Funnily enough, I already found some pointers and a thread to an OSX client for Fogbugz. Here
I am looking for a Windows client.
I know there are web browsers for Windows, but I am looking for fast editing; fast changing of attributes ("one click"); zapping through cases and edits in milliseconds; no waiting for HTTP round trips, just pure speed.
Are there any solutions for this?
Not that we're aware of. Sorry.
Anyone looking to develop something like this, though, should contact us at Fog Creek.
We can certainly help you with any questions.
Related
My title pretty much says it all. I have been looking at mod_pagespeed and it somehow impresses me as being very little more than a way to offload the work of optimization to the server instead of the developer.
There may be some advantages to doing this such as reducing developer time etc so I'm not suggesting that it is all bad. But it also does strike me as a bit of a script kiddie way to do things. Rather than learn about all those performance techniques, hey! just let the server do it!
Is mod_pagespeed something that would be good to implement on my production web application or would I be better off doing the optimization "by hand"?
Here is the original announcement.
It seems to me that it could empower the server admin to centrally optimize content created by a large set of developers. Also, it could be a good way of baking in some well-tested (by Google) best practices that might be costly to develop on your own.
My team is tasked with quickly evaluating SproutCore and a couple of other alternatives. There's not really enough time for a deep dive, but our findings might let us convince the powers that be to allow for a deeper dive. (Right now, we're just taking a quick glance to see "what's out there").
So me and a teammate have started looking at SproutCore. I'm loving it so far, but he has already decided he doesn't like it. The reason he doesn't like it is he got the impression that the "data binding" in the Todos tutorial is the naive kind of data binding that a Visual Studio grid control might do ... where the widget itself is allowed to reach across the Internet to the server and obtain new data whenever it needs to paint itself.
I would be shocked if that were the case, because it is such a naive approach that really is only good for demo-ware, and SproutCore feels much more elegant than that to me.
Unfortunately, we're probably not going to have time for either one of us to find out for sure. So, can someone who has used SproutCore and knows it well please explain a bit about how Bindings work, and whether or not Bindings are allowed to initiate an Ajax call to the server to obtain more data?
UPDATE: I got the answers I need, partly from the google group and partly from digging deeper. The Bindings are exactly what I thought they were ... a great tool for connecting objects in memory inside the Javascript environment. They eliminate a TON of "glue code", and, like the rest of SproutCore, are REALLY well done. In no way is it anything close to "naive data binding". SproutCore is one powerful, elegant library, and I hope to get plenty of chances to use it (though my current project, alas, chose to go with something else).
I don't think I qualify as "knowing [SproutCore] well," but I don't think your question is really about bindings per se; it's about what's allowed to poll the server for data. It's my impression that bindings largely talk to each other inside the application. A binding can change data in the (local) Store, but I don't think the Store necessarily initiates an Ajax call every time it's changed.
ETA: This work in progress reiterates, "Bindings are used for inter-object communication."
YSlow, dynaTrace, HTTPWatch, Fiddler .........
All these things are really good for measuring the performance of the website and get statistics for the same. YSlow is really cool, offers good guidelines also.
However, i am very confused with so many things around (Though it's good that people already invested time and have made nice guidelines to follow and i thank them for great work done).
Following are my questions:
How much accuracy these tools have in terms or numbers they show ?
Which one(tool) is BEST to use (one for all needs)? Or i am missing name of some tool which is out of box and better than above all?
I'm suprised that you haven't mentioned JMeter. It is free, quite easy to use, has lots of features, and great for load testing your website.
As for question one, I'm not sure I can answer that. I'm sure that in general, the numbers these tools show are pretty accurate, but there are some catches. Take JMeter for example:
JMeter itself uses a lot of memory and also some substantial CPU time if you do some heavy load testing. That means that if you run the tool on the same machine as your website, some resources are lost, e.g. not available for the website
Testing it on the same machine does not out-of-the-box take in account that the data has to be sent over the internet connection, so response times are lower then the reality.
But in all, I think you should never blindly trust the results these tools give you, but they can give you a good insight into possible bottlenecks or problems.
YSlow is good to measure performance for a single user. Try to keep it grade A and it will be OK. But it actually doesn't measure performance in case of multiple concurrent users. For that you can use under each Apache JMeter. It's a good webserver/webapplication stresstest tool. So I would say, just use both YSlow (for client performance) and JMeter (for server performance).
