By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
432,537 Members | 1,743 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 432,537 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

Possible to detect Windows desktop style?

P: n/a
I need to pop up a modal JS-based dialog (for some reason can't use
popup window, much less so showModalDialog()), and I'd like to imitate
the system popup titlebar according to user's desktop settings
(classic, XP, Vista). No big deal to make it work, but how do I know
the style to display? Any chance to figure out these settings
programmatically either on the client (preferrable), or possibly in
asp.net from something like Request["ServerVariables"] (not the best
thing but will work for this project). Would prefer cross-browser
compatibility, but can use IE-specific solution (sorry, no client side
activeX may be used, just plain JS/DOM/DHTML). Asking the user to
manually select visual preferences is not an option.

Thanks

NNN
Jun 27 '08 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
35 Replies


P: n/a
SAM
no****@nowhere.net a écrit :
I need to pop up a modal JS-based dialog (for some reason can't use
popup window, much less so showModalDialog()), and I'd like to imitate
the system popup titlebar according to user's desktop settings
(classic, XP, Vista).
and not Mac OS ? 9 or 10
No big deal to make it work,
Really ? fonts, colors, and so on, are probably fixed by the PC user
Where to find those settings (where and how are they saved)
but how do I know
the style to display? Any chance to figure out these settings
programmatically either on the client (preferrable), or possibly in
asp.net from something like Request["ServerVariables"] (not the best
thing but will work for this project). Would prefer cross-browser
compatibility, but can use IE-specific solution (sorry, no client side
activeX may be used, just plain JS/DOM/DHTML). Asking the user to
manually select visual preferences is not an option.
Dot not understand the need to display a desktop window that will be
different of navigator's one (and more: navigators can be skinned)?
It appears to me to be destabilizing

In XP or Vista wouldn't it be possible to choice :
- OS presentation
- Internet presentation
adding this choice to your project

--
sm
Jun 27 '08 #2

P: n/a
On Sat, 03 May 2008 11:49:26 +0200, SAM
<st*********************@wanadoo.fr.invalidwrote :
>no****@nowhere.net a écrit :
>I need to pop up a modal JS-based dialog (for some reason can't use
popup window, much less so showModalDialog()), and I'd like to imitate
the system popup titlebar according to user's desktop settings
(classic, XP, Vista).

and not Mac OS ? 9 or 10
Mac users are not a targeted user base. The spec calls for full
functionality on IE6+, at least core functionality on FireFox, and
doesn't care about other browsers, including but not limited to
Safari. If Mac users really want to use the proposed site, they'll
have to run it on FireFox or IE/Windows emulation - or get a standard
PC.
>
>No big deal to make it work,

Really ? fonts, colors, and so on, are probably fixed by the PC user
Where to find those settings (where and how are they saved)
For now, we are targeting only default XP, Vista, and Classic themes.
>
>but how do I know
the style to display? Any chance to figure out these settings
programmatically either on the client (preferrable), or possibly in
asp.net from something like Request["ServerVariables"] (not the best
thing but will work for this project). Would prefer cross-browser
compatibility, but can use IE-specific solution (sorry, no client side
activeX may be used, just plain JS/DOM/DHTML). Asking the user to
manually select visual preferences is not an option.

Dot not understand the need to display a desktop window that will be
different of navigator's one (and more: navigators can be skinned)?
It appears to me to be destabilizing

In XP or Vista wouldn't it be possible to choice :
- OS presentation
- Internet presentation
adding this choice to your project
This is not in the spec. Even more so, the spec calls for the
interface _not_ to be user-customizable, and to be as close to the
standard Windows interface as it can get. Don't you get the
difference between programming for fun, and development of business
app that involves things like spec, deadline, etc.?

NNN

Jun 27 '08 #3

P: n/a
no****@nowhere.net meinte:
This is not in the spec. Even more so, the spec calls for the
interface _not_ to be user-customizable, and to be as close to the
standard Windows interface as it can get. Don't you get the
difference between programming for fun, and development of business
app that involves things like spec, deadline, etc.?
Don't you get the idea, that there is a fundamental difference between
HTML documents shown in browsers and the UI of an OS? And don't babble
something about "specs" - it's your job to make things clear when
accepting those specs and tell the customer, that a 100%-something
integration won't be possible.

