I wrote some test code that alerts me in the background when I've left a region or entered it. Works great with "Always" location access. — However, if I change the app's location access to "When In Use", it doesn't work anymore. Works again when reverted.
I was under the impression (as were others) that geofencing (region monitoring) on iOS should work without "Always" location access. Is there an entitlement or setting somewhere to enable it to work correctly?
The hollow arrow doesn't even appear in the status bar without "Always", which is kind of a tip-off that it's not supported without "Always" being turned on, but yeah....
That's expected. Region monitoring, visit monitoring, significant Location Changes are handled on the OS level and to work need Always access. This is a screen shot from WWDC Core Location Best Practice Minute 14:09
Related
we have a quite old application that is based on Microsoft Access. Parts of the UI are still Microsoft Access, other parts use WinForms and the newest parts use WPF (trying to get rid of the old parts step by step).
We discovered an odd scaling problem in Windows 10 and a high DPI monitor and now I'm looking for a cure for this problem, preferrably one that's not involving changing the old UI.
To be able to work on this high DPI monitor Windows's scaling should be set to 200%.
And here's the problem: When the user logs in with the scaling set to 200% starting our application results in strings that use a too big font for the space the string is placed in. It looks like Windows increased the font size of the strings but not the dimensions of the controls containing the strings. Changing the scaling of Windows doesn't fix the problem, restarting our application after changing the scaling doesn't fix the problem.
Although... when the user logs in with the scaling set to 100% everything is fine, even when changing the scaling afterwards or restarting the application.
But we can't and won't tell our users to always set the scaling of Windows back to 100% when logging off and increasing it again when logging in.
Isn't there an other way to get around this problem?
Thanks for your help (if there is any).
After a little bit of googling I found a solution at least for my special problem.
Microsoft Access had a manifest file with a dpiAware node set to true. Changing that to false seems to tell Access to not use Microsoft's "intelligent" scaling and use some kind of "dumb" scaling instead. This fixed the whole problem for me.
As far as I know one can create such a manifest file for any executable to fix that problem with older applications, but I didn't try that because Access was shipped with an already existing manifest file.
Is the Azure Functions Pulse page (which can be displayed by clicking the link "live event stream" after the Monitor tab is selected) still under development?
I noticed that it can only display the chart for Executions Started/Completed/Failed.
Can anyone point me to any documentation on Azure Functions Pulse?
I believe Azure Functions is no longer in preview (this page does not indicate that it is like it used to: https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/services/functions/) but I too have noticed some errors on the pulse page (sometimes it just won't load at all).
I'm sure some of these things will improve over time. Just make sure you've updated your function app to 1.0 (or latest) as logging doesn't work for earlier versions now that they've improved it.
Trying to investigate an issue a customer is facing where he gets a generic IE9 error - "Internet Explorer cannot display the webpage". We have ruled out connection settings as a potential cause, is there any to get a dump/snapshot of the security settings on this customer's computer?
I already saw some threads on the forum regarding gpedit.msc (here); however when I did a dry run on my system I am not seeing the information that I expect. I.e. the operation is not recursive and the few sites in my trusted/blocked list do not show up either. Is there a better method?
Vin
We are programming a web application (not 'just' a web site, but functionality-wise a real application), and have the following discussion for the next release:
our UI designer wants to replace the browser's right-click context menu (showing our own menu where appropriate, or no menu at all) because he wants the web app to be more like our (existing) Windows app
our developers (and I) strongly object because this is bad practice, and simply something you do not do in a web application
Thus, I'm looking for "more solid" arguments - like best practice guidelines, any statements from reputable sources, coding arguments etc. - for the pros and cons of this issue, which I can hopefully use to resolve it once and for all...
You can't do that reliably anyway. In Firefox, go to Settings, Contents, JavaScript/Advanced (I'm guessing the captions, no English Firefox (; ) to override context menu behaviour and bang, your app doesn't work anymore. My online-banking application did this in their old version, so I couldn't do copy & paste with the mouse. I hated it, so I enabled the protection in Firefox and it worked. Kind of. Their new version doesn't do such bad things anymore.
Instead, use a little drop-down arrow where a context menu is needed, that can either be clicked or just hovered over to show the menu. JetBrains' TeamCity web app does that very well.
If your application is to run in an intranet, maybe the UI designer arguments are valid: as long as all of the users of the application are well known and you want to emulate some Windows application, I think it's ok to restrict the right-click or any other input, because it's just the requirements of this application, as it would be to any other app.
But if your application is to run in the internet, disabling or replacing right-click is a very bad idea, and these are only some of the arguments I reminded of:
First of all, changing the behavior of the user interface is aggressive and annoying -- no one wants to get used to "new controls" just to access your site, and generally people hate to leave their comfort area. I mean, I know what my right click does and I want it to do always the same thing.
People can understand the difference between Windows apps and web apps, so there's no need to "emulate Windows app behavior".
Not everyone uses Windows :-)
Also, this is innefective, sice there are several ways to overwrite this behavior, such as settings in Firefox or even plugins that disable specific javascript instructions, such as this one.
depending on your audience you stand a very good chance your users do not even KNOW there's a right click menu. So please don't make this the only alternative
I personally believe you should leave browser's default behaviors alone... users are used to them, so no need to get them used to your way of doing things.
However, if you're building an intranet (instead of a public site), then I'm for tweaking as much as possible to improve usability.
An argument I would use (in quotes for dramatic effect):
Lack of consistency & reduced
functionality compared to other
unhindered web interfaces will lead to
a loss of user confidence - which
is undesirable to say the least.
Of course, if many or most of the web application users are already familiar with or regular users of the Windows app, the UI designer could be on the right track and the consistency with the Windows app could be a winner.
