none
Big gap in the lowband view RRS feed

Answers

  • Is it so difficult to fix this white gap on all lowband pages?
    I would expect at least a simple rollback to the previous version that worked.

    The real problems here are:
    - developers do not have have anymore an offline msdn library working (it's 10 time slower than searching with google)
    - the online version is too heavy for large number of countries around the world
    - the offline version have no search and force the dev to use google or other global search engine.

    For this reason I (and my communities) would expect a prompt response fixing the lowband version.
    Raffaele Rialdi [MVP] http://blogs.ugidotnet.org/raffaele

    Raffaele,
    This issue has been fixed. Please check and let me know if I can help again. My apologies for taking longer time to provide you with a fix. Cheers.

    Anand..
    Group Manager| Developer Division| Microsoft Corp.| http://blogs.msdn.com/sandcastle/ http://blogs.msdn.com/innovation/
    Thursday, September 10, 2009 12:46 AM

All replies

  • I Agree, I can see the same. Browser: Mozilla. I can see the

    "Syntax"


    and long gap matching the height of function list at the left, then frame with actual text  starts.

    But anyway - good work! It is much much much better than full blow slow, lagging full blown browser.

    Regards,

     Tomasz Sztejka.
    Thursday, August 27, 2009 2:05 PM
  • Agreed -- can someone fix please?   It looks silly.
    Friday, August 28, 2009 3:58 PM
  • Is it so difficult to fix this white gap on all lowband pages?
    I would expect at least a simple rollback to the previous version that worked.

    The real problems here are:
    - developers do not have have anymore an offline msdn library working (it's 10 time slower than searching with google)
    - the online version is too heavy for large number of countries around the world
    - the offline version have no search and force the dev to use google or other global search engine.

    For this reason I (and my communities) would expect a prompt response fixing the lowband version.
    Raffaele Rialdi [MVP] http://blogs.ugidotnet.org/raffaele
    Sunday, September 6, 2009 8:21 PM
  • Raffaele,
    Thanks for reporting this issue. I am ivestigating this issue and will provide a fix ASAP. Until we have a fix could you please try our new lightweight version http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.windows.uielement.previewdragover(lightweight).aspx of this page. We now have added a 'switcher" at the botton of this lightweight page to swirch back to other versions.

    I will get back to you with an answer. Cheers.

    Anand..
    Group Manager| Developer Division| Microsoft Corp.| http://blogs.msdn.com/sandcastle/ http://blogs.msdn.com/innovation/
    Tuesday, September 8, 2009 3:23 PM
  • Is it so difficult to fix this white gap on all lowband pages?
    I would expect at least a simple rollback to the previous version that worked.

    The real problems here are:
    - developers do not have have anymore an offline msdn library working (it's 10 time slower than searching with google)
    - the online version is too heavy for large number of countries around the world
    - the offline version have no search and force the dev to use google or other global search engine.

    For this reason I (and my communities) would expect a prompt response fixing the lowband version.
    Raffaele Rialdi [MVP] http://blogs.ugidotnet.org/raffaele

    Raffaele,
    This issue has been fixed. Please check and let me know if I can help again. My apologies for taking longer time to provide you with a fix. Cheers.

    Anand..
    Group Manager| Developer Division| Microsoft Corp.| http://blogs.msdn.com/sandcastle/ http://blogs.msdn.com/innovation/
    Thursday, September 10, 2009 12:46 AM
  • Hi Anand,
    thank you very much for fixing that problem.

    I already tried the lightweight (and blogged about it).
    It's far better than the classic view, but it's still too heavy IMHO.
    This are the page size for the link I posted at the top of this thread:
    - classic 168K
    - lightweight 107K (60K script)
    - loband 10K

    There are many places in my country where the broadband is only a dream (for example 3G here is slug) and the load time for 100K page for looking at a parameter name is really too much.
    I won't switch from loband but in this view I still miss two features: search and a link to the parent page. Will you add those to the loband?

    Please note that also the loband cannot replace the offline version. If only the offline search would be equal to a google search, that would be my first choice (and I am confident I would not be alone at all).

    Cheers


    Raffaele Rialdi [MVP] http://blogs.ugidotnet.org/raffaele
    Thursday, September 10, 2009 7:21 AM
  • Raffaele,
    I will respond to this directly via email regarding search and links.

    Anand..
    Group Manager| Developer Division| Microsoft Corp.| http://blogs.msdn.com/sandcastle/ http://blogs.msdn.com/innovation/
    Thursday, September 10, 2009 5:21 PM
  • This are the page size for the link I posted at the top of this thread:
    - classic 168K
    - lightweight 107K (60K script)
    - loband 10K

    There are many places in my country where the broadband is only a dream (for example 3G here is slug) and the load time for 100K page for looking at a parameter name is really too much.

    For what it's worth, I have 20Mbps broadband, and the low-bandwidth version is _still_ vastly preferable.  On top of the overhead of actually transferring the bits, there is also the latency caused by the server having to assemble the HTML before sending it to me, as well as the local overhead of my computer having to render the data.

    Even from a pure data size point of view, the low-bandwidth version is an enormous relief on those pieces of the documentation display, and that's magnified by the relative simplicity of rendering the data.  That is, not only is the low-bandwidth version requiring my computer to parse less data, when my computer gets around to displaying the data, that costs a lot less to.

    In other words, even if one day broadband is available everywhere, please don't think that in any way reduces the usefulness of the low-bandwidth mode.

    Frankly, low-bandwidth mode is the single greatest improvement to MSDN I've seen since I've switched to it (from using offline MSDN help, almost ten years ago).  Please keep up the good work!
    • Proposed as answer by dode zak Thursday, October 8, 2009 4:13 PM
    Wednesday, October 7, 2009 7:25 PM