OreKehStrah
Veteran
The page looks fine for me in mobile safari
-
Welcome to SpeedSolving.com — the world’s largest puzzle community!
You’re currently browsing as a guest, which means you have limited access to discussions, resources, member profiles, and community features.
Join 50,000+ cubers and puzzle enthusiasts from around the world to ask questions, share solves, improve faster, and be part of the community.
Registration is free, fast, and easy — create your account today.
Already a member? Log in here to hide this message and start participating.
Test Twizzle
- Thread starter pjk
- Start date
CubeRed
Veteran
Fine for me on Google. Just the some of the actual indents I can't view. (Android)
kubesolver
Premium Member
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2019
- Messages
- 446
For me this page looks all good.
Forum embeds here don't show. (Android, brave)
IsThatA4x4
Veteran
I have inconsistency viewing the embeds on the forum, and I can't see anything on this link except for the heading at the top
They all look fine. The 223 has a 221 square highlighted in a brighter color than the rest of the cubelets. Not sure if that is intentional.
(I reported earlier in the thread my problems viewing some of these applets in the OP.)
Oh, and I am using Chrome 93.0.4577.82.
All looks and loads well for me. However, also on desktop some of the forum applets don't load, others do.
Melvintnh327
Veteran
it looks fine, just a bit laggy
Cubing Forever
Veteran
it works fine for me.
cuber314159
Legend
This thread is fine for me on Firefox for Android.
CubeExplorer
Regular
I see no Output using firefox 52.9.0 (32-Bit) in Win XP. Just for Info.
D
Deleted member 36445
Guest
I wonder why... windows XP is such a modern operating system
CubeExplorer
Regular
Its irrelevant wether you consider it as "modern". Its a well working machine using a well working system.
D
Deleted member 36445
Guest
qwr
Legend
you cannot reasonably expect a web tool to support a 32 bit OS at all
CubeExplorer
Regular
"Expectation" is not the topic. The subject is feedback regarding programs. So I mentioned facts.
Still wondering? So let me explain to you.
Using other programs on the same machine, the same system running, I see usefull output. 
Lucas Garron
Premium Member
I would like to discourage arguing about OS versions and such here.
cubing.js and Twizzle rely on somewhat recent web standards. We make sure to support the latest versions of all the major browsers, which will work on any OS that supports them. But if you're on an OS that does not support a current browser, we unfortunately can't offer full functionality.
However, accessibility is personally an important goal for me, and older browsers share similarities with situations where JavaScript can't run or the network is very slow. We have tested some workarounds for such situations (showing a static image, and/or a video animation), but they are not ready to use quite yet.
cubing.js and Twizzle rely on somewhat recent web standards. We make sure to support the latest versions of all the major browsers, which will work on any OS that supports them. But if you're on an OS that does not support a current browser, we unfortunately can't offer full functionality.
However, accessibility is personally an important goal for me, and older browsers share similarities with situations where JavaScript can't run or the network is very slow. We have tested some workarounds for such situations (showing a static image, and/or a video animation), but they are not ready to use quite yet.
CubeExplorer
Regular
Lucas, I appreciate your work and I did not complain. As mentioned above, I just gave feedback.
I have no problem at all, because there are programs for simulating cubes and solves working well on my machine.
qwr
Legend
There exist many polyfills for newer EcmaScript features. However idk if the program uses WebGL and if there's an easy way around that.
Lucas Garron
Premium Member
There's some nuance here.
Some browser APIs can definitely be polyfilled (although that can get expensive). However, language features generally *cannot* be polyfilled and some newer ones are not backwards-compatible enough to transpile for older browsers. We're going to be relying on more and more of those features — in particular, module workers are going to be really valuable for performance, debugging, and general maintainability.
I've spent a few hundred hours on compatibility issues already, and I'd like to avoid spending that much again. So I think I need to set the expectation that we will need to require reasonably up-to-date browsers for full functionality. That said, if you find particular compatibility issues you think are worth addressing, please do file an issue!
Lucas Garron
Premium Member
Just wanted to drop in here and let folks know that I haven't forgotten about this thread.
I've been trying to fix up some things to make the player work better in the forum and... let's just say the technical tradeoffs are significantly more difficult than you might expect.
However, you should now be able to load a large number of players on a page with reasonable (if not ideal) performance, and the player is now able to show error messages instead of blanking out for invalid input (although I'm still working on that).
I've been trying to fix up some things to make the player work better in the forum and... let's just say the technical tradeoffs are significantly more difficult than you might expect.
However, you should now be able to load a large number of players on a page with reasonable (if not ideal) performance, and the player is now able to show error messages instead of blanking out for invalid input (although I'm still working on that).
Last edited:
Similar threads
