• (cs)

    And of course this is the way you should do it.  The web afterall is a Visual Medium, I just don't know who it is channeling.

  • (cs)

    They forgot to fold the paper before faxing it as well

  • anon (unregistered)

    I know this is a running joke, but is it possible the class was teaching basic computer functions (such as designing something in word, printing, and scanning)?  Maybe this assignment was not done to show the correct way to design a web page but rather as an assignment to show the student had mastered basics such as printing/scanning.

     

  • garyman99 (unregistered)

    ... I don't feel quite as bad taking pictures of my Polaroids anymore. 

  • (cs) in reply to anon

    It's possible that whoever took the photo didn't have the original artwork and didn't print and/or design the paper they photographed.
     

    But it's equally likely that they just didn't know how to export the Word document as an image for their web page, and went the Web 0.1 route.

  • Beermad (unregistered)

    While not wanting to detract from how amusing the example is, perhaps the person posting it ought to have been a little more careful about getting what he wrote right?

    [...]"it may not seem to visible"[...] OH DEAR!!!

  • (cs)
  • dustin (unregistered)

    Bah this isn't enterprisey enough.

    I bet the table used is made out of cheap pressed wood. For our organizations implementation everyone will need to have 100% oak wooden tables made by the Amish.

    Captcha: captcha? Infinite loop lol internet.

  • anonymous (unregistered)

    I love your site, Alex, but if you want to see a WTF, do View | Page Source on this site.  Wow:

     

    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">
    <!--
    function KeyDownHandlerctl00_ctl01_bhcr_t___TitleBarSearchButton(event)
    {
    	if (event.keyCode == 13)
    	{
    		event.returnValue = false;
    		event.cancel = true;
         __doPostBack('ctl00$ctl01$bhcr$t$_$TitleBarSearchButton','')	}
    }
    //-->
    </script>
    All I have to say is Telligent == "Brillant!" 
  • (cs) in reply to anonymous
    Anonymous:

    I love your site, Alex, but if you want to see a WTF, do View | Page Source on this site.  Wow:

     

    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">
    <!--
    function KeyDownHandlerctl00_ctl01_bhcr_t___TitleBarSearchButton(event)
    {
    	if (event.keyCode == 13)
    	{
    		event.returnValue = false;
    		event.cancel = true;
         __doPostBack('ctl00$ctl01$bhcr$t$_$TitleBarSearchButton','')	}
    }
    //-->
    </script>
    All I have to say is Telligent == "Brillant!" 

     

    I don't know much about ASP.NET, but that looks like it is auto-generated. 

  • enviousofjackalvonorfsmonitor (unregistered) in reply to Jackal von ÖRF

    Jackal von ÖRF:

     

    rofl.  And by the way, nice monitor, I am envious.

  • enviousofjackalvonorfsmonitor (unregistered) in reply to jspenguin
    jspenguin:
    Anonymous:

    I love your site, Alex, but if you want to see a WTF, do View | Page Source on this site.  Wow:

     

    <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript">
    <!--
    function KeyDownHandlerctl00_ctl01_bhcr_t___TitleBarSearchButton(event)
    {
    	if (event.keyCode == 13)
    	{
    		event.returnValue = false;
    		event.cancel = true;
         __doPostBack('ctl00$ctl01$bhcr$t$_$TitleBarSearchButton','')	}
    }
    //-->
    </script>
    All I have to say is Telligent == "Brillant!" 

     

    I don't know much about ASP.NET, but that looks like it is auto-generated. 

     

    Parts are most definitely generated by ASP.Net.

    "ctl01_bhcr_t___TitleBarSearchButton" is a great example of the value of MyCustomControl.ClientID.  ASP.Net uses the server side control hierarchy to generate the client (html) id.  e.g. TitleBarSearchButton is a control inside t which is inside bhcr which is inside ctl01.

     

  • (cs) in reply to enviousofjackalvonorfsmonitor

    Jackal von ÖRF: After you took that photo, you of course printed it and scanned it back into computer, right? You surely didnt just download it from the camera, did you?

  • (cs) in reply to enviousofjackalvonorfsmonitor

    I do have to say that this is an awesome monitor...I am looking at mine right now. It also has Component inputs...so I have my 360 hooked up also, pumping widescreen, high-def goodness.

