|
|
Posted by Onideus Mad Hatter on 09/25/07 12:44
On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 23:05:53 +0100, SpaceGirl
<nothespacegirlspam@subhuman.net> wrote:
>> I type shit in the lil box I hit the lil button...how the fuck more
>> complicated do you need it to be? o_O
>That's not what I meant.
Well, you should say what you mean.
>>> I tend to shift click links that I'm interested
>>> in so that they open in new tabs so that I can read them all when I've
>>> trawled the first few results.
>>
>> ....DUH!
>>
>> http://www.backwater-productions.net/_images/_Usenet/Spacey_Duh.png
>So you're asking the user to change the configuration of their browser
>for just your site?
No, Sparkles, I'm asking them to change the configuration of their
browser for the function they want...I mean either you want stuff
opened in tabs or you don't. It doesn't make any sense to sit there
hittin an extra button every time you click a link...unless you're an
idiot.
It figures though, I mean dribblers like yourself whine on end about
the wondrous achievement of fuckin tabs, whining and snitting about
IE6 every chance you get because it doesn't have tabs...and then you
start fuckin whining about having to use the tabs all the time.
There's just no pleasing snits and that truly is the bottom line.
Snits are snits, they're unhappy, they're unpleasant and all they
really like doing is bitching. If things are one way, they want 'em
the other. If things are the other way, they want 'em back the way
they were.
>What if they want it some other way for all
>non-Flash sites? You've taken the option away from them if they are
>"forced" to check that box.
You do realize that ctrl+click will work in reverse when that box is
checked, right? Won't work in reverse with Flash stuff, but it will
with everything else, so you're not really losing any
"functionality"...and by that I mean snitting, because honestly, I
don't think I've heard a more absurd complaint since that idiot woman
outside of Wal*Mart started bitching to me about the fuckin bench
being too close to the bike rack (in her opinion).
>> *shakes head*
>>
>> I wish people would THINK more before they start typing...it would
>> make my life a lot easier.
>...not to mention when they reply.
I'm pretty sure that's what I said, Kiddo. Take notes if you can't
keep up.
>>> I also quite often use the Google cache
>>> (clicking cached results) so that google highlights the search terms
>>> in the selected document.
>> ...and how exactly would that functionality be lost?
>A function that I use (content being highlighted) is no longer
>available. How many ways can you describe "functionality lost". LOL.
The function is only "lost" if they don't bother to program it in.
Honestly Spacey, if you think something so utterly basic as a Flash
based HTML parser would anything more than child's play you're not
even half the Flash developer I imagined you as.
Ooo...that's another great project though...a Flash based HTML
browser. I'm likin that idea.
>Explain to me how to achieve the effect I demonstrated would be lost, in
>Flash. Given that Flash cannot re-render a web page...
Fuckin DUH! Just because it can't do it by default doesn't mean you
can't code yer own Flash based HTML rendering engine. Just have it
import the HTML as plain text and then have it split the text apart
based on the tags and rebuilt as Flash constructs. As I said, just
like the test XML entry on my forum prototype:
Only a bit more advanced to handle more complex tags.
>Now if we were
>talking about AIR, it would be a different story as AIR can render full
>HTML. So I could pull up someones web page, with the bits of text I'm
>searching for highlighted, and their web page still be correctly
>displayed. Not possible in Flash itself.
Not possible for YOU maybe. Don't confuse YOUR deficiency with a
deficiency of the language. Actionscript is capable of far more than
you can even begin to try and imagine.
>Lost the function to right-click and save the link, or to search on the
>word I have selected, or to save the image...
All of which is easily recreated in Flash. Again, not by default,
there's no fuckin hand holding, cookie cutter, wipe yer ass wizard to
do it for you. YOU have to code that functionality in if you want it
and it CAN be done...so long as you've got the skill...which you
obviously don't.
>Only if you force all links to behave like that in the browser.
And yet that's the way it works anyway...fuckin DUH, all the link are
going to behave in either one way or the other, the only exception is
when using a ctrl+click and even that gets reversed if you switch the
setting.
