|
fuf posted:I've just discovered http://www.google.com/fonts and it seems like a pretty ideal way of allowing unconventional fonts. Just make sure you are checking for its impact on page load. Including many faces, or many variants of a single face (or both) can really slow things down.
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 14:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 22:21 |
|
|
Cool, thanks for the reassurance. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 15:24
|
|
|
In a similar vein, what's the best way to utilize Google's web font loader? Should this mostly just be used to eliminate FOUT? (by hiding all fallback fonts while the replacements are loading, I guess?) Or are people using this to display spinners and such?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 16:57
|
|
|
What machines are you guys using for your web dev machines? At work I use an HP EliteBook 8540w, and at home I just use my gaming PC. The more I get into the newer web technologies like NodeJS, Ruby (I know Ruby isn't really new), etc I'm finding myself wanting a Mac. I'm also very interested in becoming involved in Apple App Store development. I often run into problems trying to compile modules with NPM. Too many modules/addons are just are just straight up Windows incompatible or a huge pain in the rear end to get working (see http://rvm.io/ ). For those of you that that have switched to Macs for your development environment, are you able to completely move off of your PC with something like boot camp? I hate focusing on the dev environment when I could be working on the actual project at hand, but I'm not sure if I'm just being lazy or what. Alternatively, has anyone successfully dual booted something like Ubuntu and developed exclusively on that (sans visual studio stuff) while using Windows for everything else? I think I tried this about 1.5 years ago and found it to be a pain in the rear end, but if a distro that would work well for this has been updated or released please let me know. Knyteguy fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Sep 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 17:32
|
|
|
Knyteguy posted:What machines are you guys using for your web dev machines? At work I use an HP EliteBook 8540w, and at home I just use my gaming PC. The more I get into the newer web technologies like NodeJS, Ruby (I know Ruby isn't really new), etc I'm finding myself wanting a Mac. I'm also very interested in becoming involved in Apple App Store development. I run Windows, but I use Ubuntu in a VirtualBox VM for pretty much all my development work. It's less trouble than dual-booting, and developing on Linux can make it easier to deploy to a Linux server. As you're discovering, most of the current open-source tools are developed with Unix in mind.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 18:02
|
|
|
Knyteguy posted:What machines are you guys using for your web dev machines? A lot of people and businesses use Vagrant for dev environments because they are relatively easy to setup and share on any OS. That being said it depends on the type of work you want to do. If you are set on picking up mac app dev / iOS dev you need a mac. They have the added bonus of being the default all-in-one dev machine because of the Unix backend. If you absolutely need windows it can be used via Bootcamp or Parallels if you prefer a windows VM.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 18:11
|
|
|
Knyteguy posted:Alternatively, has anyone successfully dual booted something like Ubuntu and developed exclusively on that (sans visual studio stuff) while using Windows for everything else? I think I tried this about 1.5 years ago and found it to be a pain in the rear end, but if a distro that would work well for this has been updated or released please let me know. At work we're all Windows, but at home I develop on Linux Mint with multiple VMs running Windows for PhotoShop and testing in IE (I've got four Windows VMs, each with a different version of IE installed). I also have Windows 8 installed on my computer, but I very rarely boot into it. I find working in Linux to be quite easy and fun. As was mentioned, all the open source software I need is available, and Apache is a breeze.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 18:19
|
|
|
Knyteguy posted:What machines are you guys using for your web dev machines? At work I use an HP EliteBook 8540w, and at home I just use my gaming PC. The more I get into the newer web technologies like NodeJS, Ruby (I know Ruby isn't really new), etc I'm finding myself wanting a Mac. I'm also very interested in becoming involved in Apple App Store development. You could always get a second monitor and just throw an Ubuntu VM on one of them. I use all 3 in my daily life and I really prefer my Mac for doing dev work, though Ubuntu is a close second and could probably be #1 if I spent more time on those machines and tweaked them just the way I like them as I have done to my Mac.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 18:27
|
|
|
I switched to Ubuntu a year or two ago just to ease dev work. It's been pretty great.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 19:12
|
|
|
PlesantDilemma posted:Someone help me understand how browsers work with Ajax. I load up a page in my browser and it makes an ajax call. The ajax is calling a php script that takes 20 seconds to execute. If I hit F5 on my browser at 10 seconds into the ajax call, the browser doesn't start refreshing until 10 seconds later when the ajax is done. Is there a way to make the browser bail out of the ajax quicker? I'm using jQuery to make the request. PlesantDilemma posted:I am not setting the async propery when I call $.ajax(), and the docs say that the default value is async:true. OK, i setup a test page where all I do is call the ajax the same way I call it on the real page and I don't get this behavior. So I'm confused as to what the real problem is. The project is one of those big messy application that got built without a plan so its a mess and anything could be going on in here. Anyone know of any articles or blog posts that explain the details of what happens when an ajax call is in progress and the browser navigates to another page or the user hits refresh?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 19:15
