The Web Design & Development Megathread

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > The Cavern of COBOL > The Web Design & Development Megathread

«‹›361 »

Oh My Science: Dec 29, 2008

fletcher posted:

If you use a wildcard SSL cert I think it will only match *.mainsite.com, not whatever.*.subdomain.com

Would this:

https://www.subdomain.mainwebsite.com

also be considered a multi-level subdomain? I'm guessing yes.

# ? Jan 14, 2014 01:13

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 15, 2024 05:41

A MIRACLE: Sep 17, 2007; All right. It's Saturday night; I have no date, a two-liter bottle of Shasta and my all-Rush mix-tape... Let's rock.

Oh My Science posted:

Would this:

https://www.subdomain.mainwebsite.com

also be considered a multi-level subdomain? I'm guessing yes.

Yes because www is still a subdomain, it just is supposed to point to the root. I don't think I've ever seen a www subdomain subdomain like that.

# ? Jan 14, 2014 01:15

subx: Jan 12, 2003; If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes should fall like a house of cards. Checkmate.

Hey I have an SSL question too! I'm not sure if anyone here will know or not, but I don't know which thread is best.

So we have a tray application that does some fancy printing stuff. It shoots over a request to a local web server that the tray app runs, and it works fine over http. When you try to do it over https, you get the error:

quote:

[blocked] The page at 'https://localhost/foo' was loaded over HTTPS, but ran insecure content from 'http://localhost:8731/bar/somestuff: this content should also be loaded over HTTPS.

Is the only way to get this to work with https to make the tray work with an https request? Is there any other way to do this that wouldn't require me learning a whole bunch about ssl that I don't really want to learn at the moment?

# ? Jan 14, 2014 04:55

Kobayashi: Aug 13, 2004; by Nyc_Tattoo

I'm designing a SPA with iPad-inspired popovers instead of modal dialogs; can anyone recommend a good library? I'm looking at qTip right now, but I thought I'd see if there's anything better.

# ? Jan 14, 2014 05:24

Maluco Marinero: Jan 18, 2001; Damn that's a
fine elephant.

subx posted:

Hey I have an SSL question too! I'm not sure if anyone here will know or not, but I don't know which thread is best.

So we have a tray application that does some fancy printing stuff. It shoots over a request to a local web server that the tray app runs, and it works fine over http. When you try to do it over https, you get the error:

Is the only way to get this to work with https to make the tray work with an https request? Is there any other way to do this that wouldn't require me learning a whole bunch about ssl that I don't really want to learn at the moment?

The point of SSL is that there is a guaranteed handshake encryption between your server and the web browser.

That guarantee means that all the elements that constitute the page are securely delivered over SSL meaning they cannot be tampered with or listened to. ANY elements loaded with http breaks this guarantee and is a potential vulnerability to listening, or modification.

If you're going to make a page or request in SSL, you need to go all the way to be genuine about it.

# ? Jan 14, 2014 05:30

subx: Jan 12, 2003; If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes should fall like a house of cards. Checkmate.

Maluco Marinero posted:

The point of SSL is that there is a guaranteed handshake encryption between your server and the web browser.

That guarantee means that all the elements that constitute the page are securely delivered over SSL meaning they cannot be tampered with or listened to. ANY elements loaded with http breaks this guarantee and is a potential vulnerability to listening, or modification.

If you're going to make a page or request in SSL, you need to go all the way to be genuine about it.

Yea I know it does, unfortunately as I mentioned I don't know enough about setting up an SSL server. Any resources you know of?

Would it be possible to do this with a browser plugin? They already have to isntall the tray application, so the plugin could just be included with that.

# ? Jan 14, 2014 05:56

EAT THE EGGS RICOLA: May 29, 2008

subx posted:

Yea I know it does, unfortunately as I mentioned I don't know enough about setting up an SSL server. Any resources you know of?

Would it be possible to do this with a browser plugin? They already have to isntall the tray application, so the plugin could just be included with that.

Is this a windows environment? Certificate stuff super easy in Server 2003 or higher.

# ? Jan 14, 2014 05:59

subx: Jan 12, 2003; If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes should fall like a house of cards. Checkmate.

EAT THE EGGS RICOLA posted:

Is this a windows environment? Certificate stuff super easy in Server 2003 or higher.

