Closed
Bug 85009
Opened 24 years ago
Closed 23 years ago
bmwusa.com - Top portion of the window is garbled
Categories
(Tech Evangelism Graveyard :: English US, defect, P1)
Tech Evangelism Graveyard
English US
Tracking
(Not tracked)
VERIFIED
WONTFIX
People
(Reporter: SalmanAshfaq, Assigned: bc)
References
()
Details
(Whiteboard: [aok])
Top portion of the window is not displayed correctly. Netscape 4.77 displays it
correctly. If you do a side by side comparison with Netscape and Mozilla then
you will know what I am talking about.
Comment 1•24 years ago
|
||
I only see the top and bottom parts of the page. Moz pegs the cpu at 100% for
approx 20 seconds before rendering anything. Using today's tip on linux.
Keywords: perf
OS: Windows 2000 → All
Comment 2•24 years ago
|
||
Interesting page source:
</frameset></html>
SRC="/site_layout/navigation/copywrite/copywrite.cfm" NAME="foot"
MARGINWIDTH="0" MARGINHEIGHT="0" SCROLLING=NO NORESIZE>
<frame SRC="/site_layout/navigation/BMWBotNav/menu.cfm" NAME="foot2"
MARGINWIDTH="0" MARGINHEIGHT="0" SCROLLING=NO NORESIZE>
</frameset></html>
Investigating further...
Comment 3•24 years ago
|
||
The middle frame is blank because it's source is three lines:
<script language="javascript">
if (navigator.appVersion.indexOf("Macintosh") == -1) { document.domain =
"bmwusa.com"; }
</script>
Comment 4•24 years ago
|
||
I spot layers in the top frame's source.
--> Evangelism.
Eric: you might want to look at why we're so slow at rendering this page
regardless of it source.
Status: UNCONFIRMED → NEW
Component: HTMLFrames → Evangelism
Ever confirmed: true
Hardware: PC → All
Assignee | ||
Updated•24 years ago
|
Priority: -- → P2
Assignee | ||
Updated•24 years ago
|
Summary: Top portion of the window is garbled → bmwusa.com - Top portion of the window is garbled
Assignee | ||
Comment 7•24 years ago
|
||
All Evangelism Bugs are now in the Product Tech Evangelism. See bug 86997 for
details.
Component: Evangelism → US English
Product: Browser → Tech Evangelism
Version: other → unspecified
Comment 8•23 years ago
|
||
This bug seems to have fallen off the radar... If you go to the site now, you
get redirected to a page with the following text:
Welcome to bmwusa.com.
We detect that you are using the Netscape 6x browser. We are working to make our
site compatible with Netscape versions 6.0 and 6.01.
For smooth browser performance at bmwusa.com, we recommend using Netscape 4.7 or
Internet Explorer 4.0+.
Assignee | ||
Updated•23 years ago
|
Priority: P2 → P1
Comment 9•23 years ago
|
||
I visited this site today, still same result but no
noted that they are working on changing anything. Is
this a site problem or Mozilla problem ?
Comment 10•23 years ago
|
||
they just block ns6, they miss mozilla. However, they still don't work with us.
Keywords: perf
Whiteboard: [aok]
Comment 11•23 years ago
|
||
Just a remark: http://www.bmw.de works. It looks quite similar to the american
site (didn't look to close). They could probably share some code.
Comment 12•23 years ago
|
||
*** Bug 121099 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 13•23 years ago
|
||
reassigning to Mgalli who has fully analyzed the issues, contacted the company
who designed the site and done a sample page recoding....for naught as they
don't plan to fix soon.
Irate letters from customers would help push the issue!
(there is a "contact the site representative" link on the Contacts page)
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 23 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
Comment 14•23 years ago
|
||
argh reopening to assign to marcio
Status: RESOLVED → REOPENED
Resolution: WONTFIX → ---
Comment 15•23 years ago
|
||
marked wontfix due to explanation above
Status: REOPENED → RESOLVED
Closed: 23 years ago → 23 years ago
Resolution: --- → WONTFIX
Comment 16•23 years ago
|
||
i'm in an endlessloop.com. next job is to get checkboxes here instead of radio
buttons to change status and assignee at same time. i will leave it assigned to
bob and cc marcio.
Comment 18•23 years ago
|
||
The javascript on that site
(http://www.bmwusa.com/library/navigation/menuFunctions.js) shows
an error at line 22 and line 30 when using Mozilla 2002031209
at line 22, the error is ObjectId is not defined, at 30 is
masterArray[itemId] has no properties. It's not clear whether this is
a bug in the javascript (i.e. ObjectId should be ItemId) or not.
Comment 19•23 years ago
|
||
Why is this tech evangelism bug marked WONTFIX? This doesn't make any sense at
all. I was about to file this as a new bug until I came across this.
Specifically, the "Contact Us" button at the bottom right doesn't work, although
it works fine in IE.