>>> 2) As Flash cannot render HTML properly, there is no way it could
>>> display cached results with the search term highlighted in them.
>>
>> Oh ye of little brain. Maybe by DEFAULT Flash can't render HTML so
>> good...but then what the fuck is stopping you from doing it yourself?
>> A nice lil collection of CSS scripts and something to parse all the
>> tags is all you need. How the fuck do you think this works:
>> http://www.backwater-productions.net/_test_platform/Forum_Template/index.swf
>Flash only supports about 10 CSS attributes... out of many hundreds. So
>you'd have to write your own CSS parser from scratch... not to mention
>and HTML parser to go along with it. Possible, but heck of an overhead.
>You'd sacrifice a great deal of speed.
Not really considering that once you made it you would be able to
reuse it for pretty much any and all future sites...not to mention you
could sell usage and make a shit load of money.
>So, now we have to write our own web browser inside Flash, along with
>CSS parsing, before we can even tackle the business of matching Google
>Searches Cache view.
Oh I'm sorry, is that too complicated for you? LOL, I thought you
were good, Spacey, not some dribbling flunkie. If you're on my level
you know damn well that wouldn't take more than a week or two of
concentrated effort to complete. And again, you'd be able to reuse it
on any and all future sites.
>Tell me how Flash can also support any JS that is
>running on that page? It can't So you have to write your own JS engine
>too. What if the page has video? You have to write your own video
>engine... LOL. Flash cannot re-render external pages with all the content :)
Um, neither can Google's cache search, Sparkles
>In other words... not going to happen. Means we cannot match the
>functionality of Googles Cache view.
Sure we can, Google's cache view is practically limited to only the
plain text of an old site. Very rarely is much else still left
intact, maybe some pictures. The point of Google's cache search is
the TEXT of the site, not a cache of the site itself you bumbling
idiot. I swear, I'm really starting to wonder if you've ever even
used Google's cache search before.
>>> 3) Mouse wheel only works in Windows, it's not supported in the other
>>> players (so much for cross browser)
>> http://blog.pixelbreaker.com/flash/swfmacmousewheel/
>>
>> DUH!
>Requires JavaScript to work, which is reliant on the client browser
>supplying it. So much for Flash being cross platform...?
That's "javascript", do note the lack of capitals. And javascript
works on all major browsers on all major operating systems and is
enabled on all of them by default, so I don't know what the fuck yer
babbling about.
>> ...although really, who would waste the fuckin bother for, what, 5% of
>> Mac lusers? LOL
>10%, of a market that is growing.
Yeah, keep dreamin, Sunshine. I've been hearing that 'ol line for
fuckin DECADES now. You doorknob zealots really do need to learn to
give it a fuckin rest already. I mean, yer revolution didn't happen,
it just didn't. It didn't happen, it's not going to happen and quit
fuckin jackin yerself off to the fantasy until it comes true (which
will be never).
>Mostly home users, and home users with
>money, who are more likely to buy products online (rather than users
>with cheap PCs, lower tech, less money to spend or they would have got a
>better computer... horrible generalization I know :P)
Pretty much as backwards as it gets really. The only thing Macs are
good for is Mac Trendies...Gavin wannabes, suckin down lattes, dreamin
about bigger logos and typin along on their lil prefab, cookie cutter
web blogs about how "hip" and "mainstream" they think are...totally
outside the box, totally non-conformist. *nods*
Most home users buy their computers at Staples and Wal*Mart. They're
cheap, they're easy and best of all they're disposable. If something
goes wrong with it in a few years, hey, just go get another. To your
average computer user a Mac is more of a burden than anything and
nearly every new, first time, Mac buyer out there will wind up buying
a PC as their second system once they learn that the Mac hype isn't
all it's cracked up to be. The number of FORMER Mac users is just
fuckin staggering. The number of FORMER PC users is...practically
nonexistent. The ONLY people who stick with Macs are Mac Zealots.
>>> 4) No right-click at all in Flash 9 player, on any platform.