It's windows, but the tray app runs on the client machines. It's a specialized application for running tournaments - it prints out a match slip with a bar code that they can scan to input the result, and a few other things. It's not spyware or anything like that.

Is setting up a certificate in a client environment even feasible?

# ? Jan 14, 2014 06:07

EAT THE EGGS RICOLA: May 29, 2008

subx posted:

It's windows, but the tray app runs on the client machines. It's a specialized application for running tournaments - it prints out a match slip with a bar code that they can scan to input the result, and a few other things. It's not spyware or anything like that.

Is setting up a certificate in a client environment even feasible?

Are the client machines and the server machine on the same domain? If so, then you can just use the certificate authority to generate them. That doesn't sound like what's going on here though.

You can always get a cert from startssl or something for free, although it's kind of unclear what's going on and what the requirements are.

# ? Jan 14, 2014 06:21

ManoliIsFat: Oct 4, 2002

What is it, some webhost running on these local machines, or like a server per client environment install. If it's just to localhost, why HTTPS at all? You have two web servers running on different port on this thing? If it's like an IIS instance at each clients data center, that's super easy, depending on how fancy an SSL setup we're talking here.

I still don't understand wholly what's going on. Is a browser involved at all? I don't know how you'd be mixing http and https on a single page if this was all REST calls.

# ? Jan 14, 2014 06:49

Maluco Marinero: Jan 18, 2001; Damn that's a
fine elephant.

Yeah. Its a bit hard to follow the end result here. Hell, if its client to localhost why do you need SSL? And even so, wouldn't a self signed certificate work in that case? Bit beyond my usual ballpark.

# ? Jan 14, 2014 10:03

subx: Jan 12, 2003; If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes should fall like a house of cards. Checkmate.

The HTTPS is for the web site that the database resides on. This database has all the player information, past tournaments, all the admin information, etc.

The local application is for running their tournament - it does the printing out slips/results, scanning and a couple other things. It's just a normal windows application that runs a local web server on port 12345 (just an example) that listens for an ajax request from the browser. So the ajax calls http://localhost:12345/somedirectory/someoptions.

It doesn't live on a server at all. So yes, it's a server per client install. It does sync with the main server - when they scan a result it's uploaded to the server.

Sorry, I know it's a bit confusing. I appreciate all the help.

# ? Jan 14, 2014 15:33

glompix: Jan 19, 2004; propane grill-pilled

Kobayashi posted:

I'm designing a SPA with iPad-inspired popovers instead of modal dialogs; can anyone recommend a good library? I'm looking at qTip right now, but I thought I'd see if there's anything better.

If you're looking for something that looks similar, the Popovers in Bootstrap look pretty close. The default triggering/disposing logic sucks for what I've tried to use it for, but if you're replacing a modal with this it might work well for you.

# ? Jan 14, 2014 15:51

ManoliIsFat: Oct 4, 2002

subx posted:

The HTTPS is for the web site that the database resides on. This database has all the player information, past tournaments, all the admin information, etc.

The local application is for running their tournament - it does the printing out slips/results, scanning and a couple other things. It's just a normal windows application that runs a local web server on port 12345 (just an example) that listens for an ajax request from the browser. So the ajax calls http://localhost:12345/somedirectory/someoptions.

It doesn't live on a server at all. So yes, it's a server per client install. It does sync with the main server - when they scan a result it's uploaded to the server.

Sorry, I know it's a bit confusing. I appreciate all the help.

And it's the browser pointing to https://mybackroomserver.local/ that is making calls to this localhost, server, and the browser is complaining about mixing http and https, correct? The windows application with the web server, is this a package or your own home rolled HTTPS? If it's a little IIS Express, you can configure a self signed cert with that and I believe Chrome won't bitch about the cert being substandard on the AJAX call, but you'll have to test that. You could take them to an unsecured page just for this printing, that would work, but would be clunky and would probably circumvent the reason it's using HTTPS in the first place.

But the basic problem is you're logged on to some web page over https, and then from that you want to fire off a call to localhost unsecured. In chrome, there's alittle shield arrow in the address bar when this happens, you can just click that and say "Screw it, allow the unsecured communication", but that option never really seems to stick and you've gotta click it every couple of days. I bet there's some configuration change you could make to always allow this, but IDK about that. Really, I'd try to get all my communication over HTTPS. You may have to do some tricky Access-Control header work to make the cross domain stuff work.