Anyway, since it is narrowed down to "standard or classic or Vista"
layout: Write the according CSS, have the user choose between the style
sheets mimicking the desktop appearance, store it in a cookie. Stop
whining. You can even use Opera or Firefox or another browser then. As
long as you don't have any form elements which are hard to impossible to
skin.

Gregor

--
http://photo.gregorkofler.at ::: Landschafts- und Reisefotografie
http://web.gregorkofler.com ::: meine JS-Spielwiese
http://www.image2d.com ::: Bildagentur für den alpinen Raum
Jun 27 '08 #4

P: n/a
On Sat, 03 May 2008 22:13:31 +0200, Gregor Kofler
<us****@gregorkofler.atwrote:
>no****@nowhere.net meinte:
>This is not in the spec. Even more so, the spec calls for the
interface _not_ to be user-customizable, and to be as close to the
standard Windows interface as it can get. Don't you get the
difference between programming for fun, and development of business
app that involves things like spec, deadline, etc.?

Don't you get the idea, that there is a fundamental difference between
HTML documents shown in browsers and the UI of an OS? And don't babble
something about "specs" - it's your job to make things clear when
accepting those specs and tell the customer, that a 100%-something
integration won't be possible.
I do get the idea. However I'm not in the position to tell it to
non-techie customers, and I happen to have a boss that wouldn't take
"no" for an answer unless I prove "beyond any reasonable doubt" that I
really tried to solve it.
>
Anyway, since it is narrowed down to "standard or classic or Vista"
layout: Write the according CSS,
already done - that's the easy part
>have the user choose between the style
sheets mimicking the desktop appearance,
This is what I can't do. It's not a technical decision, it's a
business decision, and it was not mine. If there's a way to find out
the setting by the means of coding, please let me know, I'll greatly
appreciate it. Or just confirm what I've suspected all along: it
can't be done.
>store it in a cookie. Stop
whining. You can even use Opera or Firefox or another browser then. As
long as you don't have any form elements which are hard to impossible to
skin.

Gregor
Believe me or not, I'm not a novice in the business (almost 10 years
in Web dev, MCAD and stuff). Usually I've found the vay to solve
things without asking for help. But this time I have neither the
solution nor a solid proof that it's not doable the way it was
requested. If you have a direct answer to the question, it'd be
greatly appreciated. If you have nothing to say but personal insults,
please just stay away from the thread.

NNN
Jun 27 '08 #5

P: n/a
rf
"no****@nowhere.net" <my***********@hotmail.comwrote in
news:ji********************************@4ax.com:
If there's a way to find out
the setting by the means of coding, please let me know, I'll greatly
appreciate it. Or just confirm what I've suspected all along: it
can't be done.
It can't be done.

--
Richard
Killing all google groups posts
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Jun 27 '08 #6

P: n/a
no****@nowhere.net meinte:
This is what I can't do. It's not a technical decision, it's a
business decision, and it was not mine.
So your boss is promising things to customers without consulting his
developers first, plus having no clue about feasibility and technical
issues? Nice.
If there's a way to find out
the setting by the means of coding, please let me know, I'll greatly
appreciate it. Or just confirm what I've suspected all along: it
can't be done.
It can't be done.
If you have a direct answer to the question, it'd be
greatly appreciated. If you have nothing to say but personal insults,
please just stay away from the thread.
Well, that's usenet. Anything else would be support you most likely have
to pay for.

Gregor
--
http://photo.gregorkofler.at ::: Landschafts- und Reisefotografie
http://web.gregorkofler.com ::: meine JS-Spielwiese
http://www.image2d.com ::: Bildagentur für den alpinen Raum
Jun 27 '08 #7

P: n/a
Use CSS. Browsers support direct access to each user's system font choices
and interface colors.

Here is one link:
http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-CSS2-1...font-shorthand

Brett Merkey
Jun 27 '08 #8

P: n/a
rf
"Brett Merkey" <bm*****@tampabay.rr.comwrote in news:481daa6d$0$12963
$4*******@roadrunner.com:
http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-CSS2-1...font-shorthand
And how precicely does this help the OP determine which skin is being used
in his viewers operating system?

