5 ms·

Hi, I'm one of the engineers working on the Apture replacement (Highlight). Care to be more specific about the biggest gripes you had with Apture's original imp

by cdata 15y ago

Hi, I'm one of the engineers working on the Apture replacement (Highlight). Care to be more specific about the biggest gripes you had with Apture's original implementation? As far as the general UI and UX is concerned, I'm not sure what we would really change, but generally I'd be happy to do what I can to ensure that bad practices aren't carried over (especially those related to user privacy).

chunkyslink 15y ago
Personally I hate the whole implementation. I've never found anything in those annoying boxes of any use at all. I just don't want a box popping up when I mouse over links. Its just a bad idea. Could you implement a 'permanently disable this feature' option ?
- cdata 15y ago
  That's a good idea. It's difficult to communicate the purpose of a "permanently opt out of this feature" button from the little widget that pops up, but it's definitely something we could integrate into the main window that expands. Would that be a satisfactory experience for you? Feel welcome to suggest alternative UI ideas for adding a feature like that, if you have any.
  - jerrya 15y ago
    I do like redthroway's suggestion of putting it on it's own subdomain. That makes it easy for noscript or adblock to get rid of that and only that and leave actually useful scripts and content served.
    - cdata 15y ago
      It seems like an easy way to disable it outright and permanently is a feature people would like to have. While noscript (and similar tools) would certainly solve this on a per-visitor basis, if we (CloudFlare) could provide a novel way to present an opt-out in the UI we could then report to our users how many of their visitors ultimately disabled the feature completely. This is just me musing about the possibilities, but overall that seems like it would be more constructive than our users thinking "Oh awesome, another one of those Apture things!" while their users silently grumble and block scripts..
      - Arelius 15y ago
        Certainly providing a global opt-out would help your stance in that you care about the end-users, and not just the advertisers using the service. There are probably also ways to figure out how many people opt-out using no-script also.
    - hack_edu 15y ago
      The notion that they would be willing to take any action to encourage NoScript is wishful thinking to say the least. Its a shame too, but it flies in the face of every aspect of their business model.
      - cdata 15y ago
        For what it's worth, I personally encourage the usage of NoScript, and other similar tools, to my friends and family. That said, what I'm trying to propose is that the UI for the app could allow site visitors to communicate a dissatisfaction with the app to the site owner, as that seems to me to allow for constructive feedback not possible when scripts are simply blocked outright.
- redthrowaway 15y ago
  Without knowing anything about Apture's implementation, I'm reasonably certain you could block it with NoScript. For highlight, just wait until it comes up then block "highlight.cloudflare.com" (or whatever). While I don't like NoScript's default behavior, it's a godsend if you allow all globally and just blacklist domains you dislike.
- robryan 15y ago
  Yeah this is something you can easily get by highlighting text, right clicking and clicking search Google when you really want to know something. Any other time it's going to be more of a hinderance than a help. Although in saying that I don't mind the ebook highlight a word and get a definition as usually with an ebook you don't want to break the flow and venture back out onto the net, whereas while browsing the net this is perfectly normal.
  - cdata 15y ago
    That's a very good point on both counts. In some ways this duplicates existing functionality (although in our case, it is mostly a side effect of trying to provide our users with the same features they would be losing when Apture is shut down). As you said, though, there is value in providing contextual information about a topic without breaking the flow of the page. If we could turn Highlight into a tool that captures that value really well, I think the effort would be worth our while.
- Maro 15y ago
  Install the Ghostery addon.
jdc 15y ago
Making the box appear in a static location might make it less irritating.
- cdata 15y ago
  That's definitely an option we can consider giving our users. It wouldn't be the first time we've supported a feature like that. Thanks for the idea!
jerrya 15y ago
Obviously I didn't like the the poor implementation that sent any and all of my selections off to their servers. I really dislike what it does to mouse input. If I select something, it's mostly because I want to copy and paste it. I am very good about crediting where I collect my copy and paste segments from, I didn't need apture to put in references to the original article in every single one of my cut and paste buffers. Sometimes I select so I can search. I want to conduct the search with my favored search engine. I don't want Apture conducting the search (poorly) with the intent of keeping me at the original site. And sometimes I click or even select in a window just to leave a visual indicator of where I am so that when I scroll or drag a window around, I can find my place easier. I don't want apture windows popping up whenever I click or select anything. To quote the Simpson's the Internets do not work that way. And there was no way to opt out of it short of using noscript or adblock or other technologies to strip it away. So: don't invade my privacy, don't insert text into my cut and paste buffers, don't steal my search abilities, don't steal my mouse clicks, don't pop up windows, don't break my browser. Apart from that, it was a real winner service for the websites, and not for their visitors
- cdata 15y ago
  > Don't invade my privacy To varying extents, saying you don't do this is really hard for any third party application integrated into a website. Unfortunately, we can't pull up contextual search results about a text selection without consulting a third party service like Bing or Duck Duck Go, so I doubt that we'll be able to do much better than offering an "opt out" feature in our UI. > Don't insert text into my cut and paste buffers We don't currently do this, but if our users ask for it, there is a good chance we will add it. Since it does sound like a frustrating thing, we can push to make it an "opt in" feature on the site owner's side, as opposed to the default behavior. At least that way, it'll only happen when the site owner really wants it to. > Don't steal my search abilities I don't believe we currently inhibit your ability to search with your engine of choice. If you find that we do, please let me know! > Don't steal my mouse clicks We don't "steal" your mouse clicks (though we do listen to them ;), and we do try to make sure the window only pops up when you have selected text. This experience will hopefully improve over time. Unfortunately, not doing this prevents the app from working in the first place (unless you have a better way to implement it) > Don't pop up windows Again, not doing this makes it difficult to have the app in the first place. I know its not for everyone, but a lot of our users really enjoy this functionality. > Don't break my browser That's something I can definitely do. Please let me know if you notice us breaking your browser in any way :) us not breaking your browser is one of my highest concerns.
esrauch 15y ago
I highlight text while I'm reading it on a regular basis, almost never to copy paste it or do anything else, it just helps me keep track of where I am in the article. I pretty much never want highlighting to have any action except highlighting. Even if it didn't, it's breaking consistent behavior because highlighting on page X suddenly has completely different behavior than on page Y. There should at least be a cookie that can optionally disable the service that can be set when it opens up. Would be pretty easy to implement and it would at least allow an out for people who think the experience is awful.
SquareWheel 15y ago
If I may also contribute, I find this type of activity to be a major inconvenience, and often times infuriating. Here are three examples: Clipboard hijacking: Remember Tynt? They hijacked your clipboard to say "Read more at <link>" or some nonsense. That is not what I copied, and you are breaking my expectations by modifying it. Gruber has a much better post on this (http://daringfireball.net/2010/05/tynt_copy_paste_jerks http://daringfireball.net/2010/05/tynt_copy_paste_jerks), but essentially: knock it off. Don't try and manipulate your reader. Information panels: If I doubleclick a word, it's because I'm marking my place in an article, or I intend to copy and paste that word. To offer any sort of popup or panel gets in my way, and causes me annoyance. This is not the expected behavior, and I'm far less likely to continue reading the article or website if this happens. Tracking: I don't know how bad yours is, but with Apture it was just one more company tracking me. There's already Google +1, Facebook like buttons, and Analytics on every page - and this is just one more thing to slow down my page and turn my data usage into statistics. I don't like it. I can enable Noscript, but I shouldn't have to. You may say that these are features that your users (Cloudflare customers) want, but I'm sorry - they're morons. I deal with clients who would eat these kinds of features up, "they'll set us apart from other websites!". No. It only hurts the end users, and does not provide useful features. And it really concerns me that Google bought Apture, I often use Chrome and do not want to see this integrated at any level. I can see marketers and managers eating this stuff up, but it surprises me that the engineers at Google are interested.