# ? Jan 14, 2014 18:39

Vulture Culture: Jul 14, 2003; I was never enjoying it. I only eat it for the nutrients.

I need a resizable vertical splitter plugin for jQuery that works with 2.0, but isn't part of some gigantic thing like the UI Layout package. Does anyone know of anything that fits the bill? Bonus points if it can display an outline and only do one reflow on mouseup.

Vulture Culture fucked around with this message at 19:46 on Jan 14, 2014

# ? Jan 14, 2014 19:44

subx: Jan 12, 2003; If we hit that bullseye, the rest of the dominoes should fall like a house of cards. Checkmate.

ManoliIsFat posted:

And it's the browser pointing to https://mybackroomserver.local/ that is making calls to this localhost, server, and the browser is complaining about mixing http and https, correct? The windows application with the web server, is this a package or your own home rolled HTTPS? If it's a little IIS Express, you can configure a self signed cert with that and I believe Chrome won't bitch about the cert being substandard on the AJAX call, but you'll have to test that. You could take them to an unsecured page just for this printing, that would work, but would be clunky and would probably circumvent the reason it's using HTTPS in the first place.

But the basic problem is you're logged on to some web page over https, and then from that you want to fire off a call to localhost unsecured. In chrome, there's alittle shield arrow in the address bar when this happens, you can just click that and say "Screw it, allow the unsecured communication", but that option never really seems to stick and you've gotta click it every couple of days. I bet there's some configuration change you could make to always allow this, but IDK about that. Really, I'd try to get all my communication over HTTPS. You may have to do some tricky Access-Control header work to make the cross domain stuff work.

Yes, that about sums it up. I will look into a self-signed cert.

And because it's an ajax call, you don't even get the arrow in chrome. It errors on the back end and the user sees nothing (except for whatever error handling you might have set up).

Thanks for the info, hopefully it will get it working.

# ? Jan 14, 2014 21:13

ahobday: Apr 19, 2007

We've got a domain that we want to point at another domain.

So we want domainone.com to point at domaintwo.com.

But we've also got email accounts set up with the registrar for domainone.com.

I pointed the nameservers for domainone.com at the hosting for domaintwo.com, and the email accounts broke.

Turns out the MX settings had been changed, so I changed everything back and email worked again.

Then I pointed the nameservers for domainone.com at the hosting for domaintwo.com again, but this time made sure that the MX servers stayed the same.

Still, the email accounts broke.

So what's the best method for pointing domainone.com at domaintwo.com, but keeping the email accounts at the registrar working?

# ? Jan 15, 2014 10:43

kedo: Nov 27, 2007

Changing the nameservers changes everything to point at domaintwo.com. What you're thinking about are A records ��you can modify, say, the www A record to point to domaintwo's IP address, which would leave the MX records untouched.

However it sounds like you want to forward the domain, no? Ie. when someone types domainone.com into their browser, you want them to end up on domaintwo.com? If so your registrar might offer a cheap forwarding option, or you can set up a super basic hosting account somewhere and just redirect traffic via htaccess to domaintwo.com.

Here's a short article from Media Temple that talks about how to set one up. The short version is A) create .htaccess file, B) put redirect in it, C) upload to your public_html, or htdocs directory, or whatever it's called on your server.

kedo fucked around with this message at 15:32 on Jan 15, 2014

# ? Jan 15, 2014 15:27

Oh My Science: Dec 29, 2008

Bootstrap finally has an official Sass port. Kinda happy about that.

# ? Jan 16, 2014 21:52

Lewd Mangabey: Jun 2, 2011; "What sort of ape?" asked Stephen.
"A damned ill-conditioned sort of an ape. It had a can of ale at every pot-house on the road, and is reeling drunk. It has been offering itself to Babbington."

Apologies if this isn't the right thread, but it's a question on how to build a pretty simple but kind of weird web app, so I thought it belonged best here.

I have a decent amount of coding experience, but most of it is 10-15 years old and was oriented around scientific computing and hacking together tools for the lab (C++, C, java, wayyy old school html). Now, for my work environment, I would like to make a very specific, pretty simple tool since the one we're using doesn't fit our needs, and we spend more time working around it than using it. I have a concept of the specs I would like, but I'm so out of date that even a week or two of reading tutorials on the web are making it hard for me to figure out exactly where to start.

