Coffeehouse Thread

36 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Duncan ... you care to explain ?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    Zeus

    From Twitter:

    Duncanma wrote:
    just finished shipping code to Channel 9 that makes me feel dirty... first time in this group I've deployed code that I strongly objected to

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    I wonder if this is related.

    Some Anti-Silverlight or Anti-Firefox conspiracy doing the rounds?

  • User profile image
    irascian

    Shouldn't you guys be discussing this offline?

    I know C9 is all about being more "open" and all, but really there are times when washing dirty laundry should be done in private (or using the original launderette, not moved to the big flash one where everyone can see in the windows and there are security cameras recording everything going on).

  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    I just read this page and was wondering why Silverlight was broken and most of the pages wouldn't load, and I was about to give up in dispair when I realized I'd disabled Javascript for Firefox last night.

    While this means bad kudos on me rather than you, it's pretty shocking how much of this site simply doesn't work when Javascript is gone.

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    evildictaitor wrote:
    I just read this page and was wondering why Silverlight was broken and most of the pages wouldn't load, and I was about to give up in dispair when I realized I'd disabled Javascript for Firefox last night.

    While this means bad kudos on me rather than you, it's pretty shocking how much of this site simply doesn't work when Javascript is gone.


    The C9 guys have stated, repeatedly, in messenger conversations with me, that client scripting is a requirement for visitors since they cannot cost-justify development of a non-scripted version.

    I don't think this is related. Duncan actually works on the "backend" stuff, Erk (HumanCompiler) works on the frontend.

  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    W3bbo wrote:
    
    The C9 guys have stated, repeatedly, in messenger conversations with me, that client scripting is a requirement for visitors since they cannot cost-justify development of a non-scripted version.


    A requirement for the videos and forum editing, maybe, but for getting to a specific page in a multipage thread? No. I like being able to open a page in tabs, and their abuse of __doPostBack breaks it for me.

    And the worst part? They already have the mechnism to get rid of it.

    Inside a multipage thread (e.g. this one) the code to move the page 2 is javascript:__doPostBack('template$_ctl0$PostThroneView$_ctl0$Pager1$2','').

    But from the main forum thread page, it's the non-javascripted:

    http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PageIndex=2&PostID=374208#374208

    (Note the PageIndex=2).

    Now if they can't cost-justify replacing that because of the huge cost of rebuilding the backend, then frankly my view of their competence is somewhat reduced.

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    evildictaitor wrote:
    
    W3bbo wrote:
    
    The C9 guys have stated, repeatedly, in messenger conversations with me, that client scripting is a requirement for visitors since they cannot cost-justify development of a non-scripted version.


    A requirement for the videos and forum editing, maybe, but for getting to a specific page in a multipage thread? No. I like being able to open a page in tabs, and their abuse of __doPostBack breaks it for me.

    And the worst part? They already have the mechnism to get rid of it.

    Inside a multipage thread (e.g. this one) the code to move the page 2 is javascript:__doPostBack('template$_ctl0$PostThroneView$_ctl0$Pager1$2','').

    But from the main forum thread page, it's the non-javascripted:

    http://channel9.msdn.com/ShowPost.aspx?PageIndex=2&PostID=374208#374208

    (Note the PageIndex=2).

    Now if they can't cost-justify replacing that because of the huge cost of rebuilding the backend, then frankly my view of their competence is somewhat reduced.


    In this incarnation, it's brought about by the monolithic codebase of Community Server and their control library, they're bad at this sort of thing.

    It would take too long to replace or redevelop it in a way Microsoft would approve of. So just keep quiet and wait for C9v4 before complaining.

  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    W3bbo wrote:
    
    In this incarnation, it's brought about by the monolithic codebase of Community Server and their control library, they're bad at this sort of thing.

    It would take too long to replace or redevelop it in a way Microsoft would approve of. So just keep quiet and wait for C9v4 before complaining.


    Right. That's scheduled here to happen after they invent the pig-jet pack, global cooling hits all of hell and the second, third and fourth coming of Christ.

    How long have we been waiting for C9 v4 now? Why can't they just fix this one?

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    evildictaitor wrote:
    
    W3bbo wrote:
    
    In this incarnation, it's brought about by the monolithic codebase of Community Server and their control library, they're bad at this sort of thing.

    It would take too long to replace or redevelop it in a way Microsoft would approve of. So just keep quiet and wait for C9v4 before complaining.


    Right. That's scheduled here to happen after they invent the pig-jet pack, global cooling hits all of hell and the second, third and fourth coming of Christ.

    How long have we been waiting for C9 v4 now? Why can't they just fix this one?


    A while ago, HumanCompiler posed a challenge to me: that if I was able to hack into the C9 servers, Microsoft would take what I had to say seriously (or words to the effect of). (yes, I have the chatlogs to prove it).