by cdata 15y ago

chunkyslink 15y ago

Personally I hate the whole implementation. I've never found anything in those annoying boxes of any use at all. I just don't want a box popping up when I mouse over links. Its just a bad idea. Could you implement a 'permanently disable this feature' option ?

cdata 15y ago
That's a good idea. It's difficult to communicate the purpose of a "permanently opt out of this feature" button from the little widget that pops up, but it's definitely something we could integrate into the main window that expands. Would that be a satisfactory experience for you? Feel welcome to suggest alternative UI ideas for adding a feature like that, if you have any.
- jerrya 15y ago
  I do like redthroway's suggestion of putting it on it's own subdomain. That makes it easy for noscript or adblock to get rid of that and only that and leave actually useful scripts and content served.
  - cdata 15y ago
    It seems like an easy way to disable it outright and permanently is a feature people would like to have. While noscript (and similar tools) would certainly solve this on a per-visitor basis, if we (CloudFlare) could provide a novel way to present an opt-out in the UI we could then report to our users how many of their visitors ultimately disabled the feature completely. This is just me musing about the possibilities, but overall that seems like it would be more constructive than our users thinking "Oh awesome, another one of those Apture things!" while their users silently grumble and block scripts..
    - Arelius 15y ago
      Certainly providing a global opt-out would help your stance in that you care about the end-users, and not just the advertisers using the service. There are probably also ways to figure out how many people opt-out using no-script also.
  - hack_edu 15y ago
    The notion that they would be willing to take any action to encourage NoScript is wishful thinking to say the least. Its a shame too, but it flies in the face of every aspect of their business model.
    - cdata 15y ago
      For what it's worth, I personally encourage the usage of NoScript, and other similar tools, to my friends and family. That said, what I'm trying to propose is that the UI for the app could allow site visitors to communicate a dissatisfaction with the app to the site owner, as that seems to me to allow for constructive feedback not possible when scripts are simply blocked outright.
redthrowaway 15y ago
Without knowing anything about Apture's implementation, I'm reasonably certain you could block it with NoScript. For highlight, just wait until it comes up then block "highlight.cloudflare.com" (or whatever). While I don't like NoScript's default behavior, it's a godsend if you allow all globally and just blacklist domains you dislike.
robryan 15y ago
Yeah this is something you can easily get by highlighting text, right clicking and clicking search Google when you really want to know something. Any other time it's going to be more of a hinderance than a help. Although in saying that I don't mind the ebook highlight a word and get a definition as usually with an ebook you don't want to break the flow and venture back out onto the net, whereas while browsing the net this is perfectly normal.
- cdata 15y ago
  That's a very good point on both counts. In some ways this duplicates existing functionality (although in our case, it is mostly a side effect of trying to provide our users with the same features they would be losing when Apture is shut down). As you said, though, there is value in providing contextual information about a topic without breaking the flow of the page. If we could turn Highlight into a tool that captures that value really well, I think the effort would be worth our while.
Maro 15y ago
Install the Ghostery addon.