Here's the concept. The user will navigate a long and fairly complicated form, with the usual text fields, radio buttons, and drop boxes. As these fields are filled out, internal logic will use those fields to create a readable summary report that incorporates the choices. For example, if the user selects A1 and A2 for choice A, B2 for choice B, and nothing for choice C, the output will be a text string that says "The As are A1 and A2. The Bs are B2. No Cs are observed." At the end of filling out the form, the user will look over the report and export it as text (or in a lowest-tech scenario, copy it to the clipboard) to be pasted into our proprietary reporting software (directly interfacing with this software is way out of the scope of what I'd like to hack together at this time).

That's the very basic concept, but things that I would really like to incorporate include (in the order of how easy I predict they would be to implement, from easiest to hardest)

A minimal amount of CSS styling so it doesn't look butt-ugly.
Options so the specific logic used to create the report can be changed based on the user. For example, user1 likes it to say "The As are A1 and A2," and user2 prefers the format "As are seen, including A1 and A2." This wouldn't require a login, just selecting a user from a dropdown box.
Showing each section of the report side by side (two columns) with the appropriate section of the form, and updating that report actively as the user navigates the form.
An option to save the form in a partially finished state with a unique ID (provided in the form) which can then be re-accessed so a form can be partially completed and then reloaded. This would probably need a locking mechanism in case two people tried to re-open and modify the form at once.

This tool would only be used by a handful of people in the same work environment, almost all (unfortunately) using IE8. It wouldn't have to be particularly robust, since there would be very few users, no real way to damage anything (it's not accessing any databases), everyone would be trained, and if someone manages to break it, the worst case scenario would just be someone having to manually type in that part of the report.

As far as I can tell, this wouldn't be too tough to do with javascript. What I can't tell is whether diving into jquery and some of the associated packages would save me a ton of time by not having to reinvent the wheel, or whether that's way too much gun for this fight given my extremely modest requirements and I'd waste a lot of time configuring or getting rid of things I don't need.

If experienced folks could just point me in the direction of the right tools, I'll go teach myself how to use them. Thanks!

# ? Jan 17, 2014 22:06

Oh My Science: Dec 29, 2008

Lewd Mangabey posted:

A minimal amount of CSS styling so it doesn't look butt-ugly.

Use a front end framework like Twitter Bootstrap or Foundation. They include common UI interfaces, menus, forms, etc... Documentation is thorough, they work in IE8 with a few caveats.

Lewd Mangabey posted:

Options so the specific logic used to create the report can be changed based on the user. For example, user1 likes it to say "The As are A1 and A2," and user2 prefers the format "As are seen, including A1 and A2." This wouldn't require a login, just selecting a user from a dropdown box.

An option to save the form in a partially finished state with a unique ID (provided in the form) which can then be re-accessed so a form can be partially completed and then reloaded. This would probably need a locking mechanism in case two people tried to re-open and modify the form at once.

I've seen both of these problems solved in DB backed applications. In fact you're basically describing the main features of Basecamp which is the Ruby on Rails app. Unfortunately I have no idea if one of the JS frameworks would work, especially when it comes to sharing data across the domain without a DB.

# ? Jan 17, 2014 22:32

kedo: Nov 27, 2007

Was skimming through the most recent Web Design Weekly and found this opinionated (and sort of worthless) article about target="_blank". The author's opinion is basically "never use it" and his reasons are "it's not default behavior" and "because."

So I started searching around to see if anyone had actually done research on whether or not users like or dislike links that open in a new window and I can't seem to find anything reliable. However I did find a whole bunch of random webmasters and bloggers polling their audience and it seems like most of their users were in favor of links opening in a new window (a judgement I made entirely by skimming comments).

Anyone know of any real research they could share?

# ? Jan 18, 2014 00:05

ManoliIsFat: Oct 4, 2002

All the reasoning I've heard is "people will ctrl+click or middle click if they want to so bad" and that it's annoying in mobile to open up new tabs for people.

ManoliIsFat fucked around with this message at 00:13 on Jan 18, 2014

# ? Jan 18, 2014 00:11

Janitor Prime: Jan 22, 2004; PC LOAD LETTER

What da fuck does that mean; Fun Shoe

ManoliIsFat posted:

it's annoying in mobile to open up new tabs for people.