I haven't used DynaTrace before, so I'll skip that part. The mentioned HTTP request trackers doesn't really measure performance, they are more debuggers.
As far as I am concerned, i find YSlow to be really good (have tried fiddler too) and it does help me when i need it and i do believe that it provides the correct figures thereby making me use that in the time ahead too unless there is anything unanimously accepted (which is difficult because everyone has different choices and requirements.) or even better. Oh they are right, forgot the JMeter, something you should definitely give a mention.
There is also Speed Tracer extension for Chrome. It should be usable with any JavaScript heavy website.
http://code.google.com/webtoolkit/speedtracer/
http://gtmetrix.com is a good tool and it is free. that analyzes your page's speed performance using Page Speed and YSlow
This is a broad question, so let me narrow it a bit. I am a graphic designer entering the world of web design. I'm not totally green in this field, but I know enough to know that I have a lot to learn. From friends and from posts on this site I realize there is often a harmful disconnect between design and development.
I'm getting ready to place a client log-in/password "portal" on my website. Nothing fancy, just enough to provide some sound mind for my clients and a space for secure download of imagery. I am only handling the look and feel of this one, nothing more. What potential pitfalls should I know about, on my end, to avoid making the development end hairy?
And of course any other nuggets of wisdom are appreciated too. Thanks!
Perhaps the worst mistake that many designers make when working with developers is to assume that developers aren't creative, and that we couldn't possibly have any good ideas or inputs into the design. The fallacy of this is obvious because what we do all day, every day, is create things. It's taken for granted that designers can raise bugs against developers when our code doesn't represent the design exactly, yet many designers get very touchy when we raise suggestions about how their design could be improved even in minor ways. Sometimes the suggestions may not be suitable, but occasionally you might be able to improve your design.
In addition, I have frequently found that designers under-estimate the capabilities of developers to achieve what they want, so will sometimes suggest a simpler alternative. By opening up the dialog and giving a couple of options like a minimum one and an ideal one, you might be surprised that you can have elements of the ideal one, or all of it, or even something better as you discuss what actually can be achieved (sometimes what seems hard to achieve to a designer seems easy to the dev, and vice versa, because they are different disciplines). Of course the converse is true and you might be aiming too high, so you need to find that out as well.
In summary - you're absolutely right that any disconnect between design and dev is detrimental both to morale and the final product. So talk to the devs as soon as you have initial designs, and keep a good two-way dialog open.
I am a web developer, so I'm answering this from my viewpoint. There is really no serious pitfall as long as developer and designer understand each other. One tries to make websites look as attractive as possible, while the other tries to make the look of the website as close to the design as possible.
So when I'm asked to do the impossible, (like replacing the browser's default scrollbar with an animated image of a cat) I'll just tell the designer that it can't be done, the reasons for that, and suggest possible alternatives (Flash ?). After that being said, I expect the designer to understand and cooperate with me to choose the best alternative, not suddenly turning into grumpy mode or something.
A little basic knowledge of the developer's work would help, too.
Some ideas that may smooth the process :
Talk to the developers directly and ask if they have any specific requirements. Different platforms have different needs and requirements. Communication is important.
Get the basics of good HTML and CSS down. There are many references but you can try A List Apart as a starting point.
Does anyone have experience with embedding messaging or mailing programs into VS? I'm interested in things like Skype or Instant Messenger being embedded as tool windows. If you use (or have used) something like this, how has it affected your productivity?
I'm not sure why you want to do this? I find I already have too little space in VS.
That aside, almost every dev team I have been on now communicated via a combination of IRC, MSN, Skype etc. We have always found that a flashing toolbar is a much smaller distraction to your programming zone than a tap on the shoulder. It also means we can stick our headphones on, and faze out into focused programming land, aka "The Zone", without concern for missing co-workers trying to get your attention.
I second the fact that I would find this very annoying; I prefer to read messages on my own basis, not when someone wants to send me something, and then be forced to distract my attention from what I'm on.
That said, you could fairly trivially host some sort of messaging website (twitter perhaps, or any other) in a tab in VS. I wouldn't, but you could.