jdc 15y ago

Making the box appear in a static location might make it less irritating.

cdata 15y ago
That's definitely an option we can consider giving our users. It wouldn't be the first time we've supported a feature like that. Thanks for the idea!

jerrya 15y ago

Obviously I didn't like the the poor implementation that sent any and all of my selections off to their servers. I really dislike what it does to mouse input. If I select something, it's mostly because I want to copy and paste it. I am very good about crediting where I collect my copy and paste segments from, I didn't need apture to put in references to the original article in every single one of my cut and paste buffers. Sometimes I select so I can search. I want to conduct the search with my favored search engine. I don't want Apture conducting the search (poorly) with the intent of keeping me at the original site. And sometimes I click or even select in a window just to leave a visual indicator of where I am so that when I scroll or drag a window around, I can find my place easier. I don't want apture windows popping up whenever I click or select anything. To quote the Simpson's the Internets do not work that way. And there was no way to opt out of it short of using noscript or adblock or other technologies to strip it away. So: don't invade my privacy, don't insert text into my cut and paste buffers, don't steal my search abilities, don't steal my mouse clicks, don't pop up windows, don't break my browser. Apart from that, it was a real winner service for the websites, and not for their visitors

cdata 15y ago
> Don't invade my privacy To varying extents, saying you don't do this is really hard for any third party application integrated into a website. Unfortunately, we can't pull up contextual search results about a text selection without consulting a third party service like Bing or Duck Duck Go, so I doubt that we'll be able to do much better than offering an "opt out" feature in our UI. > Don't insert text into my cut and paste buffers We don't currently do this, but if our users ask for it, there is a good chance we will add it. Since it does sound like a frustrating thing, we can push to make it an "opt in" feature on the site owner's side, as opposed to the default behavior. At least that way, it'll only happen when the site owner really wants it to. > Don't steal my search abilities I don't believe we currently inhibit your ability to search with your engine of choice. If you find that we do, please let me know! > Don't steal my mouse clicks We don't "steal" your mouse clicks (though we do listen to them ;), and we do try to make sure the window only pops up when you have selected text. This experience will hopefully improve over time. Unfortunately, not doing this prevents the app from working in the first place (unless you have a better way to implement it) > Don't pop up windows Again, not doing this makes it difficult to have the app in the first place. I know its not for everyone, but a lot of our users really enjoy this functionality. > Don't break my browser That's something I can definitely do. Please let me know if you notice us breaking your browser in any way :) us not breaking your browser is one of my highest concerns.

esrauch 15y ago

I highlight text while I'm reading it on a regular basis, almost never to copy paste it or do anything else, it just helps me keep track of where I am in the article. I pretty much never want highlighting to have any action except highlighting. Even if it didn't, it's breaking consistent behavior because highlighting on page X suddenly has completely different behavior than on page Y. There should at least be a cookie that can optionally disable the service that can be set when it opens up. Would be pretty easy to implement and it would at least allow an out for people who think the experience is awful.

SquareWheel 15y ago

If I may also contribute, I find this type of activity to be a major inconvenience, and often times infuriating. Here are three examples: Clipboard hijacking: Remember Tynt? They hijacked your clipboard to say "Read more at <link>" or some nonsense. That is not what I copied, and you are breaking my expectations by modifying it. Gruber has a much better post on this (http://daringfireball.net/2010/05/tynt_copy_paste_jerks http://daringfireball.net/2010/05/tynt_copy_paste_jerks), but essentially: knock it off. Don't try and manipulate your reader. Information panels: If I doubleclick a word, it's because I'm marking my place in an article, or I intend to copy and paste that word. To offer any sort of popup or panel gets in my way, and causes me annoyance. This is not the expected behavior, and I'm far less likely to continue reading the article or website if this happens. Tracking: I don't know how bad yours is, but with Apture it was just one more company tracking me. There's already Google +1, Facebook like buttons, and Analytics on every page - and this is just one more thing to slow down my page and turn my data usage into statistics. I don't like it. I can enable Noscript, but I shouldn't have to. You may say that these are features that your users (Cloudflare customers) want, but I'm sorry - they're morons. I deal with clients who would eat these kinds of features up, "they'll set us apart from other websites!". No. It only hurts the end users, and does not provide useful features. And it really concerns me that Google bought Apture, I often use Chrome and do not want to see this integrated at any level. I can see marketers and managers eating this stuff up, but it surprises me that the engineers at Google are interested.