I thought the point of tech evangelism is that we keep on their ass until they
fix their bugs. How can this be marked WONTFIX? It should remain open until they
fix their bugs, yes? Obviously I'm missing something here.
- Adam
Comment 20•23 years ago
|
||
The explanation for WONTFIX is in comment #13.
Assignee | ||
Comment 21•23 years ago
|
||
In evangelism, if a site tells us they have no intention of fixing their site
there is nothing we can do about it. We mark those bugs as wontfix to indicate
their unwillingness to support the standards. If at some later time, we have the
time and resources we will revisit wontfix bugs and recontact them.
We do not harrass or act in an objectionable way if someone tells us they have
no intention of fixing their site. That is just the way things are.
However, as an individual customer you are free to complain to them. However, as
someone who receives feedback from external aliases, if you are obnoxious or
rude, you are very much less likely to achieve a positive result.
To put it bluntly, whenever I receive feedback from a person who resembles a
rectum, I ignore them.
Comment 22•23 years ago
|
||
LOL. Ok, I get it. But "Resolved" implies "complete." Shouldn't we have some
other tag than WONTFIX so we could leave the bug unresolved, but explain that
the site operators have no intention of fixing the site? That way, it doesn't
come up on anybody's operator, but it DOES come up in searches so the bug
doesn't continually get put into the system and resolved WONTFIX again? Also,
this way it's very clear that a site's operator is being unreasonable, which
might get the community to turn up the pressure on them to fix their site.
- Adam
Comment 23•23 years ago
|
||
sure, i could change this bug from (verified)'resolved'[wontfix] to
'closed'[wontfix]
that really doesn't improve anything. and it's not really useful to make any
sort of distinction.
Comment 24•23 years ago
|
||
I don't think you understood the point of my message. I understand a
differentiation between "Resolved" and "the site developer doesn't feel like
fixing this." Don't you? By marking this Resolved Wontfix, the impression I get
is that Mozilla.org doesn't wish to fix the bug, or doesn't feel like doing
anything to get the site developer to fix their site. And by extension, that
means that Mozilla users don't feel like doing anything (or can't do anything)
to get the site fixed either. And that is incorrect.
To me, the point of "evangelism" is that people push the site developer to fix
their bugs. At first, gentle prodding and offers of help are useful. But when
that doesn't work, then it's probably time to turn up the heat. It's not the
time to mark the bug "resolved" so nobody knows there's still a problem.
This system of resolving evangelism bugs when the site isn't fixed appears
broken to me. Once again, my suggestion would be that the bug should be left
open, but a new resolution should be created ("obstinate?") to identify site
developers that don't feel like fixing their site.
My personal belief is that when a site developer says they don't feel like
fixing something to accomodate Moz, our emails have likely landed with a
Microsoft-loving weenie. They figure anything from Microsoft is wonderful, and
screw alternatives. Why should email landing with one technie moron keep us from
getting a site fixed? Chances are, we simply haven't reached the email box of
the site admin's boss, who wants to sell things no matter which web browser a
user wishes to use. We talk to that guy, and the site gets fixed.
And that's why I think this bug should remain open, and a new resolution should
be used as an identifier.
- Adam
Comment 25•23 years ago
|
||
some future version of bugzilla will support custom resolutions. until then,
we use the features we've been dealt.
Assignee | ||
Comment 26•23 years ago
|
||
Adam,
Evangelism is it's own universe. We reuse bugzilla which is set up for
developers for our own purposes. When people have been exposed to evangelism
issues for any length of time, our reinterpretation of resolutions, etc is quite
clear.
As for searching for existing evangelism bugs, you should always include
resolved bugs to see if sites with reported problems that have been resolved
have regressed. If a site has regressed on the *exact* same issue as the one you
have discovered, you can reopen the bug. Otherwise file a new bug on the site.
As for WONTFIX, unless you want to take ownership of contacting the site, and
take the bug yourself, leave them alone for now.
We will readdress the WONTFIX bugs at the appropriate time.
See http://mozilla-evangelism.bclary.com/ for more details.
Comment 27•23 years ago
|
||
*** Bug 139932 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 28•23 years ago
|
||
*** Bug 148388 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 29•23 years ago
|
||
If you want to give bmwusa feed back the link is
http://ntisweb3.salessupport.com/bmw_vc/feedback.asp
The link given in comment 13 did not work(their javascript is busted), which is
what is the point of this bug.
Comment 30•23 years ago
|
||
I haven't gone through the whole site but It seems that if you tell Mozilla to
identify as IE 5.5 (I don't like it but for testing purpose and for reaching my
Internetbanking service I have to live with it now and then) The site comes up
ok and works.
So fixing the site might for them be a question of serving Mozilla the same code
as they serve IE. And that can't take many minutes to implement.
Updated•10 years ago
|
Product: Tech Evangelism → Tech Evangelism Graveyard
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•