm, TYPE can be used in the manner of cat > file ?

    I thought you need to do COPY CON file ...

    You can do TYPE CON > file, as well.



  •  @tOmcOlins said:

    @MiffTheFox said:

    Ha! You Linux users and your eternal VI vs Emacs debate! On Windows, everybody just uses the far-superior-to-either Notepad.

     

     The noobs use notepad. Anyone who isn't an idiot uses edit.exe

    Ahem, edit.com

    Microsoft Windows XP [Version 5.1.2600]
    (C) Copyright 1985-2001 Microsoft Corp.

    C:\Documents and Settings\zemm.MYDOMAIN>edit.com

    C:\DOCUME~1\ZEMM~1.MYD>edit.exe
    'edit.exe' is not recognized as an internal or external command,
    operable program or batch file.

    C:\DOCUME~1\ZEMM~1.MYD>

    Interestingly it removes my long file names! (Domain changed to protect the guilty)

     edit.com was originally (MS-DOS 5-6.22 era) just a wrapper for qbasic.exe, to use the editor only.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @morbiuswilters said:

    Supposedly the bad memory leaks from FF2 were fixed in FF3
    I'm still waiting for them to fix the ones from when the damn thing was still called Mozilla Firebird.



  • @PSWorx said:

    I didn't expect that result, but it let me discover that edit.exe is still shipped with Windows XP, complete with (c) 1995 copyright hint, so it can only be good.
    It's still there in 32bit Vista, and probably in 32bit Windows 7, too.



  • @Master Chief said:

     Someone like me who multitasks on a computer as easily as I breathe would be absolutely driven batshit by this.  If it worked anyway, Firefox 3 apparently would now allow it to (or wasn't capable of focusing itself on the Vista desktop.)

     Twenty bucks on which browser this works on...

     

    Firefox 3.0x on linux.



  • @PSWorx said:

    As for the OP, interestingly HTML 5 actually changes the definition of window.focus() to prevent such things from happening. (Even though I'd have liked "Zap the responsible lead developer with a high voltage pulse" as a new definition more.) So we can hope that this problem will vanish completely in the future.

    Also, Windows prevents programs from stealing focus (their taskbar button flashes instead) by default since Windows 98 (though apps are only prevented from changing the setting that stops them stealing focus since Windows 2000). Of course, they're not in a position to stops one webpage from stealing focus from another within the browser (I suppose the IE team is, as far as that browser is concerned)



  • @Random832 said:

    Windows prevents programs from stealing focus (their taskbar button flashes instead) by default since Windows 98
     

    Hu?

    Programs and dialogs stealing focus is a notable issue with several windows programs. For example: the Restart Now/Later update message, and internet explorer spawning a modal dialog. Nothing in the behaviour of Windows suggests that it makes any effort to prevent focus theft.



  • @dhromed said:

    @Random832 said:

    Windows prevents programs from stealing focus (their taskbar button flashes instead) by default since Windows 98
     

    Hu?

    Programs and dialogs stealing focus is a notable issue with several windows programs. For example: the Restart Now/Later update message, and internet explorer spawning a modal dialog. Nothing in the behaviour of Windows suggests that it makes any effort to prevent focus theft.

    More accurately, you've been able to prevent programs from stealing focus since Windows 98.  To actually get it to do that, you need TweakUI, because as far as I know the setting isn't exposed anywhere in the standard UI.

     



  • @dhromed said:

    @Random832 said:

    Windows prevents programs from stealing focus (their taskbar button flashes instead) by default since Windows 98
     

    Hu?

    Programs and dialogs stealing focus is a notable issue with several windows programs. For example: the Restart Now/Later update message, and internet explorer spawning a modal dialog. Nothing in the behaviour of Windows suggests that it makes any effort to prevent focus theft.

    <speaking-out-of-my-ass>

    When a program invokes a windows API for focus, the taskbar flashes (to prevent the porn popup problem of the olden days), however when a program also sets "always on top" and no ability to minimize you are fucked.

    Fortunately always on top is not something browsers allow.

    </speaking-out-of-my-ass>

     

    So basically windows 98 has something done right that is fucked up in ubuntu 9.04? facepalm




  • @Carnildo said:

    @DWalker59 said:

    I hate sites that use "status=no,menubar=no,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,"   Ugh.


    I like Opera: those options don't do anything.
     

    The irony is that the freetard mob will spawn hatebots to bash on M$ is they dare to not make IE complient to every standard.  Then when the standard is shit and allows for shitty things like menubar=no or status=no or whatever, they immediately start raving about how good other software is because it doesn't follow the standards.



  • @tster said:

    @Carnildo said:

    @DWalker59 said:

    I hate sites that use "status=no,menubar=no,scrollbars=no,resizable=no,"   Ugh.


    I like Opera: those options don't do anything.
     

    The irony is that the freetard mob will spawn hatebots to bash on M$ is they dare to not make IE complient to every standard.  Then when the standard is shit and allows for shitty things like menubar=no or status=no or whatever, they immediately start raving about how good other software is because it doesn't follow the standards.

    +1, Insightful



  • YOU DO NOT ALT TAB THE BROWSER, THE BROWSER ALT TABS YOU



  • @DOA said:

    @PSWorx said:

    could we maybe, just for a change, not derail this thread into yet another a vi-vs-emacs debate?

    <snip>

    I'd have liked "Zap the responsible lead developer with a high voltage pulse" as a new definition .

    But vi is better! :)

    As for punishing the developer, I'd have to go with the old "stab people in the face over the internet" suggestion. Someone publish a RFC already.

     

    Real men don't use editors. They cat their code into each file, one line at a time. If a file has a mistake, they rm it and retype the whole thing. Builds character.



  • @savar said:

    Builds character.
     

    It builds something, alright.

    Rage, most likely.



  • @lolwtf said:

    TRWTF is that web pages are able to perform window management functions. Especially when not all devices with web browsers even have a multitasking OS.
     

     

    TRWTF is a non-multitasking OS is an OS that cannot allow concurrency of tasks and therefore would better called an scheduler.

     

    I think what you really mean is not all devices have a Windows manager or even a GUI. 


Log in to reply
 

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