|
It's the quiet that worries me - I'm not one for solitary confinement.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Surely there's a bustling urban area just up the river from you no?
"the debugger doesn't tell me anything because this code compiles just fine" - random QA comment
"Facebook is where you tell lies to your friends. Twitter is where you tell the truth to strangers." - chriselst
"I don't drink any more... then again, I don't drink any less." - Mike Mullikins uncle
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, but it's not my life's gaol to live there.
/ravi
|
|
|
|
|
Contest is the antonym of protest!
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
Any suggestions on what mac device to buy so can debug a web page running on iPads.
iPhones less worried - if working on iPad will just assume width/height worst problems.
all dev work windows with chrome. with iPad being a last test consideration (at the moment).
but if page not working, iPad cannot remote debug to windows (currently, maybe some mythical future changes this).
Dont want to blow 1k on laptop, if the Mac-minis would be enough. Any comments on using a Mac-Mini for debugging iOS safari?
also I guess the OS upgrades a consideration. I know the iPads and MacPros get updates for some time, but do the Mini's, or are people "encouraged" to upgrade to get the latest os?
Maybe a second hand would be enough. Not interested in massive dev work. More like, connect it, open safari remote debugger. check line that is the issue. go back to Windows dev machine. fix it. retest.
though visual studio code runs on Mac - maybe I just move to a mac, and use the free Microsoft IE vms they provide to test IE.
|
|
|
|
|
For apple products, the following list is surprisingly appropriate:
- OFF! spray
- Mosquito netting (you did say Safari)
- Fly swatter
- Citronella candle
- Kettle of boiling water
Just amazingly appropriate ...
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
I wouldn't bother if I were you unless you really have no choice (as in your boss wants you to fix a script issue that only presents itself on iOS).
Otherwise check your app in Chrome, make sure it's all standards compliant and you should be (99% of the time) good to go. Give it a check on an iPad once it's available to see online just to make sure it works as expected. Most things you'll be able to figure out without debugging (it'll be minor layout issues most of the time).
I work between Macs, Windows and Linux machines but I've never had the need (luckily, perhaps?) to debug a web app on the Mac - every problem has always showed up when testing in Chrome.
If you're planning on developing mobile apps or just like the idea of working on a MacBook then that's a different matter.. 
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Since I don't do UIs specifically I am not the best source but I did spend a lot of time reading bug reports that came up specifically related to iPad (not iPhone) usage for a app that was normally expected to work on the desktop.
Some were major like being being unable to get to the update button on a update view. And perhaps a problem with downloading/uploading files.
|
|
|
|
|
Chances are someone's trying to do something too clever. Any issue like that which I've seen has usually been down to someone developing something that didn't make sense.
Not being able to get to a button is a problem caused by the developers not by the device or browser.
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Brent Jenkins wrote: Chances are someone's trying to do something too clever.
Definitely a possibility. But can one be sure that the OP will not encounter something similar?
Brent Jenkins wrote: Not being able to get to a button is a problem caused by the developers not by the device or browser.
Yes, but the button was accessible on the desktop. So just testing it on the desktop would not have revealed that.
It is possible they tried one simulator years ago (seems like I remember a conversation about that) but it would have been 3-4 years ago so maybe the simulators have gotten better.
|
|
|
|
|
The key thing is either he a) deals with the problems as they occur, fixing them in Chrome on Windows/Linux for free, or b) spends over £1,200 on a MacBook.
It's his choice but personally I wouldn't spend that much just on the off-chance that I may need to debug Safari on iOS. It'll spend 99.9% of it's life switched off collecting dust.
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm redeveloping a website in HTML5/CSS3/responsive, all those good buzzwords. Standards compliant, ...
But I've had to code round some "features" of Safari. Really simple stuff. Like a div initially visibility:hidden Any other (current) browser, javascript sets visibility:visible and it appears. Not with Safari. The workaround I used was opacity:0.0 and opacity:1.0 Safari gets that right.
Fortunately I have some iVictim friends to help with testing.
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Peter_in_2780 wrote: Like a div initially visibility:hidden
I'd recommend using the CSS 'display' attribute rather than visibility - it's been around for years and works on all browsers.
CSS display property
If you need to set it in JavaScript, use JQuery's .show() and .hide() methods. Again, works on all browser.
The trick is not to try to be clever with this kind of stuff, it's bread and butter stuff that is as easy or difficult as you want to make it (and I've worked on some projects where the devs really want to make it difficult). 
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
The whole point of using visibility/opacity is that layout is not affected by showing/hiding this particular element. It's either visible or not, nothing nearby moves.
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
It's all detailed in these pages:
opacity - CSS | MDN
visibility - CSS | MDN
Quote: Support for visibility: collapse is missing or partially incorrect in some modern browsers. It may not be correctly treated like visibility: hidden on elements other than table rows and columns.
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Brent Jenkins wrote: Quote: Support for visibility: collapse is missing or partially incorrect in some modern browsers. It may not be correctly treated like visibility: hidden on elements other than table rows and columns.
... and visibility: collapse has absolutely nothing to do with my point.
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
Well you're the one having problems with Safari on iPads, not me.  My point is that I'd stay away from visibility altogether and find another way of doing it.
The more browsers and devices you want to support, the simpler (and standards compliant) you should keep your code.
Now is it bad enough that you let somebody else kick your butts without you trying to do it to each other? Now if we're all talking about the same man, and I think we are... it appears he's got a rather growing collection of our bikes.
modified 31-Aug-21 21:01pm.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You could pick up a mac mini off ebay for less than $400.
Charlie Gilley
<italic>Stuck in a dysfunctional matrix from which I must escape...
"Where liberty dwells, there is my country." B. Franklin, 1783
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” BF, 1759
|
|
|
|
|
One or more large bottles of whiskey to numb the pain.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe you can embed Firebug Lite like this guy
|
|
|
|
|
Any mac will do - though you could blow some coin on a decent one and use parallels or similar to emulate Windows too when you need to- that's my preference as it means I can test on iPad fix code etc. all on the same machine (and build native apps etc. too) - I use VS Code for developing Angular apps mainly - and I'm forced into using a windows machine at work but always prefer my macbook when I can
Mac mini will certainly be fine- I'd prob make sure you get one that is at least supported by the current OSX version (late 2009 I believe)
MAC OS upgrades are free so are not a concern
PooperPig - Coming Soon
|
|
|
|
|
I'd agree with that - though I would probably say 2011 or newer year to give it a little longevity. My main home machine is a late 2012 Mac Mini that I paid around $600 new and have since upgraded to SSD and 16GB ram and it is more than powerful enough to be a full development machine. One caveat though is that they tend to hold their value - the last time I looked into buying the same model used, they were selling for more than I paid for mine new. That is in part because it was the last model that didn't have the memory soldered in.
|
|
|
|
|
Check out saucelabs.com, able to emulate almost anything and much less expensive than purchasing physical devices.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