    Resisting the urge to buy a second this season has been a challenge.

    I got mine through the dell outlet...factory refurb...but I have had no problems.

  • spookmonkey (unregistered) in reply to KattMan

    Saw this method employed in the area of desktop publishing as well at a former employer. The powers that be had asked one of their assistants to distribute a new organization chart since we had done some managment "shuffling".


    So, to produce this chart, she managed to use Windows Paint to print everyone's name on to one page of paper each. She then took these printouts, some yarn, & scotch tape, and created a new chart that ran floor to ceiling. Taking a digital camera, she took a photo of the new chart, and distributed that as our new official chart.

  • Sweet Raspberry Danish (unregistered) in reply to Jackal von ÖRF

    Jackal von ÖRF:

    Wow you've got a lot of junk in your system tray...

  • J. (unregistered) in reply to Sweet Raspberry Danish
  • me (unregistered) in reply to J.

    Gnaa... frames are so web 0.0.1

     

    CAPTCHA: wtf 

  • Sweet Raspberry Danish (unregistered) in reply to J.

    Anonymous:

    Uh oh... this is turning into the InfiniteWTF project  (www.infinitecat.com if you don't know what I'm talking about)

  • Colyn (unregistered)

    Amusing as this is, I can't help but think that the website is in exactly the format the designer was going for. Being a school webpage, could it be possible that the design was meant to look like a piece of paper on a students desk? You're being somewhat presumptuous in thinking there wasn't a purpose for all those seemingly unnecessary steps.

  • (cs) in reply to Colyn
  • (cs) in reply to mare

    mare:
    Jackal von ÖRF: After you took that photo, you of course printed it and scanned it back into computer, right? You surely didnt just download it from the camera, did you?

    Unfortunately I only copied it straight from the camera's memory card. I did consider using a film camera and scanning the photo, but developing the film would have taken too long (nobody would read this thread anymore).

    I'm not sure if my color printer has enough ink (I use primarily a B&W laser printer), so I'm leaving the printing and scanning to the next person. ;)

    EDIT: Looks like somebody already did that. :D 

    Anonymous:

    Wow you've got a lot of junk in your system tray...

     And what's even more amazing, only about two or three of them are unnecessary. I'm quite strict on which programs I let start automatically, but still there are quite many programs which I keep running in the tray.

    Here's a list of what the systray icons are for:

    - Evation Irman (for using a remote controller with the PC, very handy in watching movies)
    - Norton Internet Security
    - OpenOffice.org Suickstarter
    - Palm Hotsync
    - foobar2000
    - Miranda IM
    - YPOPs! (POP access to Yahoo)
    - mIRC
    - Locate32 (for seaching files from HDD)
    - TightVNC Server
    - BulletProof FTP Server (soon I won't need this anymore, when I've moved all my documents to a dedicated server)
    - Genius (collection handy little tools like ping, traceroute, time, whois, password generator, conversions (feet to meters etc.) and dozens others)
    - FastStone Capture (for taking screenshots)
    - Exif Launcher (some crap which came with my digital camera)
    - uTorrent
    - Bluetooth (useless tray icon, I'm not sure if it can be hidden)
    - Volume
    - NetMeter (shows network activity, in a detailed popup window)
    - Network LED (shows network activity, directly in the tray icon, but not as detailed as NetMeter)
    - Safely Remove Hardware
    - Daemon Tools

  • micksam7 (unregistered)

    screen shot eh?

    The computer monitor + cell phone + bluetooth + bitpim method.

  • Oitzu (unregistered) in reply to micksam7
  • dustin (unregistered)

    lol infinite daily wtf's

  • dustin (unregistered)

    lol infinite daily wtfs.

  • (cs) in reply to Jackal von ÖRF
    Jackal von ÖRF:

    - Miranda IM
    - mIRC

    Why use both? Miranda handles IRC as well.

     

  • Big John (unregistered) in reply to spookmonkey

    Personally I think its a giant WTF of Jackal von ÖRF to use a resolution of 1680x1050 pixels and still maximise the windows. Your kind of missing the point of using a Window manager.. ? Don't worry, you're not alone, alot of Windows-users seems to suffer from this decease.

