8 ms·

Sorry, but the scrolling of the page is just confusing. Even if it was done with a good and helpful intend. For a lot of people it's pure pain if you take cont

Sorry, but the scrolling of the page is just confusing. Even if it was done with a good and helpful intend. For a lot of people it's pure pain if you take control of the scrolling.

currysausage 11y ago
I hate to bikeshed, but the amount of wasted vertical screen space [1] makes me almost a little angry. Web designers: if you think it's a good idea to reimplement basic browser functionality (scrolling), or to emulate the UX of HTML frames, please think again. [1] http://i.imgur.com/IUEqFj7.jpg http://i.imgur.com/IUEqFj7.jpg
- ank_the_elder 11y ago
  So many mobile sites implement this same unpleasant UI control where the header follows your scrolling and stubbornly takes a portion of the screen without adding any useful functionality, that I wonder if people know it's possible to scroll to the top of any page and see the header there...
  - visarga 11y ago
    <rant>I also object to menus that hide when scrolling up and show when scrolling down. I usually place the row I am reading at the top of the window to make it easier to follow visually. When I need to scroll back a little, the pesky menu comes out instead of the text. I think scroll up should be the exact inverse of scroll down, not a menu display trigger. Or, at least, offer us a few lines back scroll before showing the damn menu.
    - willlma 11y ago
      > at least, offer us a few lines back scroll before showing the damn menu This
      - umut 11y ago
        I dont agree that you can kill me. At least cut a few fingers off, before killing. ^^ No, not this
  - happyslobro 11y ago
    I tried to explain the retardedness of this to management, before it was implemented. They were like "but people share more when the widgets are always visible, we A/B tested this!" It's like talking to a rock sometimes.
    - jacobush 11y ago
      Who is the rock?
      - chris_wot 11y ago
        The more responsive and thoughtful of the two, it appears.
    - userbinator 11y ago
      That's like saying "but people click the ads more when they're obscuring most of the page or right next to the download button." They certainly do. Whether they intended to, however, is a different matter.
- arm 11y ago
  It looks absolutely fantastic with JavaScript disabled though (which is how I browse the Web most of the time): http://f.cl.ly/items/0Y3e3k3A17293r0s2y3d/Screen%20Shot%202016-03-01%20at%2012.58.10%20AM.png http://f.cl.ly/items/0Y3e3k3A17293r0s2y3d/Screen%20Shot%2020...
  - apatters 11y ago
    I would much rather see an implementation of the Web where by default websites need to ask for your permission to load and execute scripts. This would prompt the creation of a widely accessible "reach web" which would never break screen readers or URLs, wouldn't invade your privacy, and could be accessed with a text-only browser. Then there would also be the "rich web" - parts of sites which behave like an app and consequently need user approval to run, rather like you need to "approve" an actual app by downloading it. Many challenges to consider but I think this would solve a lot of problems.
    - arm 11y ago
      Completely agree with you. Actually, I was oversimplifying when I said I have JavaScript disabled. I’m actually using JS Blocker¹, which gives me your first sentence². Of course, the end user using a browser extension to gain that functionality instead of it simply being a part of the Web does nothing to actually encourage the creation of a “reach web”. ―――――― ¹ — http://jsblocker.toggleable.com/ http://jsblocker.toggleable.com/ ² — http://f.cl.ly/items/0q1m280M40290t222n0U/js_blocker.png http://f.cl.ly/items/0q1m280M40290t222n0U/js_blocker.png
      - marrs 11y ago
        Wow, 2 other people in the universe who actually care about this stuff. I thought I was the only one!
- edwinyzh 11y ago
  Agreed, the Gmail web UI is another example, and I've never been able to understand this...
SonicSoul 11y ago
hijacked left swipe to navigate back was a bigger pain for me
- mintplant 11y ago
  Google's Blogger does the same sort of thing, and it really annoys me. Swerve left or right as you're scrolling through the page and it "helpfully" takes you to a different article.
  - 0x0 11y ago
    That is so infuriating, especially for code blocks with no word wrap! Oh you want to scroll to read the rest of the line? How about this random article instead?! Pfft.
  - FreeFull 11y ago
    The worst thing is that AFAIK, you can't view Blogger articles with javascript disabled.
- trymas 11y ago
  web design 101: do not override default use of mouse and keyboard. That's just pure rage. Why developer of that website even bothered with implementing (or using some library) to hijack mouse actions.
rybosome 11y ago
Agreed. I tend to scroll in small increments (maybe every other line of text) in an attempt to keep the content I am looking in the same position relative to my eye. This site's scrolling kept behaving in a way that was inconsistent with my expectations, and forced me to actively pay attention to what should have been an intuitive interaction. Irritating and distracting.
speeder 11y ago
My mouse is currently with the scrollwheel having some issues. On this site the result was a total disaster: any attempt of scrolling made the site jump around randomly, and immediately stop right back at the start again, making scrolling with the mouse impossible.
userbinator 11y ago
Every time I see comments on how a site tries to override the browser functionality, I'm once again reminded of why I don't have JavaScript on by default. I don't notice these things at all as a result, and this site is as pleasant to read as any other.
visarga 11y ago
Yes, the design is awful. I feel like it's 1995 all over again.
- jensen123 11y ago
  I seem to remember blinking text, animated GIFs, slow-loading Flash and Java applets back in 1995, although I'm not sure if things were ever as bad as it is now. Then I guess around 2005 web design was generally quite good. And lately it has become pretty awful because many people obviously aren't able to restrain themselves with Javascript.
andreapaiola 11y ago
voilà http://andreapaiola.name/magpie/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reactos.ru%2Fproject-news%2Freactos-participation-google-summer-code-2016&action=&links=on http://andreapaiola.name/magpie/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reacto...
StevePerkins 11y ago
If you want to talk about bad scrolling experiences, then I give you Hacker News. Half the time when there's a submission about some deeply technical topic... before seeing any discussion of the actual topic, you have to scroll through 3 or 4 pages of debate about the ergonomics of the font kerning on the blog post or something. This is a group of C/C++ hackers who have spent the past 18 years re-implementing Windows 95. The fact that there's any CSS at all on their website is a minor miracle. I don't know how strongly I feel about non-responsive websites displaying a fixed header bar. However, I'm pretty sure that most people who do feel strongly about it either way aren't going to be using or hacking on ReactOS.
- orbitur 11y ago
  Collapsible threads should be a part of the site by now. I have a Chrome extension installed that adds this feature but it's kinda wonky sometimes.
  - jrcii 11y ago
    I have this reliable bookmarklet which makes comments collapsible, however it stopped working once I got a downvote arrow: http://pastebin.com/raw/iMkHgmNZ http://pastebin.com/raw/iMkHgmNZ
rawe 11y ago
smoothScroll for jQuery; seems to be fixed now. https://jira.reactos.org/browse/ONLINE-525 https://jira.reactos.org/browse/ONLINE-525
jeditobe 11y ago
Please recheck! No more smooth scrolling!!! https://www.reactos.org/ https://www.reactos.org/

