XP SP1 chromeless patch ;)

[Membie]

On http://www.microbians.com/ has been a XP SP1 chromeless patch for a while... but not any longer.

Chromeless scripts without this patch will open fullscreen (resize not possible) in IE6, XP and SP1 installed (see This thread... (http://www.codingforums.com/showthread.php?threadid=10065) )

Cannot imagine there isn't anybody on this board who has this patched script and doesn't want to share.

Please?
This guy will never ever... give up ;)

[Membie]

Thank 'you' all... :D :D (See attachment)

[kwhubby]

question, what are the paramaters for this function. Theres no instructions to tell how to use the function

[Membie]

See attachment... start of with the inndex.html file

If you have XP SP1 IE6 use the patched js file (browser redirection script for those users)

Good luck ;)

[krycek]

Excellent, membie... well done! :D

I will try that out later, but congrats for solving it! :thumbsup:

::] krycek [::

[Membie]

Uhhhhh :( don't get your hopes up too high krycek ;)

In case you missunderstood: Chromeless / resize fullscreen, isn't / is no longer possible in XP SP1 IE6. The patch just does a no-toolbar-etc-window... to all your privious chromeless (+resize) windows.

For now or how long it takes: You could use a (>-)browser redirect script and refer to the patched js file though.... ;)

That's just all there is / no more to get.

[beetle]

Even as a designer, I never liked chromeless windows. I just think they're kitchsy.

[Membie]

Originally posted by beetle
Even as a designer, I never liked chromeless windows. I just think they're kitchsy.
(whooohhh..., a 'new' discussion, I never get out of that way ;) "Kick a ball and expect it to come back".)

Excuse me, but... this says something about your designers qualities i.m.h.p.o.v.

Let me explain:

I've been a designer for round and about 20 years, earned my credits, still am in my spare time, but if you, as a 'designer' prefer all windows to look alike..., prefer not to allow creativity... //--> ???????? I, as a fellow-designer, do NOT understand

enough said?

[beetle]

That's because I'm a WEB-designer. My design finishes where the chrome starts. Users are accustomed to seeing the normal windows. As a matter of fact, I read a survey recently where some users were confused by re-chromed windows. I just don't see the need. I make/design web-sites, not "Web-application Windows".

So, yes, I could care less if all windows looked the same. They aren't part of my website.

[krycek]

membie, what you said is all too true... the "fix" does not even work on my PC. Period. I just get a button in the taskbar and nothing else :(

beetle, you don't have to like chromeless windows. You also don't have to like blinking text, however that has been part of html since netscape brought it in in the year dot. I guess there is a good use for blinking text somewhere, I just can't think of one. However, I can think of dozens of good uses for chromeless windows, for a start what about new "concept" designs, aimed at those people that actually know enough about computers that they will not be scared off if they can't find a menu. You are dead right that for the type of people that many commerical sites have to cater for, the user experience should be consistent... if you remember, I argued that point on this very forum a few weeks ago (you argued it also, on the side side I believe). However that does not mean that all such methods are wrong. Simply that, like most things, they can be used well, or badly.

I hope you see what I am getting at! By taking away such choices from the designer, browser makers are robbing US of the ability to make such decisions. And that is our enemy... because I love bad designers :D yup, a lot of the work I do is because a bad designer did it previously. And, often by misusing things that are great in the proper place, but when wrongly used make a site awful. If it were not possible to make such mistakes, it would be less apparent as to who the good and bad designers are... and maybe I would not get as much work.

So... do you agree with my point? ;)

::] krycek [::

[Membie]

Users were accustomed to "Kitshy" frames around paintings untill there were others aswell.... (100 years ago)

Any kind of designer has (should have, i.m.h.p.o.v.) an eye for detail. One detail is the frame / the window your work is exposed in... Therefor I do NOT understand how you can possibly say: "My design finishes where the chrome starts"

I, for one, would rather have a chromeless (or no frame) window than a "Kitshy" one, or one that doesn't 'match' my work.

This doesn't mean I think all windows should be chromeless. It all depends the way it is used, the way it's designed, the way it matches your design where the chrome starts...http://www.designhulp.nl/SystemImages/icon_smile_tongue.gif

[edit] krycek English is not my native lanquage, I'm not a fast typer / responder for that reason ;) But: I do agree! ;)

[beetle]

True krycek, but consider this: 'They' have taken away nothing. We never had the option to create our own window chrome in the first place! What exists today is the result of a bug.

Why don't we wait to be 'given' a real method to do this before we complain about having it 'taken away'.

Sorry, in today's push for standards, I cannot endorse something that is (1) one browser only (2) the result of a bug, just because it 'looks cool'. THAT, my friend, is our enemy.

[Membie]

Result of a bug or not, it gave designers possibillities they longed for, is obviuosly a market for...

How come this market still isn't gripped? //--> Techno's interfere, roule this market aswell where designers should have!!!!!!!!!!

[beetle]

Originally posted by Membie
Result of a bug or not, it gave designers possibillities they longed for, is obviuosly a market for...Yes, and I'm not refuting that. I WOULD use it if there were a standard method for doing so. Until then, I stand by my opinion.

As far as tech vs design on the web? No contest...the tech will always be the forerunner.

[Roy Sinclair]

It was a bug and while some people may have reasons for wanting it there's a really good reason why it shouldn't be possible. The reason is that with the ability to create a chromeless window the developer can create their own chrome that looks exactly like the standard chrome so the origin of the window they create is disguised or looks exactly like it came from another source entirely. With such a disguised window it's possible to get even a cautious user to accept something they shouldn't or provide information that they'd never provide to a web site.