That said, in my opinion it's hard to make a custom context-menu within a web page intuitive, and while some users might warm to it, I'm guessing most will probably never use it.
because he wants the web app to be more like our (existing) Windows app
I think right-click in a Windows app is a bad idea.
In a web browser it's a UI disaster because nobody will be expecting it.
I think it depends on whether you perceive the context-menu as part of the browsers chrome or not. If you do (and I ascribe to this view), then it should be off target, but otherwise it is a good place for adding some usability to your application.
Replacing the browser right-click context menu for specific areas of your GUI from your web application can be quite useful. Doing this just to disable the context menu will annoy your users, who may try to find a way around it. Also, removing or replacing the browser right-click context menu from the entire area of your application will usually be annoying and can make it more difficult to debug.
Unfortunately, I cannot offer any more solid arguments, and I'm not exactly taking either side of the argument, but I thought I would share my experience both as a developer of a web application and as a web user.
I know this might be a no-brainer, but please read on.
I also know it's generally not considered a good idea, maybe the worst, to let a browser run and interact with local apps, even in an intranet context.
We use Citrix for home-office, and people really like it. Now, they would like the same kind of environment at work, a nice page where every important application/document/folder is nicely arranged and classified in an orderly fashion. These folks are not particularly tech savvy; I don't even consider thinking that they could understand the difference between remote delivered applications and local ones.
So, I've been asked if it's possible. Of course, it is, with IE's good ol' ActiveX controls. And I even made a working prototype (that's where it hurts).
But now, I doubt. Isn't it madness to allow such 'dangerous' ActiveX controls, even in the 'local intranet' zone? People will use the same browser to surf the web, can I fully trust IE? Isn't there a risk that Microsoft would just disable those controls in future updates/versions? What if a website, or any kind of malware, just put another site on the trust list? With that extent of control, you could as well uninstall every protection and just run amok 'till you got hanged by the IT dept.
I'm about to confront my superiors with the fact that, even if they saw it is doable, it would be a very bad thing. So I'm desperately in need of good and strong arguments, because "let's don't" won't do it.
Of course, if there is nothing to be scared of, that'll be nice too. But I strongly doubt that.
We use Citrix for home-office, and people really like it. Now, they would like the same kind of environment at work, a nice page where every important application/document/folder is nicely arranged and classified in an orderly fashion
I haven't used Citrix very many times, but what's it got to do with executing local applications? I don't see how "People like Citrix" and "browser executing local applications" relate at all?
If the people are accessing your Citrix server from home, and want the same experience in the office, then buy a cheap PC, and run the exact same Citrix software they run on their home computers. Put this computer in the corner and tell them to go use it. They'll be overjoyed.
Isn't it madness to allow such 'dangerous' ActiveX controls, even in the 'local intranet' zone ? People will use the same browser to surf the web, can I fully trust IE ?
Put it this way. IE has built-in support for AX controls. It uses it's security mechanisms to prevent them from running unless in a trusted site. By default, no sites are trusted at all.
If you use IE at all then you're putting yourself at the mercy of these security mechanisms. Whether or not you tell it to trust the local intranet is beside the point, and isn't going to affect the operation of any other zones.
The good old security holes that require you to reboot your computer every few weeks when MS issues a patch will continue to exist and cause problems, regardless of whether you allow ActiveX in your local intranet.
Isn't there a risk that Microsoft would just disable those controls in future updates / versions ?
Since XP-SP2, Microsoft has been making it increasingly difficult to use ActiveX controls. I don't know how many scary looking warning messages and "This might destroy your computer" dialogs you have to click through these days to get them to run, but it's quite a few. This will only get worse over time.
Microsoft is walking a fine line. On one hand, they regularly send ActiveX killbits with Windows Update to remove/disable applications that have been misbehaving. On the other hand, the latest version of Sharepoint 2007 (can't speak for earlier versions) allows for Office documents to be opened by clicking a link in the browser, and edited in the local application. When the edit is finished, the changes are transmitted back to the server and the webpage (generally) is refreshed. This is only an IE thing, as Firefox will throw up an error message.
I can see the logic behind it, though. Until Microsoft gets all of their apps 'in the cloud', there are cases that need to bridge the gap between the old client-side apps and a more web-centric business environment. While there is likely a non-web workaround, more and more information workers have come to expect that a large portion of their work will be done in a browser. Anything that makes the integration with the desktop easier is not going to be opposed by anyone except the sysadmins.
The standard citrix homepage (or how we use it) is a simple web page with program icons. Click on it, and the application get's delivered to you. People want the same thing, at work, with their applications/folders/documents. And because I'm a web developer, and they asked me, I do it with a web page... Perhaps I should pass the whole thing over to the VB guy..
Ahh... I know of 2 ways to accomplish this:
You can embed internet explorer into an application, and hook into it and intercept certain kinds of URL's and so on
I saw this done a few years ago - a telephony application embedded internet explorer in itself, and loaded some specially formatted webpages.
In the webpage there was this:
Call John Smith
Normally this would be a broken URL, but when the user clicked on this link, the application containing the embedded IE got notified, and proceeded to execute it's own custom code to dial the number from the URL.
You could get your VB guy to write an application which basically just wraps IE, and has handlers for executing applications. You could then code normal webpages with links to just open applications, and the VB app would launch them. This allows you to write your own security stuff (like, only launch applications in a preset list, or so on) into the VB app, and because VB is launching them, not IE, none of the IE security issues will be involved.
The second way is with browser plug-ins.
For example, skype comes with a Firefox plug-in, which looks for phone-numbers in web-pages, and attaches special links to them. When you click on these links it invokes skype - you could conceivably do something similar for launching your citrix apps.
You'd then be tied to firefox though. Writing plugins for IE is much harder than for FF, I wouldn't go down that path unless forced to.