Holy poo poo yes, the context is super important. It might be fine on the desktop browser but gently caress this poo poo on mobile.

# ? Jan 18, 2014 00:25

Xarb: Nov 26, 2000; Not happy.

ManoliIsFat posted:

All the reasoning I've heard is "people will ctrl+click or middle click if they want to so bad" and that it's annoying in mobile to open up new tabs for people.

You'd be surprised how many users do not know how to open a link in a new tab or window.

# ? Jan 18, 2014 00:30

Maluco Marinero: Jan 18, 2001; Damn that's a
fine elephant.

My standpoint is that for web applications it makes sense, where the user is expected to keep that page as their hub to external links, but for general content websites, browsing contexts, don't use it.

# ? Jan 18, 2014 02:51

glompix: Jan 19, 2004; propane grill-pilled

I can't stand this obsession with blanket statements and pure dogma in software engineering. It's like people want to declare rules and be the guy with the blog about that or something. It's totally about context. On a link aggregator, you better believe I want to always open in a new tab so I don't lose my place.

# ? Jan 18, 2014 02:54

Sudden Infant Def Syndrome: Oct 2, 2004

At my work, we've always made it so any link off-site opens in a new window, because you don't want the customers to leave the site if you can help it.

Not sure if that way of thinking is right.

# ? Jan 18, 2014 10:27

pokeyman: Nov 26, 2006; That elephant ate my entire platoon.

Xarb posted:

You'd be surprised how many users do not know how to open a link in a new tab or window.

glompix posted:

On a link aggregator, you better believe I want to always open in a new tab so I don't lose my place.

The back button works too!

Sudden Infant Def Syndrome posted:

At my work, we've always made it so any link off-site opens in a new window, because you don't want the customers to leave the site if you can help it.

Not sure if that way of thinking is right.

It's a self-centred (as opposed to customer-focused) way of thinking.

# ? Jan 18, 2014 12:20

Dr Jankenstein: Aug 6, 2009; Hold the newsreader's nose squarely, waiter, or friendly milk will countermand my trousers.

Real real dumb question:

What's the best framework that plays nice with IE6? I, unfortunately am stuck designing to be compatable with IE6 and all my web design expierence (extremely limited, but I'm learning!) is using HTML5 boilerplates/Wordpress ...and HTML5 is hilarious on IE6. I'm not fantastic with coding, but I've hacked together a decent website that's a step up from the TABLES! TABLES EVERYWHERE mess that was our website with just HTML and some really basic CSS to align things, but I'd like it to look...nicer.

I'm about thisclose to just redesigning the entire thing in flash, since I know that will at least work...

E: I know IE6 sucks, but it was the *one* requirement my boss had. Most of the computers here in the office run IE6, and I had to install firefox on the sly on both the main reception computer and mine. His only run IE6, and apparently a lot of our clients run IE6. Funny thing is I work in broadcasting, with all kinds of brand new computers running CS6, run about half our programming off of a beautiful server, but anything that faces the web runs XP and IE6. His suggestion was "well, the last designer just threw together something in dreamweaver! you're good at photoshop and indesign and all that, you should be able to do it in dreamweaver!"

...i *could* do it in dreamweaver, but I have enough design sense to know that that is a horrible, horrible idea that will make the next person hate me as much as I hate the last designer for hacking everything together in dreamweaver. At least with Flash I know I can make a nice looking website that will be compatable with IE6, but I'd rather not go that route if I can avoid it. I'm not a web designer. I *can* do it with lots of work, and frustration, but I put together a decent site that scaled with mobile for my last boss, and it took me about a week. This job, well, we have a lot more that I want to do with the site. Last job was for a cab driver who just needed a site to be top in google results for drunks to call. Big phone number, tap to dial, etc. This job, well, i need it to look snazzy to try and get new clients.

Dr Jankenstein fucked around with this message at 15:19 on Jan 18, 2014

# ? Jan 18, 2014 14:55

karms: Jan 22, 2006; by Nyc_Tattoo; Yam Slacker

None. IE6 is the devil's spawn.

# ? Jan 18, 2014 15:08

Funking Giblet: Jun 28, 2004; Jiglightful!

pokeyman posted:

The back button works too!

