The Web Design & Development Megathread

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

«‹›362 »

The Merkinman: Apr 22, 2007; I sell only quality merkins. What is a merkin you ask? Why, it's a wig for your genitals!

I'm sure the majority of people in this thread don't have the ultimate say where they work, but what do you think of A Business Case for Dropping Internet Explorer?

# ? Oct 29, 2019 14:53

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 12, 2024 21:45

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Is it just me or could that same article have been written every year (with various substitutions of HTML and CSS features cited) for the past 20 years

# ? Oct 29, 2019 15:15

Munkeymon: Aug 14, 2003; Motherfucker's got an
armor-piercing crowbar! Rigoddamndicu𝜆ous.

Deciding whether to drop IE support is basically the same as deciding when to optimize code: look at your telemetry and make a decision to do it based on a simple cost-benefit analysis.

# ? Oct 29, 2019 15:45

Null of Undefined: Aug 4, 2010; I have used 41 of 300 characters allowed.

The Merkinman posted:

I'm sure the majority of people in this thread don't have the ultimate say where they work, but what do you think of A Business Case for Dropping Internet Explorer?

My company de-prioritized breaking changes in the newest version of safari because our analytics showed that safari users made up less than 1% of our users. We don't give a single poo poo about IE.

I love working in a company targeted towards devs. If it works on FF and Chrome we're pretty much good.

# ? Oct 30, 2019 02:47

Vincent Valentine: Feb 28, 2006; Murdertime

Literally no one uses internet explorer to use our app now. Zero. And thank god for that.

# ? Oct 30, 2019 04:04

Gildiss: Aug 24, 2010; Grimey Drawer

The only IE support I would consider putting on a site would be a page insulting the user and telling them to get a new browser.

# ? Oct 30, 2019 04:07

Empress Brosephine: Mar 31, 2012; by Jeffrey of YOSPOS

I�m surprised Safari users are so low since it�s the iphones default browser

# ? Oct 30, 2019 12:46

Ruggan: Feb 20, 2007; WHAT THAT SMELL LIKE?!

IE11 support ain�t horrific. I�m just thankful we no longer need to support IE9.

# ? Oct 30, 2019 13:51

Null of Undefined: Aug 4, 2010; I have used 41 of 300 characters allowed.

Empress Brosephine posted:

I�m surprised Safari users are so low since it�s the iphones default browser

The website in question is a documentation site for a desktop app (Postman). There is very little reason to visit it on mobile, since if you�re referencing it there�s a very good chance that you�re sitting at a desktop with the app open in front of you.

# ? Oct 30, 2019 15:11

Tei: Feb 19, 2011

I wish IE where a normal browser where supporting it had normal cost and would not make everything else worse. I would not have problems with IE if it where easy and cheap to support

# ? Oct 30, 2019 18:06

Clark Nova: Jul 18, 2004

Never forget that the broken standards and non-intercompatibility were by design, so the extra costs of supporting it (or from Microsoft�s perspective, supporting non-IE browsers) were entirely intentional

# ? Oct 30, 2019 18:24

Nolgthorn: Jan 30, 2001; The pendulum of the mind alternates between sense and nonsense

What I find bizarre about businesses being reluctant to run modern browsers is they always cite security concerns while the majority of browser updates surround security. Ie 6 stuck around an ungodly amount of time and the list of viable exploits for that browser should be worrisome. Right?

https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-26/product_id-9900/Microsoft-Internet-Explorer.html

# ? Oct 30, 2019 20:25

Munkeymon: Aug 14, 2003; Motherfucker's got an
armor-piercing crowbar! Rigoddamndicu𝜆ous.

Ours cite compatibility with shittyier old software

# ? Oct 30, 2019 20:59

Data Graham: Dec 28, 2009; 📈📊🍪😋

Because for a decade all the enterprise software makers bet big on ActiveX

Using other browsers simply wasn�t possible, and then when ActiveX finally went away all the corps stayed standardized on IE out of inertia and �trust�

# ? Oct 30, 2019 22:42

Lumpy: Apr 26, 2002; La! La! La! Laaaa!; College Slice

Munkeymon posted:

Ours cite compatibility with shittyier old software

Yep. "We use ___ so we have to use Windows Ancient Edition� and so we have to use IE __"

# ? Oct 30, 2019 22:43

Jabor: Jul 16, 2010; #1 Loser at SpaceChem

Honestly the biggest problem with IE was the update model.

Nobody cares if your site doesn't support a two-year-old version of Firefox or Chrome - because nobody is using a two-year-old version of those browsers.

Lotsa people using old-rear end versions of IE though.