|
|
|
Movac posted:I run Windows, but I use Ubuntu in a VirtualBox VM for pretty much all my development work. It's less trouble than dual-booting, and developing on Linux can make it easier to deploy to a Linux server. As you're discovering, most of the current open-source tools are developed with Unix in mind. I tried that recently but it went rather badly with the VirtualBox add-ons barely working or not at all. The UI-lag was pretty bad too thanks to there being no 2D-acceleration. Any suggestions besides "use a faster PC"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 19:19
|
|
|
Sereri posted:I tried that recently but it went rather badly with the VirtualBox add-ons barely working or not at all. The UI-lag was pretty bad too thanks to there being no 2D-acceleration. Any suggestions besides "use a faster PC"? Try XUbuntu in a VM if regular Ubuntu is too slow. That works pretty good for me. But it is annoying because when you upgrade ubuntu then it might stop working with VirtualBox's add-ons and then you have to go and upgrade VirtualBox and reinstall the add-ons.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 19:36
|
|
|
(Fixed, mostly.)
ufarn fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Sep 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 19:38
|
|
|
Sereri posted:I tried that recently but it went rather badly with the VirtualBox add-ons barely working or not at all. The UI-lag was pretty bad too thanks to there being no 2D-acceleration. Any suggestions besides "use a faster PC"?
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 19:50
|
|
|
Knyteguy posted:What machines are you guys using for your web dev machines? Ubuntu rig with giant IPS monitors. Front end is Gnome3. Mac is okay but still a little wonky to develop on, especially when installing stuff for the first time. Straight up Ubuntu or Linux Mint, or some other variant of Debian has been the breeziest experience for me so far.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 20:04
|
|
|
Knyteguy posted:What machines are you guys using for your web dev machines? Do all of my work on a retina MBP. Been Mac-only for the past decade or more, actually. Most of UNIX available if/when I need it and it looks pretty. Vagrant/VirtualBox is really handy too.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 20:41
|
|
|
Sereri posted:I tried that recently but it went rather badly with the VirtualBox add-ons barely working or not at all. The UI-lag was pretty bad too thanks to there being no 2D-acceleration. Any suggestions besides "use a faster PC"? If you're using 13, try switching to 12 (yeah, sorry) or disabling all of the stupid bullshit they added in 13. To make 13 usable, I went through everything in unity-tweak-tool and disabled any transparency and then in the compizconfig-setting-manager (ccsm) I turned off animations and fading windows. That mostly fixed the VM I updated to 13 without making a copy first  E: this is all to make the UI lag go away/be tolerable.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 21:00
|
|
|
I use Ubuntu full time for everything and Vagrant as pre-pre-production. The convenience of being able to edit something on your own machine without redeploying, be it the frontend or the services, is just so great that I still can't convince myself to not run the product on the dev machine itself. I guess an alternative would be to setup our configuration management to deploy an unpackaged version of our product onto vagrant (unminified site, no uberjar etc), but it still doesn't feel like a solution.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 21:32
|
|
|
Munkeymon posted:If you're using 13, try switching to 12 (yeah, sorry) or disabling all of the stupid bullshit they added in 13. To make 13 usable, I went through everything in unity-tweak-tool and disabled any transparency and then in the compizconfig-setting-manager (ccsm) I turned off animations and fading windows. That mostly fixed the VM I updated to 13 without making a copy first I've been using VirtualBox at home for over a year for a Ubuntu VM and it's actually quite good for most development purposes, including multi-monitor support etc. It's slower than non-virtualized Ubuntu obviously, and it my case it has a really tedious graphical glitch for gVim which drives me completely insane. Can't wait for everybody to start making Linux ports of AAA games so I can finally blow that Windows turd away. Yeah Wine etc, I'll try that at some point if I ever find time.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 21:34
|
|
|
Do you guys have a favorite mp3 player with html5/flash fallback that you use? I would like playlist capabilities, but they're not important. I'm going to be using this for a music based website, so something that would have the inline capabilities of something like Pitchfork's player would be prime. Although I imagine their player is their pride and joy and they most likely paid a lot of money for it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 22:57
|
|
|
scotty posted:Do you guys have a favorite mp3 player with html5/flash fallback that you use? I would like playlist capabilities, but they're not important. http://developers.soundcloud.com/blog/custom-players Looks like they use sound cloud. vvv cool I didn't know that. Oh My Science fucked around with this message at 23:42 on Sep 23, 2013 |
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 23:03
|
|
|
Their player works seamlessly with their own files/SoundCloud files/YouTube files, or any mp3 really. I just was trying to save myself the man hours of hacking something together to do this (even though I figured I would have to).
