none
Low bandwith general impression RRS feed

  • Question

  • I actually like the low bandwidth version better.  In high bandwidth, having a bread crumb for accessing sub post (especially members, methods, etc.) is awkward.  I think the low bandwidth version has it right.  Also, the high bandwidth TOC tree always seems to be too deep or the links I use remove the TOC tree.  It would be better to use a bread crumb only for going higher up in the document structure and cut the TOC tree down by only including the appropriate top level document (I know this won't be easier to determine in most cases).  For example, just having WCF in the tree instead of .NET Framework, which could be accessed by the bread crumbs.  This would keep the tree width small and promote browsing of the tree.  Low bandwidth removes the unecessary tree structure and I find it easier to use because of this.  It actually makes finding information easier because I can quickly see the document structure without needing to resize panes.  I'd go so far as to say that the stacked "bread crumbs" in low bandwidth are easier to use than left to right bread crumbs.  You always know where they are on the screen and it's possible to take them all in at a glance.
    Friday, July 10, 2009 2:04 PM

Answers

  • Diggy,
    Thanks for your feedback. How do you like our new "lightweight" view? Please see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.xml(lightweight).aspx. This is a combination of Script free (low nbandwifth) and classic (high bandwidth). You cannot persist the page unless you add lightweight n parenthesis at the end of each library page.

    I would love to hear your feedback on lightweight. Thanks.

    Anand..
    Group Manager| Developer Division| Microsoft Corp.| http://blogs.msdn.com/sandcastle/ http://blogs.msdn.com/innovation/
    • Marked as answer by Diggy Monday, July 20, 2009 4:41 PM
    Wednesday, July 15, 2009 4:41 AM

All replies

  • Diggy,
    Thanks for your feedback. How do you like our new "lightweight" view? Please see http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.xml(lightweight).aspx. This is a combination of Script free (low nbandwifth) and classic (high bandwidth). You cannot persist the page unless you add lightweight n parenthesis at the end of each library page.

    I would love to hear your feedback on lightweight. Thanks.

    Anand..
    Group Manager| Developer Division| Microsoft Corp.| http://blogs.msdn.com/sandcastle/ http://blogs.msdn.com/innovation/
    • Marked as answer by Diggy Monday, July 20, 2009 4:41 PM
    Wednesday, July 15, 2009 4:41 AM
  • Wow!  I like that even more!  The code boxes with the language tabs are spot on.  If only VB code examples are included, I don't miss out (I primarily develop in C#, but I can understand VB well enough).  It just needs a search bar.
    Monday, July 20, 2009 4:40 PM
  • Me too! I actually came here to complain about the low-bandwidth view, but the answer to my complaint is: use the lightweight view!

    Thanks!

    John Saunders
    WCF is Web Services. They are not two separate things.
    Use WCF for All New Web Service Development, instead of legacy ASMX or obsolete WSE
    Use File->New Project to create Web Service Projects
    Tuesday, July 21, 2009 10:31 PM
  • I never knew of the alternate views; they're quite nice!  I think I'll stick with the low bandwidth view, it's a lot cleaner than the default high-bandwidth view.  I keep a small browser window open for reference while coding, and the high-bandwidth view's top frame takes up 1/3 of the window all the time.  The lightweight version appears to honor my default font sizes, which is very nice; by default I set the font zoom on MSDN high because I don't like teeny text.

    I only found out about these alternate views because the default CSS failed to load for some reason.  The site's unusable in my browser in that state; for some reason there's no vertical scroll bar, so most of the content cannot be viewed.
    Thursday, August 13, 2009 4:30 PM
  • Just like Nicholas, I didn't know about the alternate views. I just learned about the low bandwidth view and I like that a lot until I clicked on "Provide feedback" and discovered that there's actually another view - the lightweight view. I am gonna try the lightweight view now. Thanks!

    Monday, August 17, 2009 7:03 PM
  • I had seen the Lightweight view in the MSDN .Its Very nice. I want to write some of the lightweight views for my website.Can any one guide how to write Code for the lightweight view.

    Any Concepts i have to follow for the lightweight view.


    Thanks,
    velu

    Friday, November 13, 2009 10:01 AM
  • I would love to hear your feedback on lightweight. Thanks.

    Anand..

    I LOVE the new, low bandwidth version.  I once spent more time downloading and moving the navTree than reading docs. Printing once was useless due to the poor design. And, as of a few years ago, the docs were useless anyway: written to impress not inform.

    Oh my, after a 10 years of MS creating trash docs, good docs are coming back!!! - thank you, thank you, thank you! MS IS returning to its roots -to the old school styled docs!!! It is about time someone wrestled the docs from the MS marketing dept. Now it seems the docs are once again written in the spirit of the old Visual Studio 5 & Sql Server 6 docs: written to educate developers about MS technologies not impress with stodginess. It's seems it's all coming back: good remarks, good examples, good caveats, good verbiage (sans the bs), etc... 

    Please keep it up and never return to the doc style of the past 10 years.

    Steve
    Friday, November 13, 2009 4:54 PM