Whether you liked it or not, that ability absolutely had to go away.

[Membie]

Originally posted by beetle
I WOULD use it if there were a standard method for doing so.
Rest my case = equal my earlier remarks in krycek's other topic / to krycek's remarks.

The eye, the visitor (user) wants something aswell = Techno's obligation to listen to (work together with) designers

[beetle]

Well Membie, some clarification on what I said. Since I'm both a designer AND a 'techie', trust that I have a unique perspective on this.

I would use my own chrome on a window for something like a hobby-site or something personal. I would probably NEVER use such a device for client's site unless they requested it.

I've accepted the fact that the browser chrome is the 'frame' or 'holder' for my website, and not part of it. I've never looked at ANY well designed website, mine or others, that would look empirically better with 'custom chrome'. It's like saying a beatiful sunny day outside your window would look prettier if you had nicer window treatments. Sorry, I just don't agree that it's necessary or even desirable. Make a nice looking page that doesn't require it be loaded in a popup and you're doing just fine.

[krycek]

wow this is a real hot discussion, isn't it! :D membie has got the right idea though :)

beetle - I agree about standards, and I agree about it being a bug. I never said otherwise. But, as membie said, it is obviously something needed, well, wanted, anyway. And if you only use what is available you are restricting yourself! There are all kinds of browser widgets around that are not "standard" - plus, with all the standards around, it is still a hard job to get anything more than a simple site to work properly cross-browser. Perhaps when we have PROPER standards that enable people to design as they please, and know that it will look ok in IE 14 and NN 25 then we will obey standards a bit more. And don't get me wrong, I think standards are very important, I am just not satisfied with the current ones.

Also, am I getting a little confused here? Are you backtracking? :D (stir, stir! ;)) because I could swear that earlier you said you hated chromeless windows and would never use them (because they are apparently "kitchsy") but now you say you WOULD use them if they were properly supported... :p

Plus, you will find many things only get done because they look cool. Designers are always trying to get around browser limitations in order to get a desired effect etc. or else how could they really be called creative? I love to see a new concept, or an original piece of art. If we only did what standards allowed us, then the web would be far more boring! :)

Lastly, Roy - I agree to a certain extent with what you said, however many things can be used for good or bad, depending on who uses them. It is more likely that someone will make a simple bit of JS code to make loads of popup windows open, than it is for them to spend the time recreating a chrome... especially as they have no idea who will view it, and hence what chrome do they create? With all the different versions of all the different OS's around, and especially with different skins/themese, it would not be worth doing. Plus, there is nothing that is really malicious you can do in a browser in the first place! So what is the point!

Far better is the scope for good - I would love to have the capacity to create my own chrome, that would be the opportunity to create a really cool GUI for a site, rather than have the same old surroundings all the time.

Summary:

is chromeless bad?

if (chromeless == bug) {
chromeless = possibly bad
} else {
chromeless = good
}

is chromeless a bug? currently, yes. Let's hope that changes!

::] krycek [::

[krycek]

update: just posted, read beetle's latest post.

I agree that most of the time I would not use chromeless (if available) on a client site. But that depends who the client is. If it was a cool client, that wanted a fresh new look, I would love to do a chromeless site.

And about the sunny day? It doesn't look quite so sunny if you are stuck indoors in the same surroundings all the time. Go out and enjoy - immerse yourself in it, and it feels a lot lot better! :D

::] krycek [::

[Membie]

Originally posted by beetle
Make a nice looking page that doesn't require it be loaded in a popup and you're doing just fine.

Obviously we cannot reach an agreement. No need for that / is allowed, but tell me one thing: if that's your opinion, why has your homepage an enter button to open up a no toolbar etc. popup?

Don't get me wrong: I like your homepage, your style ;)

[Roy Sinclair]

Lastly, Roy - I agree to a certain extent with what you said, however many things can be used for good or bad, depending on who uses them. It is more likely that someone will make a simple bit of JS code to make loads of popup windows open, than it is for them to spend the time recreating a chrome... especially as they have no idea who will view it, and hence what chrome do they create? With all the different versions of all the different OS's around, and especially with different skins/themese, it would not be worth doing. Plus, there is nothing that is really malicious you can do in a browser in the first place! So what is the point!

So you sniff the browser to find out the OS and version and format the chrome to match (or not show the window if you can't match the chrome). Using the IE extensions to CSS you can even match a user's custom color scheme exactly. Then you populate your box in such a way that the user will volunteer information to you that you can use in a malicious fashion. Data that the user would have never given you but by making the window look like it came from a trusted source they hoodwink you into providing.

It's still possible to do such a thing within an existing window but there are additional cues (active window highlighting and such) which help the user in detecting the deception but when a whole new window pops up it's much less obvious that a deception is occuring.

[beetle]

Originally posted by Membie
if that's your opinion, why has your homepage an enter button to open up a no toolbar etc. popup?

Don't get me wrong: I like your homepage, your style ;) Hey now! Hehe, just kidding. Well, to answer you directly, my page opens in a popup to accomodate the very tricky, experimental layout, which has two iframes, lots of positioned stuff etc. The buttons were'nt working for a while, but I just fixed that, so check it again to see the whole thing. The site is well over a year old and I don't like it so much anymore. I've learned so much since then. I'm making a new site (http://www.peterbailey.net/new/site.php?page=why) anyway. When it is done, I'll still keep my old site online someplace, for posterity's sake if nothing else.