--
Richard
Killing all google groups posts
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Jun 27 '08 #9

P: n/a
SAM
no****@nowhere.net a écrit :
On Sat, 03 May 2008 11:49:26 +0200, SAM
<st*********************@wanadoo.fr.invalidwrote :
(snip) something telling you only need to detect user's Win version
right ?
Mac users will have to do with it :-(
(I hate Windows and Windows hates me)
This is not in the spec. Even more so, the spec calls for the
interface _not_ to be user-customizable, and to be as close to the
standard Windows interface as it can get. Don't you get the
difference between programming for fun, and development of business
app that involves things like spec, deadline, etc.?
Developing for business ? Really ? Why won't you realize a real *.exe ?

Found that :
<http://jsbrwsniff.sourceforge.net/index.html>

HTH

--
sm
Jun 27 '08 #10

P: n/a
On May 2, 7:02 pm, "nob...@nowhere.net" <mygarbage2...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
I need to pop up a modal JS-based dialog (for some reason can't use
popup window, much less so showModalDialog()), and I'd like to imitate
the system popup titlebar according to user's desktop settings
(classic, XP, Vista). No big deal to make it work, but how do I know
the style to display? Any chance to figure out these settings
programmatically either on the client (preferrable), or possibly in
asp.net from something like Request["ServerVariables"] (not the best
thing but will work for this project). Would prefer cross-browser
compatibility, but can use IE-specific solution (sorry, no client side
activeX may be used, just plain JS/DOM/DHTML). Asking the user to
manually select visual preferences is not an option.

Thanks

NNN
You are correct - it can't be done. Their is no way for a browser to
access those system settings. You can get things like screen size and
so forth, but that is all.

Tyler
Jun 27 '08 #11

P: n/a
SAM
Logos a écrit :
On May 2, 7:02 pm, "nob...@nowhere.net" <mygarbage2...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>I need to pop up a modal JS-based dialog (for some reason can't use
popup window, much less so showModalDialog()), and I'd like to imitate
the system popup titlebar according to user's desktop settings
(classic, XP, Vista). No big deal to make it work, but how do I know
the style to display? Any chance to figure out these settings
programmatically either on the client (preferrable), or possibly in
asp.net from something like Request["ServerVariables"] (not the best
thing but will work for this project). Would prefer cross-browser
compatibility, but can use IE-specific solution (sorry, no client side
activeX may be used, just plain JS/DOM/DHTML). Asking the user to
manually select visual preferences is not an option.

Thanks

NNN

You are correct - it can't be done. Their is no way for a browser to
access those system settings. You can get things like screen size and
so forth, but that is all.
in address bar :

javascript:w=window.open("");for(i in
navigator)w.document.write("<li>"+i+" = "+eval('navigator.'+i));

I obtain with my Mac :
Firefox :
appVersion = 5.0 (Macintosh; fr)
platform = MacIntel
oscpu = Intel Mac OS X
Safari :
appVersion = 5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X; fr) ...etc
platform = MacIntel

I obtain with my Win XP and IE6 :
appMinorVersion = ;SP2;
cpuClass = x86
platform = Win32
opsProfile =
userProfile =
systemLanguage = fr
userLanguage = fr

Wouldn't all that be enough to detect the OS ?

--
sm
Jun 27 '08 #12

P: n/a
SAM meinte:
Wouldn't all that be enough to detect the OS ?
Detecting the OS is easy (both on client and server side; not really
reliable). Anyway, the OP wants to know the UI design settings of the
OS. And that's impossible.

Gregor
--
http://photo.gregorkofler.at ::: Landschafts- und Reisefotografie
http://web.gregorkofler.com ::: meine JS-Spielwiese
http://www.image2d.com ::: Bildagentur für den alpinen Raum
Jun 27 '08 #13

P: n/a
VK
On May 3, 6:02 am, "nob...@nowhere.net" <mygarbage2...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
I need to pop up a modal JS-based dialog (for some reason can't use
popup window, much less so showModalDialog()), and I'd like to imitate
the system popup titlebar according to user's desktop settings
(classic, XP, Vista). No big deal to make it work, but how do I know
the style to display? Any chance to figure out these settings
programmatically either on the client (preferrable), or possibly in
asp.net from something like Request["ServerVariables"] (not the best
thing but will work for this project). Would prefer cross-browser
compatibility, but can use IE-specific solution
CSS 2.x defines system color names besides explicit colors:
http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS21/ui.html#system-colors

It is marked as deprecated for CSS 3.x - but anyone ever implemented
it, it should be still here. I believe it worked for me for IE6 but I
never tested it intensively. You may try that.