>> http://www.adobe.com/devnet/captivate/articles/right_click.html
>>
>> DUH!
>That's Flash 8 honey. As far as I know, right click has been disabled in
>Flash 9, all versions.
First I've heard that. Not that it matters. You do realize you're
not actually restricted to any particular version of Flash when
exporting, right?
>>> 5) Flash won't work on my cell phone - it only supports Flash Lite,
>>> but is very basic. Flash is also very very slow on my phone. Google is
>>> lightening fast.
>>
>> I never said the thing would be for your cell phone, or for your
>Google Search works on my phone. Flash doesn't. That's another loss of
>functionality (not to mention another blow for cross-platform support).
Google Search for you phone isn't even the same fucking site for your
computer you idiot fuck!
http://www.google.mobi
Fuckin DUH!
You're essentially trying to argue apples and oranges. Google, the
Google you use to search on your computer is NOT COMPATIBLE with yer
cell phone you fuckin retard.
>> fuckin toaster or for your gawd damn shitting vibrator or whatever the
>> fuck else they're trying franken-bitch into a computer these days.
>> Not that it matters, I'm more than confident that within the next five
>> years they'll have the full version of Flash for cell phones, toasters
>> and even yer lil vibrator, Honey Bunny.
>Absolutely, we're not far off that at all. But for now all we have is
>Flash Lite, which is pretty limited in functionality.
As is the current Google mobile search engine.
>> And trying to bitch that you can't use
>> Flash on your cell phone makes about as much sense as bitching that
>> you can't use Flash on your barbeque. Let me know when they manage to
>That wasn't the point. I don't expect Flash to work on my phone. My
>phone is crap! But even a crap phone can display regular HTML pages, so
>google works just fine as it is.
No, you idiot fuck, your crap ass cell phone CANNOT DISPLAY REGULAR
HTML PAGES. It can display a bastardized, limited, botched together,
hobble of HTML that simply won't work on any fuckin site that wasn't
specifically designed for cell phones and 10 times out of 10 on a
..mobi domain.
>You claimed that Google can be recreated in Flash without loss of
>functionality. I'm just pointing out why this is not possible.
And I'm just pointing out why you're an idiot.
>> Is that a challenge? He, he, he...
>Sure! Why not? I don't think it can be done at all, but as usual with
>these things I'm very open minded. I really think Flash is The
>technology right now, which is why I work with it so much. Anything that
>proves it can replace HTML *and* be better at the task is a Good Thing
>as far as I'm concerned.
>
>If you crack the google cache trick, I'd be intrigued. I'm pretty
>confident that until Flash gets a full HTML render, it's not possible
>though.
Yes, because it'll be *SO* complicated to build a parse engine that
can extract all the text out of an HTML page. *rolls eyes*
Again, I really don't think you've ever even used Google's cache
search before, because the only fuckin thing it does most of the time
and the only fuckin thing it was even designed for in the first place
is to cache the text content...nothing more than that.
>>> However, you could argue that you could add new functionality instead.
>>> Personally I think Google Search is very very good at what it does;
>>> I'm not sure what Flash could add to that.
>>
>> Believe me, I'm not surprised. I mean, you haven't even figured out
>> how to save yourself the effort of holding down the shift key when you
>> click a link fer Christ sake.
>I dont always want links to open in new tabs. How stupid would that be?
About as stupid as complaining that IE6 doesn't support tabs. Again,
yer a snit, so yer just not happy either way. I mean people like you
just need a continual online tampon so you can keep bitching without
interruption.
>I'd rather have the choice of when it happens. If I want a new tab, I
>middle click a link and the link opens in a new tab.
Middle click, huh? So now you're claiming that all computer mice have
a middle button, eh? Uh oh, did I spot some hypocrisy in your snit
fit? I think that I did. The same worthless, idiot "arguments" you
had about the option setting can just as easily be applied to your
ASSumption that every person on the planet has a middle mouse button.
>If I want it in a
>new window I shift+click which opens a brand new window. if I'm casually
>browsing I just click and it replaces the current window.