  • (cs) in reply to spookmonkey
    Anonymous:
    Saw this method employed in the area of desktop publishing as well at a former employer. The powers that be had asked one of their assistants to distribute a new organization chart since we had done some managment "shuffling".

    So, to produce this chart, she managed to use Windows Paint to print everyone's name on to one page of paper each. She then took these printouts, some yarn, & scotch tape, and created a new chart that ran floor to ceiling. Taking a digital camera, she took a photo of the new chart, and distributed that as our new official chart.

    MS Visio(tm), Macramé Edition 

  • micksam7 (unregistered) in reply to rogthefrog
    rogthefrog:
    Jackal von ÖRF:

    - Miranda IM
    - mIRC

    Why use both? Miranda handles IRC as well.

     



    Maybe, but it's just a guess, that mirc handles irc a bit better? I mean, all-in-one solutions are great, but sometimes your just used to another app, or maybe there are features in that dedicated app that the all-in-one solution doesn't have.

    Hence why I use mIRC instead of Opera's IRC or GAIM's irc meself. :D
  • koning_robot (unregistered) in reply to Big John

    Anonymous:
    Personally I think its a giant WTF of Jackal von ÖRF to use a resolution of 1680x1050 pixels and still maximise the windows. Your kind of missing the point of using a Window manager.. ? Don't worry, you're not alone, alot of Windows-users seems to suffer from this decease.

    Actually, the window manager instead of the user should manage windows.  http://ratpoison.nongnu.org/

  • (cs) in reply to Big John
    Anonymous:
    Personally I think its a giant WTF of Jackal von ÖRF to use a resolution of 1680x1050 pixels and still maximise the windows. Your kind of missing the point of using a Window manager.. ? Don't worry, you're not alone, alot of Windows-users seems to suffer from this decease.
    So what do you suggest he should do if he wants a full-screen browser? Uninstall Windows and use DOS?
  • (cs) in reply to Oitzu
    Anonymous:
    ...

    Of course, The Real WTF is you didn't screenshot, open the screenshot, and THEN take the picture. Like so:

    [image]

    (edit: yes, I suck with a camera. Even a digital one.)

  • Craig Francis (unregistered) in reply to Oitzu

    [image]

    Or you could try a lovely 30" display running at 2560x1600... and using a Mac, the window manager does not allow you to truly Maximise (which, trust me, is defiantly a good thing).

    Please note that I was a Windows user last year, and now the chains have been released!

    PS: The old 1280x1024 screen (19") is used as a secondary display.

    Sorry, gloat over... back to work.

    :-P

  • Zumdahl (unregistered)
  • Mabinogi (unregistered) in reply to Big John
    Personally I think its a giant WTF of Jackal von ÖRF to use a resolution of 1680x1050 pixels and still maximise the windows. Your kind of missing the point of using a Window manager.. ? Don't worry, you're not alone, alot of Windows-users seems to suffer from this decease.

    He only did it to annoy you.
    Personally.

  • (cs) in reply to Big John

    Anonymous:
    Personally I think its a giant WTF of Jackal von ÖRF to use a resolution of 1680x1050 pixels and still maximise the windows. Your kind of missing the point of using a Window manager.. ? Don't worry, you're not alone, alot of Windows-users seems to suffer from this decease.

    The resolution is 1920x1200 (24" widescreen), and usually I have the web browser about 1000px wide, because reading web pages is hard, if they are maximized with this display (reading a line almost requires turning the head). I maximized it only to take that picture.

    On Linux (at school and when I access my home server through VNC) I use Ion2 (which manages my windows nicely), but on this desktop I have only Windows. I haven't yet been able to move fully away from Windows... =/

  • Big John (unregistered) in reply to iwpg
    iwpg:
    Anonymous:
    Personally I think its a giant WTF of Jackal von ÖRF to use a resolution of 1680x1050 pixels and still maximise the windows. Your kind of missing the point of using a Window manager.. ? Don't worry, you're not alone, alot of Windows-users seems to suffer from this decease.
    So what do you suggest he should do if he wants a full-screen browser? Uninstall Windows and use DOS?


    As i previously said, its a decease... He needs to be cured from the strange desire of wanting all his windows maximised.