Jun 27 '08 #14

P: n/a
SAM <st*********************@wanadoo.fr.invalidwrite s:
(snip) something telling you only need to detect user's Win version
right ?
Nope. I run Windows XP, but the first thing I turn off is themes,
so I have less than the "classic theme".

/L
--
Lasse Reichstein Nielsen - lr*@hotpop.com
DHTML Death Colors: <URL:http://www.infimum.dk/HTML/rasterTriangleDOM.html>
'Faith without judgement merely degrades the spirit divine.'
Jun 27 '08 #15

P: n/a
On Sun, 04 May 2008 19:48:45 +0200, Lasse Reichstein Nielsen
<lr*@hotpop.comwrote:
>SAM <st*********************@wanadoo.fr.invalidwrite s:
>(snip) something telling you only need to detect user's Win version
right ?

Nope. I run Windows XP, but the first thing I turn off is themes,
so I have less than the "classic theme".

/L
You are not alone - the first thing I do with any PC with XP or Vista
I have to work on is setting it to "classic modified", no visual
effects whatsoever. And I know quite a few folks that are just as
paranoid about it. If only all the users were like that...

Jun 27 '08 #16

P: n/a
On Sat, 03 May 2008 02:02:11 GMT, "no****@nowhere.net"
<my***********@hotmail.comwrote:
>I need to pop up a modal JS-based dialog (for some reason can't use
popup window, much less so showModalDialog()), and I'd like to imitate
the system popup titlebar according to user's desktop settings
(classic, XP, Vista). No big deal to make it work, but how do I know
the style to display? Any chance to figure out these settings
programmatically either on the client (preferrable), or possibly in
asp.net from something like Request["ServerVariables"] (not the best
thing but will work for this project). Would prefer cross-browser
compatibility, but can use IE-specific solution (sorry, no client side
activeX may be used, just plain JS/DOM/DHTML). Asking the user to
manually select visual preferences is not an option.

Thanks

NNN
OK guys here's the hack that seems to differ between XP and classic
style on XP box. Tested with both IE and FF. Don't have Win2k and
Vista boxes to test - have to wait until get to the office, but sure
(well, almost) Vista will work similar to XP, so the scrollTop in
combination with client OS will give the needed result. If I'm not
mistaking, win2k is Classic by default. Wanna see how it's different?
remove "visibility:hidden;" from div style and see for yourself. It
is important that the img size is exactly 197x119 to work with the div
sized 190x139px; for any other image size the div needs to be resized
the same number of px as the img. Please note - this is 'quick and
dirty', surely not production quality but good enough as a concept
proof.
;)

Any comments will be greatly appreciated.

NNN

<html>
<head>
<script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">
function body_onload()
{
var isIE=(window.ActiveXObject);
var div=document.getElementById('splash');
if(isIE)div.style.height='142px';
try
{
div.scrollTop=1;
}
catch(err){;}//not sure if need try/catch - just in case
var thing=div.scrollTop;
div.style.display='none';
if(thing==0)alert('Classic');
else if(thing==1)alert('XP');
}
</script>
</head>

<body onload="body_onload();">
<div id="splash" style="width:190px;height:139px;overflow:auto;"><i mg
src="alertClassic.jpg" style="border:#dddddd 2px solid" height="119px"
width="197px"/</div><!--picked the first image I had in the work
folder, 197x119 px. If you want to use any other image, size the div
accordingly /-->
</body>
</html>

Jun 27 '08 #17

P: n/a
rf
"no****@nowhere.net" <my***********@hotmail.comwrote in
news:b5********************************@4ax.com:
On Sat, 03 May 2008 02:02:11 GMT, "no****@nowhere.net"
<my***********@hotmail.comwrote:

OK guys here's the hack that seems to differ between XP and classic
style on XP box. Tested with both IE and FF.
Seamonkey gets it wrong.
Safari gets it wrong.
I wonder how many other browsers get it wrong.

