New development hub.

[Hudders]

they are just trying to be rude.

I'm not trying to be rude. Everything you're attempting to accomplish is already available elsewhere and is done better. To use your website, you need a browser. If you have a browser, your website is superfluous.

[Darius Poyer]

I would also like to further enforce the argument that this thing is entirely useless. Having recently been able to understand the purpose of this project.
I would not say that it is a waste of your time to work on it, as I'm sure any endeavor can teach you something. All I would say is that it will never be beneficial as a user product.

[Construed]

It's simple.
Any device such as a smart phone, ipod, gameboy advance, OLD cell phone, anything with java and a crappy OS or incapable OS can run this.
The browser is a small part of the upcoming technologies it will offer.
It will have inline text editors, image editors, file editors, DND technology, FTP, File storage and user settings eventually and i also plan to add a function that will allow you to scale the internal browser resolution with a simple control.

Also the internal browsers will be proxy enabled.

[WHAM]

I laughed a little, and will now vacate this thread. 

[Construed]

Lol, your just jelly you can't make your own lil mini browsers.
The funny thing is i made them like 9 years ago when you were still in diapers.

[Darth Mandarb]

I think I have to agree with the consensus here... I'm having a hard time picturing how I would use something like this.

Let me explain (in a constructive way)!

Unless you're using a monitor with an INSANE resolution each window in your dev-hub is going to be painfully "small" and outside of what normal websites would be designed to fit in fluidly (I design almost all my sites to be fluid but I don't worry about less than 1024x768 resolutions).  So you get that scroll-bar within scroll-bars look which is just useless to work within (not to mention incredibly annoying to the end-user!).

Now... if each of the mini-windows was purpose built for a specific function and the sites run in each window were purpose built to work in that lower resolution I could see this being something more useful.

A few months back I did some work for a company (can't give specifics as I signed a non-disclosure agreement) but they had a 60" LCD running at 1920x1080 that they had in the lobby of their office.  I designed a full-screen interface that pulled in some aggregate data from 4 different sources and displayed it in four distinct zones on the screen.  It was updated every 10-15 seconds, seamlessly integrated with no scrollbars and was quite functional (and damn pretty if I do say so myself) because each "window" was purpose built to work within the space provided!

If you could work towards that (which might not be feasible with your intentions for this hub) it might make it more effective. 

I don't think the concept of what you're trying to accomplish here is bad... just the execution!

Maybe if when you focused a window it would expand to fit more of the screen and the others would shrink back (but still be clickable so they could then expand out)?  That might make it more manageable!

something like this:

[Alan v.Drake]

I only see iframes. Unless you're planning a web application or game, I don't see the point.

- Alan

[Hudders]

It's simple.
Any device such as a smart phone, ipod, gameboy advance, OLD cell phone, anything with java and a crappy OS or incapable OS can run this.

Come on now, this is just hyperbole. Even if you were able to connect to your website on those devices, for the most part the screen would be too small, (especially when you're carving it up into "mini-browsers") and the control methods would be totally unsuited for your goals.

[selmiak]

Besides, as has been mentioned, since most modern websites are designed for fairly high resolutions, most websites will not display optimally in this "technology and developement hub" of yours.

but you could always use the mobile version of a very modern website. But I still don't get it

[Jonez]

I tend to use a lot of key combinations like ctrl + tab, ctrl + shift + tab, alt + tab, because it's actually a lot faster way to use the computer at times. Just before I wrote that previous sentence, I pressed ctrl + f4 because I wanted to close a tab, but I had a brain fart and closed this one instead. In less than a second I got this tab back just by pressing ctrl + shift + t and was back in business. If I'm not entirely sure how to write some English word, I just press ctrl + t, type the word to the address bar (that's where the focus goes immediately), check the spelling and press ctrl + f4 to close the tab and get back here. Without moving my hands I can open the irssi window and check if anyone has said anything worthwhile, and come back, doing it a lot faster than with a mouse. This might sound extremely lazy, and using a mouse to do it wouldn't really be a problem. Only then would it irritate me if the mouse were the only option. Because I know of a better way.

I use mouse only if I have to, and most of the time I just use the wheel. I hate sites that can be scrolled horizontally, because they are just not practical.