Sorry, but the scrolling of the page is just confusing. Even if it was done with a good and helpful intend. For a lot of people it's pure pain if you take control of the scrolling.

currysausage 11y ago

I hate to bikeshed, but the amount of wasted vertical screen space [1] makes me almost a little angry. Web designers: if you think it's a good idea to reimplement basic browser functionality (scrolling), or to emulate the UX of HTML frames, please think again. [1] http://i.imgur.com/IUEqFj7.jpg http://i.imgur.com/IUEqFj7.jpg

ank_the_elder 11y ago
So many mobile sites implement this same unpleasant UI control where the header follows your scrolling and stubbornly takes a portion of the screen without adding any useful functionality, that I wonder if people know it's possible to scroll to the top of any page and see the header there...
- visarga 11y ago
  <rant>I also object to menus that hide when scrolling up and show when scrolling down. I usually place the row I am reading at the top of the window to make it easier to follow visually. When I need to scroll back a little, the pesky menu comes out instead of the text. I think scroll up should be the exact inverse of scroll down, not a menu display trigger. Or, at least, offer us a few lines back scroll before showing the damn menu.
  - willlma 11y ago
    > at least, offer us a few lines back scroll before showing the damn menu This
    - umut 11y ago
      I dont agree that you can kill me. At least cut a few fingers off, before killing. ^^ No, not this
- happyslobro 11y ago
  I tried to explain the retardedness of this to management, before it was implemented. They were like "but people share more when the widgets are always visible, we A/B tested this!" It's like talking to a rock sometimes.
  - jacobush 11y ago
    Who is the rock?
    - chris_wot 11y ago
      The more responsive and thoughtful of the two, it appears.
  - userbinator 11y ago
    That's like saying "but people click the ads more when they're obscuring most of the page or right next to the download button." They certainly do. Whether they intended to, however, is a different matter.
arm 11y ago
It looks absolutely fantastic with JavaScript disabled though (which is how I browse the Web most of the time): http://f.cl.ly/items/0Y3e3k3A17293r0s2y3d/Screen%20Shot%202016-03-01%20at%2012.58.10%20AM.png http://f.cl.ly/items/0Y3e3k3A17293r0s2y3d/Screen%20Shot%2020...
- apatters 11y ago
  I would much rather see an implementation of the Web where by default websites need to ask for your permission to load and execute scripts. This would prompt the creation of a widely accessible "reach web" which would never break screen readers or URLs, wouldn't invade your privacy, and could be accessed with a text-only browser. Then there would also be the "rich web" - parts of sites which behave like an app and consequently need user approval to run, rather like you need to "approve" an actual app by downloading it. Many challenges to consider but I think this would solve a lot of problems.
  - arm 11y ago
    Completely agree with you. Actually, I was oversimplifying when I said I have JavaScript disabled. I’m actually using JS Blocker¹, which gives me your first sentence². Of course, the end user using a browser extension to gain that functionality instead of it simply being a part of the Web does nothing to actually encourage the creation of a “reach web”. ―――――― ¹ — http://jsblocker.toggleable.com/ http://jsblocker.toggleable.com/ ² — http://f.cl.ly/items/0q1m280M40290t222n0U/js_blocker.png http://f.cl.ly/items/0q1m280M40290t222n0U/js_blocker.png
    - marrs 11y ago
      Wow, 2 other people in the universe who actually care about this stuff. I thought I was the only one!
edwinyzh 11y ago
Agreed, the Gmail web UI is another example, and I've never been able to understand this...