What you persue will fail if I simply change my colour scheme. Your
"dialog" will *not* look like the rest of the stuff on my desktop.

--
Richard
Killing all google groups posts
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Jun 27 '08 #18

P: n/a
On Mon, 05 May 2008 03:02:08 GMT, rf <rf@x.invalidwrote:
>"no****@nowhere.net" <my***********@hotmail.comwrote in
news:b5********************************@4ax.com :
>On Sat, 03 May 2008 02:02:11 GMT, "no****@nowhere.net"
<my***********@hotmail.comwrote:

OK guys here's the hack that seems to differ between XP and classic
style on XP box. Tested with both IE and FF.

Seamonkey gets it wrong.
Safari gets it wrong.
These browsers extremely rearly, if ever, are used in corporate
environment - and corp is the targeted audience. Besides, I don't
have a Mac to test it on Safari and have no plans to buy one - all
places where I've ever worked were Microsoft shops.
>I wonder how many other browsers get it wrong.
The spec calls for full functionality in IE and core functionality in
Firefox. No other browser mentioned.
>
What you persue will fail if I simply change my colour scheme. Your
"dialog" will *not* look like the rest of the stuff on my desktop.
Corporate users rearly even know how to customize the desktop; besides
they oftentime don't have rights to do so. The ones who know and have
sufficient rights - they most of the time pick Classic desktop, no
color scheme, font, etc. modifications. Anyway, if somebody has a
preference for some crazy mix of pink and green - that's none of my
business, they'll get a standard XP or Classic popup.

NNN

Jun 27 '08 #19

P: n/a
rf
"no****@nowhere.net" <my***********@hotmail.comwrote in
news:jq********************************@4ax.com:
On Mon, 05 May 2008 03:02:08 GMT, rf <rf@x.invalidwrote:
>>"no****@nowhere.net" <my***********@hotmail.comwrote in
news:b5********************************@4ax.co m:
>>On Sat, 03 May 2008 02:02:11 GMT, "no****@nowhere.net"
<my***********@hotmail.comwrote:

OK guys here's the hack that seems to differ between XP and classic
style on XP box. Tested with both IE and FF.

Seamonkey gets it wrong.
Safari gets it wrong.
These browsers extremely rearly, if ever, are used in corporate
environment
How do you know?
have a Mac to test it on Safari and have no plans to buy one - all
places where I've ever worked were Microsoft shops.
All places *you* have ever worked. I'll bet the advertising corporations
have a few macks lying round.
>>I wonder how many other browsers get it wrong.
The spec calls for full functionality in IE and core functionality in
Firefox. No other browser mentioned.
Where in your original post did you say this. The only mention I see
about browsers is "Would prefer cross browser compatility" and I have
shown your solution the be not cross browser compatible.
>>What you persue will fail if I simply change my colour scheme. Your
"dialog" will *not* look like the rest of the stuff on my desktop.
Corporate users rearly even know how to customize the desktop;
How do you know that? I have known since Windows 3.1 how to do that and I
was a corporate user at that time.
Anyway, if somebody has a
preference for some crazy mix of pink and green - that's none of my
business, they'll get a standard XP or Classic popup.
So why bother to distinguish between classic or not? Give them a dialog
that looks like the site, not the underlying operating system. Every time
I see something that looks like my operating system I instantly dismiss
it as advertising.

--
Richard
Killing all google groups posts
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
Jun 27 '08 #20

P: n/a
On May 5, 6:25*am, "nob...@nowhere.net" <mygarbage2...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>*Besides, I don't
have a Mac to test it on Safari and have no plans to buy one
Safari is a free download for Windows XP and Vista: http://apple.com/safari

--Jorge.
Jun 27 '08 #21

P: n/a
Am 03.05.2008 04:02 no****@nowhere.net wrote
I need to pop up a modal JS-based dialog (for some reason can't use
popup window, much less so showModalDialog()), and I'd like to imitate
the system popup titlebar according to user's desktop settings
(classic, XP, Vista).
Not sure, whether this helps you.