    Ladies and Gentlemen, I have hatched a plot to root the C9 web farm servers. However I'll need $500, a Skype account, and 8-10 business days.

    /seriously
    //yarly

  • User profile image
    Lloyd_Humph

    W3bbo wrote:
    

    A while ago, HumanCompiler posed a challenge to me: that if I was able to hack into the C9 servers, Microsoft would take what I had to say seriously (or words to the effect of). (yes, I have the chatlogs to prove it).

    Ladies and Gentlemen, I have hatched a plot to root the C9 web farm servers. However I'll need $500, a Skype account, and 8-10 business days.

    /seriously
    //yarly


    Go for it Big Smile

    If Blackberrys are addictive cellphones, Channel9 is the ultimate addictive website.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    Cannot​Resolve​Symbol

    CompGuy101 wrote:
    [quote user="W3bbo"][quote user="evildictaitor"]W3bbo wrote:In this incarnation, it's brought about by the monolithic codebase of Community Server and their control library, they're bad at this sort of thing.It would take too long to replace or redevelop it in a way Microsoft would approve of. So just keep quiet and wait for C9v4 before complaining.Right. That's scheduled here to happen after they invent the pig-jet pack, global cooling hits all of hell and the second, third and fourth coming of Christ.How long have we been waiting for C9 v4 now? Why can't they just fix this one?[ /quote]A while ago, HumanCompiler posed a challenge to me: that if I was able to hack into the C9 servers, Microsoft would take what I had to say seriously (or words to the effect of). (yes, I have the chatlogs to prove it).Ladies and Gentlemen, I have hatched a plot to root the C9 web farm servers. However I'll need $500, a Skype account, and 8-10 business days./seriously//yarly[ /quote] $500 for what? Perhaps we should donate if you really need the money. Wouldnt you be hacking into orcasweb or whatever instead of microsoft?


    If you're on Safari, enable the Debug menu and change your User Agent to Firefox 2...  the rich text editor will work right then.

    If you're on Opera, you're just screwed.

    On topic, I'd be wary of hacking into C9, even if the developers said you could.  You have no assurance from OrcsWeb that they wouldn't pursue legal action against you (and I don't know if Erik's word is good enough to protect you, with OrcsWeb being a separate company and all).

  • User profile image
    jsampsonPC

    irascian wrote:
    Shouldn't you guys be discussing this offline?


    I agree. We've all got to have a place where we can go and vent. And if there's somebody waiting to bring in our trash and show it to the family it really isn't helpful.

    Besides, Duncan was probably refering to the following:

    body.c9v4 {
      background-color: brown;
    }

    Smiley

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    CannotResolveSymbol wrote:
    On topic, I'd be wary of hacking into C9, even if the developers said you could.  You have no assurance from OrcsWeb that they wouldn't pursue legal action against you (and I don't know if Erik's word is good enough to protect you, with OrcsWeb being a separate company and all).


    I know, that's why I have zero intention of proceeding.

    That said, I did test out my planned approach on my own dedicated servers, and it worked. (btw, it was a technical approach, not social-engineering or anything) but since it relied on the way the company operates, it might not work with OrcsWeb, so it would be a lost $500, hence me not willing to put my money on the line Wink

    Still, if/when I get my arse in through the door at MS(R) I'll get into it through the official channels, without actually telling Erik I'm an employee Wink

  • User profile image
    Human​Compiler

    You guys have too much time on your hands.  [A]  Go write something cool.  Smiley

  • User profile image
    Duncanma

    W3bbo wrote:
    I wonder if this is related.

    Some Anti-Silverlight or Anti-Firefox conspiracy doing the rounds?


    Nope, nothing to do with that... the change I shipped out was only on the home page. And due to some CSS styling issues in IE7 it was rolled back at this point.

    There is definitely no Anti- anything conspiracy Smiley

  • User profile image
    ScanIAm

    Duncanma wrote:
    
    W3bbo wrote:
    I wonder if this is related.

    Some Anti-Silverlight or Anti-Firefox conspiracy doing the rounds?


    Nope, nothing to do with that... the change I shipped out was only on the home page. And due to some CSS styling issues in IE7 it was rolled back at this point.

    There is definitely no Anti- anything conspiracy


     

    And C9v4 will come out when I'm ready.

  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    Duncanma wrote:
    There is definitely no Anti- anything conspiracy


    But that's what you'd say if there was a conspiracy!



    Tongue Out

    Also with the javascripty nonsense, please fix it. It makes everyone's lives better. What's the point of IE having tabs if channel9 goes and makes a site that deliberately prevents you from using them?

  • User profile image
    evildictait​or

    @ScanIAm:

    I know your views on religion, but for someone who self-proclaimedly doesn't care about anyone else's views and wants to keep religion out of C9, I think you ought to change your avatar and caption.

    It's inflamatory, and against the C9 terms and conditions.

    I'm just asking nicely here before other people start asking less nicely.

    Cheers.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.