This is either a programming request or a simple workaround...
Preface: I don't like Google and don't want to give YouTube any more support than I have to. However some creators I follow are only on YouTube.
Question: is there a way to always show closed captions (when available) when watching YouTube videos without being logged in/having an account? Is there an extension with this behavior?
Issue: When I watch multiple videos in a row, using the ?view=57 url trick and "Play All" button, the captions turn off when switching between videos... I have to enter the other room and hit the "c" button on the keyboard to turn them back on every time, which is inconvenient while streaming.
Action: I've searched for Firefox add-ons and extensions but their behaviors are all generically described... and I can't ascertain if they have this behavior. And many that talk about subtitles are you uploading your own .srt which is NOT what I'm trying to do.
Any help would be appreciated... it's a small but very frequently experienced annoyance and I feel like there must be some easy solution! Or... this could be a fun practice exercise for someone to release on github or something ;)
Thanks in advance.
I want to create a typing assisting addon to my Firefox such that whatever the user is typing currently appears on a small window on the right hand side bottom in bigger fonts.
This will help slow typists to type at a faster rate.
For example, when the user is on yahoo sign-up page and text box name, a small window should appear on the bottom right corner and should display the text he is entering in larger fonts. In this manner, the user can keep typing without moving his head up.
I have no experience with firefox addons, so I would like to know whether this project is feasible. If it is, then I would like to know whether it's possible to do with only JavaScript; or if I will have to use jQuery.
It will be much appreciated if you can provide some guidance in this matter.
Sure it's feasible. You never have to use jQuery and it's not very useful when writing an add-on anyway, since you don't care about differences between browsers.
I suggest you start with https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/developers/ , try to get a page-mod running, make it handle keystrokes and display them in a <div> on the web page it's running in.
I just removed IceWeasel from my Debian machine and replaced it with Firefox so I could test the website I'm developing in the more popular browser in case there was any minute differences and I noticed that google's keyboard navigation no longer works. I've done some searching (the hard way, with the mouse :P) and I can't find any mention of a link between Debian or firefox and problems with google keyboard navigation.
When I press the up and down keys, the whole window just scrolls. Also when I press the tab key, firefox just moves from link to link (starting with the google tools links in the top left-hand corner) and takes 10 - 15 tabs before it gets to the search results.
I read somewhere that google instant wasn't available in all countries (or, at least it wasn't some time in the past.) I use google Australia, but I've also tried - via an international proxy server - google.com and I still get the same results.
I also like to have images disabled for general browsing due to strict bandwidth allocations and I thought perhaps the feature was working, but not displaying the blue arrow indicator. However, when I enabled images for google.com and google.com.au, there was no observer change in behaviour (except for the images showing up.)
Has anyone else experienced this problem, either using firefox, or under any other conditions?
The broken keyboard navigation I'm encountering type ahead find. Particularly, typing, optionally beginning with '/', is directed to the search box, regardless of the document element with focus.
There are two ways to fix this:
Use the general.useragent.override pref to remove "Firefox/XXX" from the user agent string.
Use a userscript (Greasemonkey) to reclaim keyboard navigation (theoretical)
Im about to start creating a custom onscreen keyboard for my WP7 app. An out of the box SIP will not work since they can't be customized or built from scratch with .NET.
Ideally the keyboard would activate like a SIP. Specifically, appear when the textbox receives focus. Docking to the bottom of the screen would be nice, too.
Any ideas where I could find samples of this?
Also, do you have any recommendations or lessons learned you could share?
I think you'll be making this sample ;)
The challenge with letting textbox take focus is likely going to be the built in SIP is going to appear. ReadOnly is an option, but you'll either lose or need to find a way to retain/mimic the cursor if that visual queue is important to you.
I'm from a Windows programming background when writing tools, but have been programming using Carbon and Cocoa for the past year. I have introduced myself to Mac by, I admit it, hiding from UI programming. I've been basically wapping my OpenGL code in a view, then staying in my comfort zone using my platform agnostic OpenGL C++ code as usual.
However, now I want to start porting one of my more sophisticated applications to Mac OS.
Typically I use the standard Visual Studio dockable MDI approach, which is excellent, but very Windows-like. From using a Mac primarily now for a while, I don't tend to see this sort of method used for Mac UIs. Even Xcode doesn't support the idea of drag and drop/dockable views, unfortunately. I see docked views with splitter panels, but that's about it.
The closest thing I've seen to the Visual Studio approach is Photoshop CS4, which is pretty nice.
So what is the general consensus on this? Is there are more Mac-like way of achieving the same thing that I haven't seen? If not, I'm happy to write a window manager in Cocoa myself, so that I can finally delve in an learn what looks like an excellent API.
Note, I don't want to use QT or any other cross-platform libraries. The whole point is that I want to make a Mac app look like a Mac app, leave the Windows app looking like a Windows app. I always find the cross-platform libraries tend to lose this effect, and when I see a native Mac UI, with fancy Cocoa transitions and animations, I always smile. It's also a good excuse for me to learn Cocoa.
That being said, if there is an Open Source Cocoa library to do this, I'd love to know about it! I'd love to see how someone else achieves this, and would help smooth the Cocoa learning curve.