So, I have to ask, does your site support these keyboard shortcuts?

[Construed]

I don't know if any of you looked at this video:
http://youtu.be/_Jdu8nWReQw
It shows that each window can be made to fit the entirety of the screen and you can add up to thousands of windows by simply scrolling with the scroll bar.
Each window also has minimize and maximize buttons and are draggable.

You can close any given window and open it at a later time and it will be exactly where you left it.

However I do agree with darth that they could be set to better automatic positioning.

[WHAM]

So instead of using ctrl+tab and ctrl+shift+tab keyboard shortcuts in my Firefox web browser to look at different pages I CAN HORIZONTALLY SCROLL TO THEM WITH MY MOUSE!!! WOW! Discovery of the fucking century!

Oh wait, no, it's not!

[Construed]

Yea bud well close that tab and press ctrl shift and see if your exactly where you were before you closed it. I think not.
And what your not getting is there is room for many more functions and options here than firefox could ever dream of.
It's going to be an online OS with a desktop and I'll not have you or anyone like you cutting down my technologies before they even have a chance to grow.

You need to go to www.wikipedia.com and look up constructive criticism
You'll find underneath the definition that what your doing is Destructive criticism which should be prohibited on these forums.

Actually here's a link, cause i know your all lazy with your firefox.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constructive_criticism#Constructive_criticism

[Hudders]

You don't appear to be capable of processing criticism, constructive or otherwise. Ever since you realised general opinion wasn't positive towards you, you've resorted to calling us "rude", "jealous" and "lazy".

You should concentrate on creating a modern and interesting website for your "company", obviously you have the skills - why waste your time creating something that nobody will want to use, that actually hinders people when they try and utilise your website? It's time to admit that this isn't the next big thing.

[WHAM]

Yea bud well close that tab and press ctrl shift and see if your exactly where you were before you closed it. I think not.

You are correct, in fact, I need to press ctrl+shift+t to reopen closed tab to where I left it. Firefox kindly even stores multiple instances, so I can actually close a hundred tabs and then just reopen them. How handy!

[Construed]

Well, I at least got some constructive crit from the awful waffle walker and now I'm going to have lunch. So screw the whole mini browser thing, pretend they never existed!

[straydogstrut]

I think everybody is getting hung up on the execution rather than the general idea.

Most contributors to this thread have dismissed it out of hand or gotten into mud-slinging so I can see how that would ruffle your feathers a bit. You've obviously put effort into this and nobody likes to see the fruits of their labours shot down. That said, a little restraint from you Grim would perhaps have kept the mood in the thread a bit friendlier. If people don't 'get it', try to convince them rather than flaming them back.

Darth gave you some really good, constructive, feedback which you seem to have ignored almost entirely. Alternative interfaces really get my juices flowing and I would have loved to have seen Darth's work in action.

The main issue people have with what you are presenting is usability. I've had a play with it and I have to agree with some of the criticism.

Screen resolution is an issue
I've just tried it on my iPod touch and with only 4 windows it's difficult to see much of anything. (I also could not figure out how to move the windows around on the iPod. Touching the menu bar only highlighted it)

Supporting smaller resolutions does not have to be a show-stopper. With considerate planning, Plateau (yep, i'm naming it that) could adjust the display to suit. Darth has given you a brilliant example. You could also have certain menus and panels only show at set resolutions, just like mobile websites work (often widget areas will disappear on Wordpress sites, leaving only simple navigation for example)

Scrolling is a bit passe
It was said rather bluntly, but it's true that people hate having to scroll to get access to content. That is web development 101. There's nothing stopping you keeping scrolling, but again provide a slick UI to get around it. As well as manually scrolling along, couldn't there be a quick way to zip to a certain window. Look at Mac OS X with it's Launchpad and Mission Control for seeing all the applications available and those currently open.

The interface is not very user friendly
The way it is at the moment, I found the menu options very confusing. I wasn't sure how to get the layout you showed in the video until I realised you had placed and enlarged those windows manually. This is one of the major usability issues and it's tedious to have to do this. I couldn't work out how to browse to any other sites other than those accessed via the menu items or by using the multi search window. I really didn't like the Search functionality at all. Why do I have the option to change the background colour here and not on on the main page itself? What is Chimpow web search? The Google search option didn't work, but the Bing and Yahoo ones did. Also the scrollbars within scrollbars look is horrible.