    I believe Craig Francis showed us a spectacular example of how constant maxmisation of windows is completely a inept concept. I would bet you a thousand dollars that if you put a standard windows user infront a windows computer with a 2560x1600 resolution he/she would instantly subdue to the overwhelming desire of the maxmise-decease and quickly attempt to double click on the window border. I have seen this many times, however not on that large of a resolution, maybe the victim finally would realise the folishness of his/her ways and immediatly snap out of it... Then again,maybe not.
  • Nacho (unregistered)

    mmmmmmm probably too much...  :)<img src="[image]" />

  • Simple Jacob (unregistered) in reply to Big John

    Decease = to die

    Disease = illness.

    The tendency to mis-use the word decease is a disease.

  • Big John (unregistered) in reply to Simple Jacob

    Touché

  • (cs)

    Of all the days I could have taken off I had to choose THIS week...imagine what I could have done with this on my 4-panel setup at work!

    And the color laser printers.

    And my digital camera.

    And the scanners.

    And the solid wood conference table (which COULD have been crafted by the Amish).

    I don't suppose there's any chance anyone will be reading this thread NEXT Tuesday, is there? 

  • (cs) in reply to Big John
    Anonymous:
    He needs to be cured from the strange desire of wanting all his windows maximised.
    And who the hell are you to tell other people how to use their own computers?
  • RobertJohnK (unregistered) in reply to iwpg

    On the original WTF: it should be obvious even from the blurred first screenshot that this is a hobbyist site, not unlikely to be related to Halloween. It could very well intentionally be a picture of an example of an invitation/recipe (or other sort of actually printed list). Made by some tween or granny who are not paid technology experts. They would indeed be happy to find any method to get something on-line.

    I've seen morons in the industry and read some funny stuff here, but those who think this was funny should load some old Geocities pages - you'll have a great time.

  • (cs) in reply to Nacho

    Anonymous:
    mmmmmmm probably too much...  :)[image]" />

     

    [image] 

  • Disintegrator (unregistered) in reply to H3SO5

     

    jejejewhy hotizontal?

  • seebs (unregistered) in reply to Big John

    Anonymous:
    Personally I think its a giant WTF of Jackal von ÖRF to use a resolution of 1680x1050 pixels and still maximise the windows. Your kind of missing the point of using a Window manager.. ? Don't worry, you're not alone, alot of Windows-users seems to suffer from this decease.

    Then you've missed the entire point of window management.  The goal is to get the best available display of whatever you're looking at.

     I have a 1600x1200 firefox, and a 1600x1200 xterm, and a 1600x1200 xchat, and so on.  I see one thing at a time -- the thing I'm looking at.  The thing I am looking at gets displayed the best way it possibly can, with large, clear, fonts and graphics.

     Non-maximized windows are a sop to GUIs that depend on poorly-controlled hiding and layering models.  Virtual desktop panels are the way to go.


     

  • (cs) in reply to Big John

    Anonymous:
    Personally I think its a giant WTF of Jackal von ÖRF to use a resolution of 1680x1050 pixels and still maximise the windows. Your kind of missing the point of using a Window manager.. ? Don't worry, you're not alone, alot of Windows-users seems to suffer from this decease.

    I'll tell you what the problem is with a lot Windows users: they get dizzy easily. Multitasking is confusing, you know. Remebering what one was working on a few seconds ago? Gee, that's so old-school. Besides, consider your typical Photoshop/Dreamweaver/IDE window. 1280x1024 is barely enough. As for using several tools at once, that's so... Linux-ish. Oh no, I said Linux. Gaaah!

    At least Jackal von ÖRF had a good reason. Otherwise this attitude IS widespread. Sadly. 

  • Jimmy Jones (unregistered) in reply to enviousofjackalvonorfsmonitor
    Anonymous:

    Jackal von ÖRF:

     

    rofl.  And by the way, nice monitor, I am envious.

    Landscape monitors suck. Almost NOTHING in the real world is landscape shaped so you spend all that money just to look at blank space.

     

  • Gaurav (unregistered) in reply to H3SO5

    My screenshot

    Too much? What's too much?

Leave a comment on “Best of 2006: Web 0.1”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article