There is at least two Javascript frameworks/toolkits, that do something
similare. The one has native WinXP and Vista skins, so I would assume
the company behind it found some way to do this.

http://www.activewidgets.com/
(but it has a price...)

The other one seems to be the Dojo toolkit (http://dojotoolkit.org)

--
Bye,
Andreas M.
Jun 27 '08 #22

P: n/a
Am 03.05.2008 04:02 no****@nowhere.net wrote
I need to pop up a modal JS-based dialog (for some reason can't use
popup window, much less so showModalDialog()), and I'd like to imitate
the system popup titlebar according to user's desktop settings
(classic, XP, Vista). No big deal to make it work, but how do I know
Also, I think for questions like these the following groups may be more
helpful. I am pretty sure, somewhere, deep in the MS API, there may be
some special functions, that can help you. If I remember correctly,
there is access to the Windows Themeing via ActiveX.

microsoft.public.inetexplorer.scripting
microsoft.public.scripting.jscript
microsoft.public.scripting.hosting
microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.jscript
microsoft.public.scripting.wsh

--
Bye,
Andreas M.
Jun 27 '08 #23

P: n/a
Andreas M. meinte:
Am 03.05.2008 04:02 no****@nowhere.net wrote
>I need to pop up a modal JS-based dialog (for some reason can't use
popup window, much less so showModalDialog()), and I'd like to imitate
the system popup titlebar according to user's desktop settings
(classic, XP, Vista).

Not sure, whether this helps you.

There is at least two Javascript frameworks/toolkits, that do something
similare. The one has native WinXP and Vista skins, so I would assume
the company behind it found some way to do this.
Sigh. No they don't. They can't detect my desktop design settings.
They've "build" elements mimicking form elements, but unfortunately,
these don't match my "Win 2000" settings. Even worse: Since they don't
use standard elements, their fake form elements are quite off.

Gregor

--
http://photo.gregorkofler.at ::: Landschafts- und Reisefotografie
http://web.gregorkofler.com ::: meine JS-Spielwiese
http://www.image2d.com ::: Bildagentur für den alpinen Raum
Jun 27 '08 #24

P: n/a
On Mon, 05 May 2008 15:11:18 +0200, "Andreas M."
<fo****@invalid.invalidwrote:
>Am 03.05.2008 04:02 no****@nowhere.net wrote
>I need to pop up a modal JS-based dialog (for some reason can't use
popup window, much less so showModalDialog()), and I'd like to imitate
the system popup titlebar according to user's desktop settings
(classic, XP, Vista). No big deal to make it work, but how do I know

Also, I think for questions like these the following groups may be more
helpful. I am pretty sure, somewhere, deep in the MS API, there may be
some special functions, that can help you. If I remember correctly,
there is access to the Windows Themeing via ActiveX.

microsoft.public.inetexplorer.scripting
microsoft.public.scripting.jscript
microsoft.public.scripting.hosting
microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.jscript
microsoft.public.scripting.wsh
Thanks but...
Most corporate IT or users with at least a bit of brain disable
activex - and I quite understand why. ActiveX are not only security
threat, but also a source of all sort of instability, and also
bandwidth hoggers, and so on and on and on. In other words, for this
project it's not an option.
But thanks anyway
NNN
Jun 27 '08 #25

P: n/a
On Mon, 05 May 2008 05:43:20 GMT, rf <rf@x.invalidwrote:
>All places *you* have ever worked. I'll bet the advertising corporations
have a few macks lying round.
>>>I wonder how many other browsers get it wrong.
>The spec calls for full functionality in IE and core functionality in
Firefox. No other browser mentioned.