# ? Oct 31, 2019 02:46

Bruegels Fuckbooks: Sep 14, 2004; Now, listen - I know the two of you are very different from each other in a lot of ways, but you have to understand that as far as Grandpa's concerned, you're both pieces of shit! Yeah. I can prove it mathematically.

Data Graham posted:

Because for a decade all the enterprise software makers bet big on ActiveX

Using other browsers simply wasn�t possible, and then when ActiveX finally went away all the corps stayed standardized on IE out of inertia and �trust�

hahaha "activex finally went away"

i've checked bug fixes and poo poo in to six different activex controls within the past year.

meanwhile chrome updates and nobody who runs norton and windows 10 can open google chrome for a day until people figure out that norton fucks the new chrome.

# ? Oct 31, 2019 03:20

uncle blog: Nov 18, 2012

So, I'm still trucking along with Apollo. I moved the state down a level, per the thread's suggestion. Now I've reached a new pickle, in a component where Apollo loads in a list of items that I want displayed as checkboxes. The trouble is managing the state of those boxes. Previously this was done with React, but now I'm not quite sure how to do it.

Basically, as the component loads its array of items, it also creates a state object with those items. But as the component with the Apollo query seems to be continually rerendered when it is setting the state, so that's a no go.
So what's the better way to manage state of the checkboxes loaded with Apollo?

code:

const ComponentWithAmongOtherThingsTheListOfCheckboxes () => {

	const [itemList, setItemList] = useState([]);


	const CheckBoxes = () => {
		const { loading, error, data } = useQuery(OBSTACLE_LIST_QUERY, {});
		if(loading) ...
		if(error) ...

		setItemList(data.items);

		return(
			itemList.map(
			<Checkbox with method to handle change>
			)
		)
	}

	return(
		<div>
			<CheckBoxes />
		</div>
	)
}

uncle blog fucked around with this message at 13:40 on Oct 31, 2019

# ? Oct 31, 2019 11:49

Munkeymon: Aug 14, 2003; Motherfucker's got an
armor-piercing crowbar! Rigoddamndicu𝜆ous.

Lumpy posted:

Yep. "We use ___ so we have to use Windows Ancient Edition� and so we have to use IE __"

That middle bit is an excuse to avoid the cost of upgrading unless they need IE < 11 because Windows 10 comes with IE 11.

Bruegels Fuckbooks posted:

hahaha "activex finally went away"

i've checked bug fixes and poo poo in to six different activex controls within the past year.

meanwhile chrome updates and nobody who runs norton and windows 10 can open google chrome for a day until people figure out that norton fucks the new chrome.

I fixed an ActiveX integration issue earlier this year :buddy:

Also, that's a problem with poo poo (all third party) AV, not Chrome

# ? Oct 31, 2019 14:11

Lumpy: Apr 26, 2002; La! La! La! Laaaa!; College Slice

uncle blog posted:

So, I'm still trucking along with Apollo. I moved the state down a level, per the thread's suggestion. Now I've reached a new pickle, in a component where Apollo loads in a list of items that I want displayed as checkboxes. The trouble is managing the state of those boxes. Previously this was done with React, but now I'm not quite sure how to do it.

Basically, as the component loads its array of items, it also creates a state object with those items. But as the component with the Apollo query seems to be continually rerendered when it is setting the state, so that's a no go.
So what's the better way to manage state of the checkboxes loaded with Apollo?

When your CheckBoxes component renders, it runs the query, which on completion sets state in the parent. Which updates state, which causes it to render, and since that child uses itemList, it needs to render, which will run the query, which will set parent state, which will....

It is doing exactly what you asked it to.

Here's some code written before I had my coffee so it might suck.

code:

const Dad = () => {
  const [list, setList] = useState([]);
  const { data, loading, error } = useQuery(BLAH);
  useEffect(() => {
    if(data && data.items) {
      setList(data.items);
    }
  }, [data])

  return(
    {loading && <Load />}
    {error && <OhCrap />}
    {list.length && <ListDrawThing list={list}  />}
  )
     
}

EDIT: As for where / how to store the state of the individual checkboxes, that depends entirely on what else needs to know about that state. If the list component is the only thing that cares, it's local component state. If a few related components care, then a small scoped Context might fit the bill. If the app as a whole cares about them, then maaaaybe a global context, or more likely @client storage in Apollo since you have there anyway.

Lumpy fucked around with this message at 15:09 on Oct 31, 2019

# ? Oct 31, 2019 14:57

Lumpy: Apr 26, 2002; La! La! La! Laaaa!; College Slice

Double posting for my own Apollo checkbox related question!