It's a self-centred (as opposed to customer-focused) way of thinking.

If you have a form on a page, say a payment page and a few links like T&C's etc, you should never have a link take over the current page, as it can blank any progress in a form where a field is set remove autocomplete (CC details etc). It's all about context.

# ? Jan 18, 2014 15:41

Bognar: Aug 4, 2011; I am the queen of France; Hot Rope Guy

AA is for Quitters posted:

E: I know IE6 sucks, but it was the *one* requirement my boss had.

Tell your boss he's an idiot and show him this graph: http://gs.statcounter.com/#desktop-browser_version_partially_combined-na-monthly-201212-201312

IE6 isn't even on the graph anymore. IE7 is right at about 0.5%. It would cost more money to develop a website that doesn't look like poo poo on IE6 than it would to build a nice looking modern website and install FF or Chrome on all the XP computers.

# ? Jan 18, 2014 20:30

cbirdsong: Sep 8, 2004; Commodore of the Apocalypso; Lipstick Apathy

You could also tell him Windows XP is getting end of lifed in April: http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/enterprise/endofsupport.aspx

# ? Jan 18, 2014 22:45

Bodhi Tea: Oct 2, 2006; seconds are secular, moments are mine, self is illusion, music's divine.

Does anyone have suggestions for an IP-based geolocation service? It doesn't have to be super accurate, I literally just need to know what Canadian province a user is visiting from.

# ? Jan 18, 2014 22:54

EAT THE EGGS RICOLA: May 29, 2008

Bodhi Tea posted:

Does anyone have suggestions for an IP-based geolocation service? It doesn't have to be super accurate, I literally just need to know what Canadian province a user is visiting from.

just use http://hostip.info

# ? Jan 19, 2014 01:51

RobertKerans: Aug 25, 2006; There is a heppy lend
Fur, fur aw-a-a-ay.

glompix posted:

I can't stand this obsession with blanket statements and pure dogma in software engineering. It's like people want to declare rules and be the guy with the blog about that or something. It's totally about context. On a link aggregator, you better believe I want to always open in a new tab so I don't lose my place.

Yesterday at work I got sent the link to the css-tricks article discussing this, and aggregators were the first thing I said in response to it. But then the first response I got was 'well, yeah, but back button'. I'd rather have shitloads of tabs open (and this applies to mobile as well), and read through them at leisure, but another, say 50%, of people go open, read, back. I've always gone blank for external, but it's absolutely subjective.

Edit: as long as it's not target new, Jesus gently caress that is the most annoying thing.

# ? Jan 19, 2014 02:13

glompix: Jan 19, 2004; propane grill-pilled

RobertKerans posted:

Yesterday at work I got sent the link to the css-tricks article discussing this, and aggregators were the first thing I said in response to it. But then the first response I got was 'well, yeah, but back button'. I'd rather have shitloads of tabs open (and this applies to mobile as well), and read through them at leisure, but another, say 50%, of people go open, read, back. I've always gone blank for external, but it's absolutely subjective.

Edit: as long as it's not target new, Jesus gently caress that is the most annoying thing.

Well, it doesn't matter about a back button anyway if the list implements infinite scrolling. Sure, you could hash nav on the page they're on and fast-forward to that on back navigation, but that's pretty inefficient compared to just opening in a new tab by default. You could still implement the other behavior too - you're just saving yourself some bandwidth using target="_blank".

# ? Jan 19, 2014 03:48

Pollyanna: Mar 5, 2005; Milk's on them.

How do I tie a form to a specific URL? This searchbar:

HTML code:

<div id="searchbar">
    <form method="get">
        <input type="text" class="search" name="symbol" placeholder="Enter symbols...">
        <input type="submit" value="Go">
    </form>
</div>

searches from the current url (e.g. '/stocks/user'), which bugs out due to the way I programmed my app. I want it to instead search from the base URL ('/stocks').

# ? Jan 19, 2014 19:01

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 15, 2024 05:41

Suspicious Dish: Sep 24, 2011; 2020 is the year of linux on the desktop, bro; Fun Shoe

code:

    <form method="get" action="/stocks">

# ? Jan 19, 2014 19:03

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > The Cavern of COBOL > The Web Design & Development Megathread

«‹›361 »