SonicSoul 11y ago

hijacked left swipe to navigate back was a bigger pain for me

mintplant 11y ago
Google's Blogger does the same sort of thing, and it really annoys me. Swerve left or right as you're scrolling through the page and it "helpfully" takes you to a different article.
- 0x0 11y ago
  That is so infuriating, especially for code blocks with no word wrap! Oh you want to scroll to read the rest of the line? How about this random article instead?! Pfft.
- FreeFull 11y ago
  The worst thing is that AFAIK, you can't view Blogger articles with javascript disabled.
trymas 11y ago
web design 101: do not override default use of mouse and keyboard. That's just pure rage. Why developer of that website even bothered with implementing (or using some library) to hijack mouse actions.

rybosome 11y ago

Agreed. I tend to scroll in small increments (maybe every other line of text) in an attempt to keep the content I am looking in the same position relative to my eye. This site's scrolling kept behaving in a way that was inconsistent with my expectations, and forced me to actively pay attention to what should have been an intuitive interaction. Irritating and distracting.

speeder 11y ago

My mouse is currently with the scrollwheel having some issues. On this site the result was a total disaster: any attempt of scrolling made the site jump around randomly, and immediately stop right back at the start again, making scrolling with the mouse impossible.

userbinator 11y ago

Every time I see comments on how a site tries to override the browser functionality, I'm once again reminded of why I don't have JavaScript on by default. I don't notice these things at all as a result, and this site is as pleasant to read as any other.

visarga 11y ago

Yes, the design is awful. I feel like it's 1995 all over again.

jensen123 11y ago
I seem to remember blinking text, animated GIFs, slow-loading Flash and Java applets back in 1995, although I'm not sure if things were ever as bad as it is now. Then I guess around 2005 web design was generally quite good. And lately it has become pretty awful because many people obviously aren't able to restrain themselves with Javascript.

andreapaiola 11y ago

voilà http://andreapaiola.name/magpie/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reactos.ru%2Fproject-news%2Freactos-participation-google-summer-code-2016&action=&links=on http://andreapaiola.name/magpie/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reacto...

StevePerkins 11y ago

If you want to talk about bad scrolling experiences, then I give you Hacker News. Half the time when there's a submission about some deeply technical topic... before seeing any discussion of the actual topic, you have to scroll through 3 or 4 pages of debate about the ergonomics of the font kerning on the blog post or something. This is a group of C/C++ hackers who have spent the past 18 years re-implementing Windows 95. The fact that there's any CSS at all on their website is a minor miracle. I don't know how strongly I feel about non-responsive websites displaying a fixed header bar. However, I'm pretty sure that most people who do feel strongly about it either way aren't going to be using or hacking on ReactOS.

orbitur 11y ago
Collapsible threads should be a part of the site by now. I have a Chrome extension installed that adds this feature but it's kinda wonky sometimes.
- jrcii 11y ago
  I have this reliable bookmarklet which makes comments collapsible, however it stopped working once I got a downvote arrow: http://pastebin.com/raw/iMkHgmNZ http://pastebin.com/raw/iMkHgmNZ

rawe 11y ago

smoothScroll for jQuery; seems to be fixed now. https://jira.reactos.org/browse/ONLINE-525 https://jira.reactos.org/browse/ONLINE-525

jeditobe 11y ago

Please recheck! No more smooth scrolling!!! https://www.reactos.org/ https://www.reactos.org/