Where in your original post did you say this. The only mention I see
about browsers is "Would prefer cross browser compatility" and I have
shown your solution the be not cross browser compatible.
Admittedly it was misleading. But then, for a mostly MS - IE only
guy, the phrase "Would be nice if this feature also worked in Firefox"
means cross-browser compatibility.
;-)
>
>>>What you persue will fail if I simply change my colour scheme. Your
"dialog" will *not* look like the rest of the stuff on my desktop.
Corporate users rearly even know how to customize the desktop;

How do you know that? I have known since Windows 3.1 how to do that and I
was a corporate user at that time.
You don't seem to be a plain vanilla corporate user. Think "bean
counter" or "sales rep" - these usually have no clue how to do it or
even if it's possible at all. I also happened to have been worked in
a few places where access to these facilities in Windows was disabled
for all but admins, and the only available screensaver was the
corporate logo.
>
>Anyway, if somebody has a
preference for some crazy mix of pink and green - that's none of my
business, they'll get a standard XP or Classic popup.

So why bother to distinguish between classic or not? Give them a dialog
that looks like the site, not the underlying operating system. Every time
I see something that looks like my operating system I instantly dismiss
it as advertising.
This app is ment only for the users who intended to get there, paid
for access rights, and they'd expect the popup screen to appear in
response to their actions (after all, that'll be put in the user
manual). But this is something to think of before applying this
technique to sites open to general public.

Anyway the hack that I posted does the job, and most importantly was
approved by the boss. Not that I like to base the logic on some
display quirks, but there's nothing else to go by, and it seems to
work reliably on all target systems.

NNN
Jun 27 '08 #26

P: n/a
On Sun, 4 May 2008 22:58:32 -0700 (PDT), Jorge
<jo***@jorgechamorro.comwrote:
>On May 5, 6:25*am, "nob...@nowhere.net" <mygarbage2...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>>*Besides, I don't
have a Mac to test it on Safari and have no plans to buy one

Safari is a free download for Windows XP and Vista: http://apple.com/safari

--Jorge.
OMG, Steve Jobs finally made another piece of brilliant Apple
engineering available to us lowly slaves of evil Bill Gates!

Jokes aside, I will install anything Apple branded only if I really
_have to_ - or if somebody pays me real money to do so. I will never
forget how their piece of $h!t quicktime forced me to reinstall
Windows a while ago to get rid of it. I don't care if they simply
screwed up or ment to demonstrate how prone was Windows to BSOD and
how bad it was comparing to their then latest and greatest os9 - I'm
just not using their crap period.

NNN

Jun 27 '08 #27

P: n/a
no****@nowhere.net wrote:
[...] I will install anything Apple branded only if I really
_have to_ - or if somebody pays me real money to do so. I will never
forget how their piece of $h!t quicktime forced me to reinstall
Windows a while ago to get rid of it. I don't care if they simply
screwed up or ment to demonstrate how prone was Windows to BSOD and
how bad it was comparing to their then latest and greatest os9 -
You are not thinking clearly enough to realize that it might have been
your fault. QuickTime never broke anything on my Wintel platforms.
I'm just not using their crap period.
Not using a well-known user agent for everyday navigation is a personal
choice; not testing on a well-known user agent is a stupid choice.
PointedEars
--
realism: HTML 4.01 Strict
evangelism: XHTML 1.0 Strict
madness: XHTML 1.1 as application/xhtml+xml
-- Bjoern Hoehrmann
Jun 27 '08 #28

P: n/a
no****@nowhere.net wrote:
On Mon, 05 May 2008 03:02:08 GMT, rf <rf@x.invalidwrote:
>Seamonkey gets it wrong. Safari gets it wrong.

These browsers extremely rearly, if ever, are used in corporate
environment - and corp is the targeted audience.
Wrong. Seamonkey is *the* most commonly used - and it is not a
browser, it is the Javascript engine.
>
The spec calls for full functionality in IE and core functionality
in Firefox.
And Firefox uses Seamonkey. One hurdle fallen already.
>
Corporate users rearly even know how to customize the desktop;
besides they oftentime don't have rights to do so.
That was perhaps true of your particular clients yesterday. What about
tomorrow?
>
The ones who know and have sufficient rights - they most of the
time pick Classic desktop, no color scheme, font, etc.
modifications. Anyway, if somebody has a preference for some crazy
mix of pink and green - that's none of my business, they'll get a
standard XP or Classic popup.
So - according to your own rather silly spec - your solution already
doesn't work for some people. This *is* what we have been telling you.
Jun 27 '08 #29