Cheers,
Shane
UPDATE: I forgot to mention a critical point. I support plugins, which can have their own UI to display various plugin specific information. I don't know which plugins will be loaded and I don't know where their UI will live, if I don't support docking. I'd love to hear people's thoughts on this, specifically: How do I support a plugin view architecture, if the UI can't change? Where do I put the plugin views?
Coming from a Windows background, you feel the need to have docking windows, but is it really essential to the app? Apple's philosophy (in my opinion) is that the designer knows better than the user how things should look and work. For example, iTunes is a pretty sophisticated app, but it doesn't let you change the UI around, change the skin, etc., because Apple wants to keep it consistent. They offer the full view, the mini player, and a handful of different viewing options, but they don't let you pull the source list off into a separate window, or dock it in other positions. They think it should be on the left, so there it stays...
You said you "want to make a Mac app look like a Mac app", and as you pointed out, Mac apps don't tend to have docking windows. Therefore, implementing your own docking windows is probably a step in the wrong direction ;)
+1 to Ken's answer.
From a user perspective unless its integral to the app like it is in Adobe CS or Eclipse i want everything as concise as possible and all the different options and displays out of my way so i can focus on the document.
I think you will find with mac users that those who have the "user skill" to make use of rearranging panels will in most cases opt for hot key bindings instead, and those who dont have that level of "skill" youre just going to confuse.
I would recommend keeping it as simple as possible.
One thing that's common among many Mac apps is the ability to hide all the chrome and focus on your content. That's the point behind the "tic tac" toolbar control in the top right corner of many windows. A serious weakness of many docking UIs is that they expect you to have the window take up most of the screen, because the docked panels can obscure content. Even if docked panels are collapsable, the space left by them is often just wasted and filled with white space. So, if you build a docking panel into your interface, you should expect it to be visible most of the time. For example, iTunes' source list is clearly designed to be visible all the time, but you can double-click a playlist to open it in a new window.
To get used to the range of Mac controls, I'd suggest you try doing some serious work with some apps that don't have a cross-platform UI; for example, the iWork apps, Interface Builder or Preview. Take note of where controls appear and why—in toolbars, in bottom bars, in inspectors, in source lists/sidebars, in panels such as IB's Library or the Font and Color panels, in contextual HUDs. Don't forget the menu bar either. Get an idea of the feel of controls—their responsiveness, modality, sizing, grouping and consistency. Try to develop some taste—not everything is perfect; just try iCal if you want to have something to make fun of.
Note that there's no "one size fits all" for controls, which can be an issue with docking UIs. It's important to think about workflow: how commonly used the control would be, whether you can replace it with direct manipulation, whether a visible indication of its state is necessary, whether it's operable from the keyboard and mouse where appropriate, and so forth. Figure out how the control's placement and behavior lets the user work more efficiently.
As a simple example of example of a good versus bad control placement and behavior in otherwise-decent applications, compare image masking in OmniGraffle and Keynote. In OmniGraffle, this uses the Image inspector where you have to first click on an unlabeled button ("Natural size") in order to enable the appropriate controls, then adjust size and position away in a low-fidelity fashion with an image thumbnail or by typing percentages into fields. Trying to resize the frame directly behaves in a bizarre and counterintuitive fashion.
In Keynote, masking starts with a sensibly named menu item or toolbar item, uses a HUD which pops up the instant you click on a masked image and allows for direct manipulation including a sensible display of the extent of the image you're masking. While you're dragging a masked image around, it even follows the guides. Advanced users can ignore the HUD entirely, just double-clicking the image to toggle mask editing and using the handles for sizing. It should be easy to see, with a few caveats (e.g. the state of "Edit Mask" mode should be visible in the HUD rather than just from the image; the outer border of the image you're masking should be more effectively used) Keynote is substantially better at this, in part because it doesn't use an inspector.
That said, if you do have a huge number of options and the standard tabbed inspector layout doesn't work for you, check out the Omni Group's OmniInspector framework. Try to use it for good, and hopefully you'll figure out how to obsess over UI as much as you do over graphics now :-)
(running in slow motion, reaching out in panic) Nnnnnoooooooo!!!!!
:-) Seriously, as I mentioned in reply to Ken's excellent answer, trying to force a "Windowsism" on an OS X UI is definitely a bad idea. In my opinion, the biggest problem with Windows UI is third-party developers inventing new and inconsistent ways of presenting UI, rather than being consistent and following established conventions. To a Mac user, that's the sign of a terrible application. It's that way for a reason.
I encourage you to rethink your UI app's implementation from the ground up with the Mac OS in mind. If you've done your job well, the architecture and model (sans platform-specific implementation) should clearly translate to any platform.
In terms of UI, you've been using a Mac for a year, so you should have a pretty good idea of "the norm". If you have doubts, it's best to post a question specifically detailing what you need to present and your thoughts on how you might do it (or asking how if you have no idea).
Just don't whack your app with the ugly stick by forcing it to behave as if it were running in Windows when it's clearly not. That's the kiss of death for an app to Mac users.