My thoughts

I actually do like the general idea itself.

I know that modern browsers provide similar features already, but I could see this as a web application, or rather a suite of web applications. The only requirement would be a device running a modern web browser. I know you described it as an Operating System but perhaps that was a slip of the tongue. Coding a new Operating System sounds incredibly dull to me. Great if you can do it but, unless you're creating your own flavour of Linux, the other two OSes have got things covered. That's not to say I wouldn't like to see alternatives but it would be a tonne of work before you even consider the graphics.

No, I think you meant a web application. At the moment it's more like a website with the ability to drag around iframes. There are some nice touches like the windows remembering their locations, but it basically shows content from other sites and not much more. I think you could do so much more.

For a start, if it is to be a development hub, play up the 'all your applications and sites in one place' idea. And I mean applications. Showing websites is good, but you could create some cool web applications. Look at what Google Docs provides for your basic office on the go. I've also used sites like Pixlr for online image editing. Also, look at what Aviary provides.

So as a development hub for AGS I would expect the default 'applications' to include:

A word processor with screenwriting support
A graphics program with sprite animation support
A music editor
Access to the AGS forums
Access to the AGS chatrooms

You describe it as a development hub - why stop there? Why not think in terms of workspaces and have web applications tailored to different needs: office, writers, musicians, artists, students.

Some of web applications/websites you could provide for the above would include:

Word Processor (including templates for novels, screenplays, poetry)
Spreadsheets
Calendar with reminders
Access to Webmail
PDF editor/creator
Slideshow creator
Integration with sites like Amazon for product reviews and prices
University library book search

Certainly from a technical point of view, with some of these you could just pull in content from other sites rather than reinvent the wheel. But you could deliver a consistant user interface to tie them all together and easy ways to manipulate the content.

As it currently stands, I would like to see options like:

• Windows that snap into position
• One click options to rearrange the display of the windows (tile horizontally, vertically, cascade, minimise all, show all etc)
• Navigation that lets you easily see where you are and how to access hidden windows (perhaps a document tree or similar)
• An omni search or other overview tool to find a particular application
• A clearer launcher or menu bar for the available applications
• 'Workspaces' - ways to group applications for different use cases
• Style options affecting the whole user interface while also providing accessibility options

I don't think you should give up on the idea, but I do think you should make some paper prototypes to test out the usability of the website before leaping back into the code.

Don't restrict yourself to scrolling either. Experiment with different ways to present content and interact with it. What about mousing near the edge of the screen to have windows slide into view? Or collapsable nav trees or a layer hierarchy? How will it perform on mobile devices, especially those that are touch-enabled? Obviously there will be limits to what you can do in a web browser but so long as it gives the impression of more robust navigation it will work.

Also, think in terms of use cases:

Who would use this? Come up with user profiles. Is this a generic tool for everyone or a specialist tool for your studio?
If I have 20 windows open and I can't remember which is the AGS forum, how do I find it?
If I open a new application, should it appear on top of the others or slot into place somewhere?
How do I tell how many windows I have open?
How can I close/reopen all windows at once?
What about offline storage?

And so on..

If it's useful for your team, stick with it. I'd actually recommend that you develop it as a prototype like that so that you can work with it and see how it would fit your workflow. If it's successful, then show to other people and see how it could benefit them.

[void]

I think you're trying to reinvent the wheel: http://www.eyeos.org/

Well, I don't agree with the argument that the idea of a web based desktop is pointless. Think of a big company with hundreds of (slim) workstations that to need maintenance. I noticed, my credit institution did switch to a web based system recently, so there is definitely a reason for having it. But, just to repeat myself, I don't think that it would be a good idea to develop such a thing from scratch instead of just using one of the dozens available for free.

[Construed]

Some very nice crit I will surely use from stray and darth.

And for reinventing the wheel, I made this 9 years ago.
We might have a sweet lawsuit here

Not that I'm the type to sue...

[Icey]

 Just curious is GQ still going on?