P: n/a
no****@nowhere.net wrote:
>
Thanks but...
Most corporate IT or users with at least a bit of brain disable
activex - and I quite understand why.
Indeed they do. And your "hack" relies upon it. That's another hurdle
where it fails.
Jun 27 '08 #30

P: n/a
On May 6, 2:51*am, "nob...@nowhere.net" <mygarbage2...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2008 22:58:32 -0700 (PDT), Jorge wrote:
On May 5, 6:25*am, "nob...@nowhere.net" <mygarbage2...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>*Besides, I don't
have a Mac to test it on Safari and have no plans to buy one
Safari is a free download for Windows XP and Vista:http://apple.com/safari

OMG, Steve Jobs finally made another piece of brilliant Apple
engineering available to us lowly slaves of evil Bill Gates!
(...)
I'm just not using their crap period.
That's not that "I don't have a Mac to test it on Safari", as you
said.
FYI : IEs marketshare is shrinking fast and steadily.

--Jorge.
Jun 27 '08 #31

P: n/a
FYI : IEs marketshare is shrinking fast and steadily.

Shrinking even with dirty tricks like these : (M$ : "This behavior is
by design")

<http://www.bazon.net/mishoo/articles.epl?art_id=958>

--Jorge.
Jun 27 '08 #32

P: n/a
The Magpie wrote:
no****@nowhere.net wrote:
>On Mon, 05 May 2008 03:02:08 GMT, rf <rf@x.invalidwrote:
>>Seamonkey gets it wrong. Safari gets it wrong.
These browsers extremely rearly, if ever, are used in corporate
environment - and corp is the targeted audience.
Wrong. Seamonkey is *the* most commonly used - and it is not a
browser, it is the Javascript engine.
You are confused.

SeaMonkey is now the name of a project and application suite maintained by
non-mozilla.org contributors as a continuation of the Mozilla Suite,
previously codenamed SeaMonkey, which has been abandoned by mozilla.org in
favor of the newer and cleaner XUL-based codebase used by Firefox and
Thunderbird, among other standalone applications.

The codename of the JavaScript reference implementation in C that is used by
and is available in all Gecko-based user agents, on the other hand, is
_SpiderMonkey_.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SeaMonkey
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SpiderMonkey
>The spec calls for full functionality in IE and core functionality
in Firefox.

And Firefox uses Seamonkey.
It does not, as little as MSIE uses Opera.
PointedEars
--
Anyone who slaps a 'this page is best viewed with Browser X' label on
a Web page appears to be yearning for the bad old days, before the Web,
when you had very little chance of reading a document written on another
computer, another word processor, or another network. -- Tim Berners-Lee
Jun 27 '08 #33

P: n/a
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>
You are confused.
I was not aware of the Seamonkey change. That may also be true of the
original comment about it though.
Jun 27 '08 #34

P: n/a
The Magpie wrote:
Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>You are confused.
I was not aware of the Seamonkey change.
The change does not matter. The JavaScript Reference implementation in C
was never called SeaMonkey. Had you quoted properly, you would have known.
That may also be true of the original comment about it though.
You are not making sense.
PointedEars
--
Prototype.js was written by people who don't know javascript for people
who don't know javascript. People who don't know javascript are not
the best source of advice on designing systems that use javascript.
-- Richard Cornford, cljs, <f8*******************@news.demon.co.uk>
Jun 27 '08 #35

P: n/a
On 06.05.2008 01:02 no****@nowhere.net wrote
Thanks but...
Most corporate IT or users with at least a bit of brain disable
activex - and I quite understand why. ActiveX are not only security
threat, but also a source of all sort of instability, and also
bandwidth hoggers, and so on and on and on. In other words, for this
project it's not an option.
You mean like:
var http = new ActiveXObject("Microsoft.XMLHTTP");
?

Or not using any MSXML DOM objects from Javascript?

Tsts...why do they use a modern operating system at all then? ;-)

I would say the contrary: Users with at least a little bit of brain
don't fall for the panic-hype and know how to configure and use their
systems correctly, regarding ActiveX.

Besides, most ActiveX objects for ordinary tasks come already
pre-installed with WindowsXP.

--
Bye,
Andreas M.
Jun 27 '08 #36

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.