|Just a comment on Win32 Clients
||[Nov. 27th, 2001|01:18 pm]
LiveJournal Client Discussions
Just to little things I'd like to pick on.
First off is that there is no, "Are you sure you want to exit ?" message when I hit Alt-F4 or try to close the window. This creates quite a pain when I may get "Close Window Happy" on some popups (stupid pr0n... well.. wait.. GOOD pr0n.. stupid popups) and BAM! there goes a 5 page journal entry. Frustrating :-)
The second thing is tiny... WINAMP 3 !! :-) It's quite cool, and I'm using the Internal Beta now full time. Should we expect the new LJ clients to support "Auto Song Detection" sooner... or later ?? ;-)
Thanks guys. Geek on.
In addition, I think it would be great if whatever you have typed in was saved in between sessions. Let's say that I started writing an entry, but needed to reboot my computer. If I could just close the client, boot the computer, restart the client, and have all the text and stuff was it was when I shut down, that would be great. If that's implemented, a "reset all" button would be great to get everything back to your defaults.
both of you should try the sema client - it does buffer saving periodically. Only problem is that (at least the version I have) doesn't clear the saved buffer when you post, so if you close the after you post, it may open with last post in the buffer.
I've tried Sema... it doesn't do one of the two things I requested. ;-)
2001-11-27 12:13 pm (UTC)
If you request that in ljwin32_sema
, there's a good chance he'll add it.
Oh.. these were just Ideas to all the Win32 clients... :-)
Not just HIS inparticular ;-)
2001-11-27 12:18 pm (UTC)
Yeah, I realised that. But his is the only one that's being actively maintained, the "official" one isn't.
2001-11-27 09:01 pm (UTC)
Only problem is that doesn't clear the saved buffer when you post
i've done that deliberately.
i may add option "Clear draft after post", think it'll satisfy you
2001-11-27 09:06 pm (UTC)
I've added both things to my to-do list (I mean ljwin32_sema
winamp3 support should be at most a 5 line patch (99% cut and paste from the rest of the code). i never added support for it because it didnt like my machine and they changed the class name a few times in the versions that i saw, which is annoying.
Currently I'm using the Internal Beta #453
, and it looks like it's a solid product. They also released a new SDK with this internal beta, so I think it'd be time to get WinAmp3 support in some of them clients. :-)
you are using an internal product (the version you have not being available to the public through legit channels) and an unfinalized and changing sdk.. yet at the same time you are saying it should be included in the clients? hmmm... seems a little illogical.
It's available to me through legit channels, and all I'm sayin is the SDK is getting more and more final as the days go on. I doubt they're going to change the class name MUCH MORE... besides.. even if they did.. just point the client to the new class in the clients 'next' release.
when i said avaiable to the public through legit channels.. i meant the general public. how is one supposed to develop for something that they don't have access to or the ability to test against directly? third party testing is tedious at best. the sdk doesnt really matter all that much since winamp3 would still use the findwindow technique. also, changing the class name is a pain in the ass due to versioning. people don't always upgrade to the latest and greatest version. also, when you think about backwards compatibility... it becomes even more of a headache. once something is supported, it is bad style to remove support for it (including version changes). that bloats the code tremendously in the end. i think there was atleast 3 or 4 class name changes for winamp3 so far... and its still in devel.
I think 3 or 4 class name changes in almost 1.5 years of development isnt that bad.. but thats just me.
oh yeah... Public Beta 2 "Cold" was released today.
2001-12-05 06:57 pm (UTC)
"Are you sure you want to exit ?"
The best of both worlds would be to have the user be able to disable these messages ("Don't bother me with this message again.").
Nothing annoys me more than unnecessary confirmations... If I am not going to lose data, then don't bother me. :)
Actually, the client could only prompt you when trying to close when it has an unsubmitted entry lying in wait, otherwise it could just go to town..
Another option (and this is for the requesting user, not the client developer) is to toss the client into "Close button minimizes application" mode (which is in the options screen)... If you Alt-F4, the window disappears, but if you double-click on the tray icon it comes back, with all your content still safely housed within.