|
|
#
?
Sep 23, 2013 23:23
|
|
|
I'm a graphic designer just getting deeper into the web sphere than basic static html/css and I'm trying to make a simple cheats site for my phone. I need a recommendation for a really simple content management system that will let me easily add new cheats with 3 basic criteria: Title, the cheat itself (in plaintext, which I've actually got a pretty snazzy bit of java to add html span elements) and like a tag that will tell it where to go. Here's a screenshot of my current mockup showing how simple I want this to be:  Where should I start?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2013 00:12
|
|
|
Fayez Butts posted:Here's a screenshot of my current mockup showing how simple I want this to be: How often are you updating the content? Are others aside from yourself going to be adding content? Do you know any languages aside from basic HTML/CSS (PHP, Ruby, etc)? Do you need a fancy dashboard in the back? With a basic understanding of nearly any framework you could do that fairly quickly.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2013 00:56
|
|
|
Oh My Science posted:How often are you updating the content? Are others aside from yourself going to be adding content? Do you know any languages aside from basic HTML/CSS (PHP, Ruby, etc)? Do you need a fancy dashboard in the back? That's what I was hoping to hear. 1: Not very often 2: myself 3: Not really, I can make a static php based site but I can't code in it. I could probably learn pretty quickly if pointed in the right direction 4: Not particularly
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2013 01:02
|
|
|
Fayez Butts posted:That's what I was hoping to hear. Is this supposed to be a springboard to learning more backend stuff, or do you just want the easiest way to get this done?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2013 01:08
|
|
|
To be honest, I'd just do this using a static site and edit the HTML when I want to add a new cheat. But if you want to learn something basic for backend programming, try Flask or Django with Python?
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2013 01:11
|
|
|
Fayez Butts posted:That's what I was hoping to hear. I should clarify. Learning a framework takes a lot of time. First you need a basic understanding of MVC lest it all seem like magic, then you need to learn the language underneath the magic. I know that when I first started rails (coming from a front-end background) I didn't spend a lot of time learning Ruby. Eventually I got to the point I wanted to know what the hell was going on and took a few ruby courses. Let's just say a lot of things started making sense and my code was a lot better from that point on. You then get to play the 'I can't just use any host' game. This may be more of a rails problem since shared hosting is garbage, but a lot of PaaS providers are really easy to use now. How much you want to learn about server maintenance, db administration, and how to handle web assets is up to you and how much you're willing to pay to not worry about it. Go find a few quick online videos or courses for the frameworks you think will work for you and give them a shot. Go with whatever makes the most sense.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2013 02:16
|
|
|
fuf posted:I've just discovered http://www.google.com/fonts and it seems like a pretty ideal way of allowing unconventional fonts. A bit late to the party but if you want to pick fonts from the google webfonts directory, make sure to check http://hellohappy.org/beautiful-web-type/ to find actual nice fonts.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2013 06:48
|
|
|
Skiant posted:A bit late to the party but if you want to pick fonts from the google webfonts directory, make sure to check http://hellohappy.org/beautiful-web-type/ to find actual nice fonts. Great link, thanks for sharing. One thing Google Fonts does is share analytics, so if you click the popup on a font it will show you which fonts it is statistically loaded alongside the most. Ex: http://www.google.com/fonts/specimen/Lato#pairings So while it's not great (a multitude of bad designers will skew this), it'll at least show you some sample text paired together.
|
|
#
?