Why wouldn't you just do it all in tabs?
>What you are suggesting is I loose all that functionality
No, see stupid, YOUR the one whose losing functionality. The GAINED
functionality, the "UPGRADE" from IE6 was TABS. The whole basis of
the argument was that tabs are superior in every way to new windows.
So really, all your middle click is doing (or lack of middle click
depending on how you have it setup) is LOSING the functionality gained
through tabs. Essentially, what you're complaining about is the
inability to lose functionality...which makes no fuckin sense at all
unless yer just some dumb fuckin snit bitch lookin to bellyache about
shit.
>>> Take BiteSizedJapan - the front end is a bleeding edge Flash 9 stuff,
>>> packed with video and nice animation and stacks of lovely content. The
>>> back end is WordPress (PHP), an in house content manager (ASP classic,
>>> HTML, XML) and a .NET XML bridges (C#, XML). It would be a complete
>>> nightmare to build all those tools in Flash - not worth the effort
>>> when we can plug in free things like WP, or build our own server-side
>>> stuff easily.
>> Like I said, use Flash as the front end, use other stuff for the
>> backend. But using antideluvian forms like HTML for your backend
>> instead of say XML...that's just fuckin retarded.
>?? Um. XML is a data container.
Um, so is HTML. HTML isn't a programming language, it's a MARKUP
language.
>We have HTML admin pages (forms) that post all the content to the
>database. Flash request the data from the database and gets and XML
>stream in return... which is nice and easy for Flash to digest.
>
>You really expect our writers and content providers to write XML!?
>You're crazier than I thought :)
No, I expect a Flash front end form to send the data to a PHP script
which will then convert it into an XML document and save it to the
server.
--
Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ¹ x ¹
http://www.backwater-productions.net
http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog
Hatter Quotes
-------------
"You're only one of the best if you're striving to become one of the
best."
"I didn't make reality, Sunshine, I just verbally bitch slapped you
with it."
"I'm not a professional, I'm an artist."
"Your Usenet blinders are my best friend."
"Usenet Filters - Learn to shut yourself the fuck up!"
"Drugs killed Jesus you know...oh wait, no, that was the Jews, my
bad."
"There are clingy things in the grass...burrs 'n such...mmmm..."
"The more I learn the more I'm killing my idols."
"Is it wrong to incur and then use the hate ridden, vengeful stupidity
of complete strangers in random Usenet froups to further my art?"
"Freedom is only a concept, like race it's merely a social construct
that doesn't really exist outside of your ability to convince others
of its relevancy."
"Next time slow up a lil, then maybe you won't jump the gun and start
creamin yer panties before it's time to pop the champagne proper."
"Reality is directly proportionate to how creative you are."
"People are pretty fucking high on themselves if they think that
they're just born with a soul. *snicker*...yeah, like they're just
givin em out for free."
"Quible, quible said the Hare. Quite a lot of quibling...everywhere.
So the Hare took a long stare and decided at best, to leave the rest,
to their merry little mess."
"There's a difference between 'bad' and 'so earth shatteringly
horrible it makes the angels scream in terror as they violently rip
their heads off, their blood spraying into the faces of a thousand
sweet innocent horrified children, who will forever have the terrible
images burned into their tiny little minds'."
"How sad that you're such a poor judge of style that you can't even
properly gauge the artistic worth of your own efforts."
"Those who record history are those who control history."
"I am the living embodiment of hell itself in all its tormentive rage,
endless suffering, unfathomable pain and unending horror...but you
don't get sent to me...I come for you."
"Ideally in a fight I'd want a BGM-109A with a W80 250 kiloton
tactical thermonuclear fusion based war head."
"Tell me, would you describe yourself more as a process or a
function?"
"Apparently this group has got the market cornered on stupid.
Intelligence is down 137 points across the board and the forecast
indicates an increase in Webtv users."
"Is my .sig delimiter broken? Really? You're sure? Awww,
gee...that's too bad...for YOU!" `, )
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|