If I have a query:

code:

GET_BUTTS = {
   getButtsByZipCode: (zip: $aZip) {
     buttSizes
   }
}

And a list of checkboxes with a mess of zip codes, I can easily refetch w/ a new zip each time a user checks a new box. However, a user can click a lot faster than we can fetch, so if they click 4 boxes in the time it takes that first query to run, is there a mechanism in Apollo for sending out the same query multiple times in parallel? Obviously I can either just build a queue of zip codes or use fetch to make my own requests manually in parallel, but looking through the docs it doesn't seem like I can do that with Apollo client.

# ? Oct 31, 2019 15:54

spiritual bypass: Feb 19, 2008; Grimey Drawer

Bruegels Fuckbooks posted:

i've checked bug fixes and poo poo in to six different activex controls within the past year.

time to

# ? Oct 31, 2019 16:10

My Rhythmic Crotch: Jan 13, 2011

Hey dudes, is this a good thread to chat about web stores and shopping carts and stuff?

I'm a long time web developer but I have never needed to do a web store, now I've got a side business and I want to sell my widgets. I'm hoping to hear technical perspectives about supporting your own web store. Is it a fool's errand, should I just use Shopify?

# ? Oct 31, 2019 16:31

MrMoo: Sep 14, 2000

My Rhythmic Crotch posted:

I'm a long time web developer but I have never needed to do a web store, now I've got a side business and I want to sell my widgets. I'm hoping to hear technical perspectives about supporting your own web store. Is it a fool's errand, should I just use Shopify?

If your time is almost worthless and there is no rush to sell anything then DIY. Shopify gets you to market quick and can integrate with oodles of stuff. It has a tiered pricing structure which can significantly increase with functionality though.

If you�re creating a store for services or products, your time should be spent on those services and products, not the means for consumers to get them. Obviously this changes when you get incredibly large, but that�s a good problem to have.

DIY works for wholesale which is not always covered well, ie buying a lot of variations in bulk. But then you can often get away with processing money outside of the website.

MrMoo fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Oct 31, 2019

# ? Oct 31, 2019 19:09

The Dark Souls of Posters: Nov 4, 2011; Just Post, Kupo

A DIY shouldn't be too bad to do for a newish web developer. The trickiest part is the shopping cart, but it is a fun problem to solve!

# ? Oct 31, 2019 21:01

Thermopyle: Jul 1, 2003; ...the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt. �Bertrand Russell

MrMoo posted:

If your time is almost worthless and there is no rush to sell anything then DIY. Shopify gets you to market quick and can integrate with oodles of stuff. It has a tiered pricing structure which can significantly increase with functionality though.

If you�re creating a store for services or products, your time should be spent on those services and products, not the means for consumers to get them. Obviously this changes when you get incredibly large, but that�s a good problem to have.

DIY works for wholesale which is not always covered well, ie buying a lot of variations in bulk. But then you can often get away with processing money outside of the website.

This person knows their poo poo.

It's too easy for us people who know how to build stuff to think we should be building stuff.

You should be spending your time solving not-already-solved problems. Now, maybe the not-already-solved problem is Shopify missing a feature or being too expensive, but make sure you're not just doing stuff because you can.

# ? Oct 31, 2019 21:53

My Rhythmic Crotch: Jan 13, 2011

I think what's tripping me up is that I'm having a very hard time understanding the cost of something like Magento on a per-month and per-transaction basis. Shopify and the like make that very easy to understand. This makes me feel like I'm leaving dollars on the table by not understanding all the options out there.

I absolutely understand the value of not reinventing the wheel though. A working, existing solution that covers my use case and how I want to build and sell my widgets... that is very valuable.

Edit: I'm currently in what I'm calling "vendor hell" where I'm looking for places that can do some of the manufacturing steps to get me from the only hand-built prototype, up to a real thing that people can buy. So I do have some available time to mess around and experiment, but ideally less of my time and effort spent on this == better.

My Rhythmic Crotch fucked around with this message at 22:38 on Oct 31, 2019

# ? Oct 31, 2019 22:05

Volguus: Mar 3, 2009

If you're only looking to present a product and give the ability to the customer to pay you via a credit card, something like Stripe can make it quite easy to do that. The api is very straight-forward and you could integrate that in your website relatively fast. Their pricing is not too bad either.
But if you're actually looking for a webstore in earnest, with all the features that would entail, ugh ... that can get out of hand fast. I totally support the suggestions everyone else gave: just focus on your product and let others worry about selling stuff. But if just Stripe would work for you, that is relatively easy to setup.