Sep 24, 2013 14:48
|
|
|
PlesantDilemma posted:OK, i setup a test page where all I do is call the ajax the same way I call it on the real page and I don't get this behavior. So I'm confused as to what the real problem is. The project is one of those big messy application that got built without a plan so its a mess and anything could be going on in here. You should search all of your libraries for "ajaxSetup". http://api.jquery.com/jQuery.ajaxSetup/
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2013 14:16
|
|
|
Munkeymon posted:If you're using 13, try switching to 12 (yeah, sorry) or disabling all of the stupid bullshit they added in 13. To make 13 usable, I went through everything in unity-tweak-tool and disabled any transparency and then in the compizconfig-setting-manager (ccsm) I turned off animations and fading windows. That mostly fixed the VM I updated to 13 without making a copy first I had already used the ccsm to turn off animations but only after unity-tweak-tool it's actually usable. Thank you very much.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2013 16:53
|
|
|
I need a solution that's preferably more dependable and does more than HTML5's application cache. This would need to be website that if there is no internet connection, would need to read an offline version. When there is a connection, it would load the online version and automatically update (or the option to) update the offline version. The problem that would probably come up with HTML5 application cache is that it would not dependably store all the large videos that need to be on this site. This is an enterprise website, so there's the possibility of installing something on the company's computers. Since there is a backend with a database, many of the pages would probably made in php.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2013 17:10
|
|
|
Sereri posted:I had already used the ccsm to turn off animations but only after unity-tweak-tool it's actually usable. Thank you very much. This is good to hear. Thanks everyone for their input on development machines. I think I'll just buy a 2nd monitor (I'm still running off one at home) and VirtualBox Ubuntu for the moment. I was looking at the Retina Macbooks and they're just way too expensive for me at this point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2013 17:27
|
|
|
Am I the only one who hates virtual desktops for development work? They seem really slow, with a lot of configuration overhead. Maybe I just suck at it but I switched to Ubuntu / GTK full time this time last year and haven't looked back.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2013 17:39
|
|
|
Yeah dual-booting into linux is fairly painless and makes development a lot easier. I installed Ubuntu just because I wanted to play around with lamp and git, but I'm so used to it now that I only boot into Windows for games.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2013 17:43
|
|
|
A MIRACLE posted:Am I the only one who hates virtual desktops for development work? They seem really slow, with a lot of configuration overhead. Maybe I just suck at it but I switched to Ubuntu / GTK full time this time last year and haven't looked back. Most modern computers should be able to run linux distros in a VM easily. I would shy away from Ubuntu and look at something like Xubuntu or Ubuntu Server(with a frontend like xfce) if you are having performance issues. Also, store your configuration files in a public github repository under "dotfiles" and just pull/symlink those files every time you set up a new VM. Also one thing I'd recommend is to make a "master" image that is a backup of a VM with the OS installed and configured without any project-specific packages. That way you'll save the configuration time down the road.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2013 17:50
|
|
|
Just use vagrant. It really is the easiest way to manage multiple dev environments or create a blank slate box.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2013 18:12
|
|
|
LP0 ON FIRE posted:I need a solution that's preferably more dependable and does more than HTML5's application cache. This would need to be website that if there is no internet connection, would need to read an offline version. When there is a connection, it would load the online version and automatically update (or the option to) update the offline version. The problem that would probably come up with HTML5 application cache is that it would not dependably store all the large videos that need to be on this site. This is an enterprise website, so there's the possibility of installing something on the company's computers. Since there is a backend with a database, many of the pages would probably made in php. I have no exposure to HTML5's application cache at all, but couldn't you prepend pageload with a javascript that pings something (to see if network exists) and then branch what your page does depending on that? http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4282151/is-it-possible-to-ping-a-server-from-javascript So I'm thinking (psuedo code) code:
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2013 18:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 8, 2024 22:21 |
|
|
Oh My Science posted:Just use vagrant. poo poo I saw you mentioned this earlier, but this looks awesome. I'm going to give this a try thanks.
|
|
#
?
Sep 25, 2013 18:53
|
|