# ? Oct 31, 2019 22:58

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

Shopify is actually quite easy to tweak, in my experience, and it's only more expensive the DIY if you don't value your time much at all. The only case in which I would recommend a DIY solution is if you have some sort of special case that cannot even be handled via modifying Shopify in some way (plugins, etc.).

That being said, I've been asked to quote on a project using a similar service, and they want to add a feature to it that does not seem to be well-supported by the API of the service, and I'm running out of ways to tell them the only way to accomplish what they want (and I can't even guarantee it will work) is to ruthlessly abuse the API to do things it was never intended to do. The backstory is that I've done a number of assorted plugins, apps, tweaks, etc. for another web developer who doesn't have the skillset to do them himself, and now in his mind, anything that he doesn't know how to do is likely something I both can do and know how to do. This is a filthy lie, and I do not know how to make this dime-store version of Shopify support recurring billing and a customer portal where customers can tweak subscription options and access members-only discounts, and frankly I don't believe it's possible in any kind of reliable or economical sense. Oh well.

# ? Nov 1, 2019 00:15

My Rhythmic Crotch: Jan 13, 2011

I think I'll start with Shopify and if I run into missing features or other issues, I will look at building something with Stripe or whatever.

Thanks for bouncing some ideas around.

# ? Nov 1, 2019 16:16

Mr. Apollo: Nov 8, 2000

At my work we have an in house web based program to send out mass emails to the sales team. I'd like to put tables in the email that look like the below tables:

I've used the following HTML code to generate the tables:

https://www.w3schools.com/bootstrap/tryit.asp?filename=trybs_table_basic&stacked=h

https://www.w3schools.com/bootstrap/tryit.asp?filename=trybs_table_striped&stacked=h

The tables display properly in the preview editor, but when I send the email, the tables end up looking like this in Outlook 2016:

I've been told that the mailing program can only send HTML or plain text emails, it can't use CSS anything like that. Are the issues I'm having related to the code or to something in Outlook?

# ? Nov 12, 2019 19:35

Volguus: Mar 3, 2009

When sending HTML emails, everything that you knew about writing HTML is void.

- You have to inline your CSS. Do not link to external stylesheets or script files.
- Alignment, in HTML email, is best done using tables
- Use the CSS only for visual enhancement. Keep it simple.
- You can use inline CSS (using the style attribute) as well. That works best, in most HTML capable email clients.
- Always, always, include the plain/text version of the email.

# ? Nov 12, 2019 19:40

Lumpy: Apr 26, 2002; La! La! La! Laaaa!; College Slice

Volguus posted:

When sending HTML emails, everything that you knew about writing HTML is void.

* unless everything you knew about HTML was learned in a small two month window in early 1997.

# ? Nov 12, 2019 20:29

Mr. Apollo: Nov 8, 2000

Ok thanks. That would explain why things weren't working.

edit - Yay! It worked. Thanks for the tips and advice.

Mr. Apollo fucked around with this message at 20:36 on Nov 12, 2019

# ? Nov 12, 2019 20:33

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

Email is hateful in essentially every aspect and really ought to be re-engineered from scratch.

# ? Nov 13, 2019 16:49

kedo: Nov 27, 2007

PT6A posted:

Email is hateful in essentially every aspect and really ought to be re-engineered from scratch.

Not an empty quote.

# ? Nov 13, 2019 20:01

marumaru: May 20, 2013

PT6A posted:

Email is hateful in essentially every aspect and really ought to be re-engineered from scratch.

I can almost hear the thousands of companies that use comically outdated software complaining about this.

# ? Nov 13, 2019 20:12

Nolgthorn: Jan 30, 2001; The pendulum of the mind alternates between sense and nonsense

PT6A posted:

Email is hateful in essentially every aspect and really ought to be re-engineered from scratch.

It was, Google Wave was an explicit replacement for the email format, and it was rejected by every single man woman and child alive. So we still have email probably the worst internet thing, and I still use it for everything.

# ? Nov 13, 2019 20:37

Thermopyle: Jul 1, 2003; ...the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt. �Bertrand Russell

I never used Google Wave, but my understanding was that people who used it really loved it...the problem was less that everyone rejected it and more that it's really hard to bypass network effects.

# ? Nov 13, 2019 20:40

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 12, 2024 21:45

The Merkinman: Apr 22, 2007; I sell only quality merkins. What is a merkin you ask? Why, it's a wig for your genitals!

Email is fine, there just need to be a push for the email clients to actually render with standards and modern compatibility instead of like, using the rendering engine from Word.

# ? Nov 13, 2019 20:54

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

«‹›362 »