|
Hi All,
My parents had an 'upgrade' done by BT changing the copper to fibre. Guess what, it didn't work. So I spent a most of saturday fighting with it. BT won't do anything as there is a good signal to the property. Before the upgrade everything was good Win10 PC on the network, Ubuntu/Redhat XP pc & My phone when I was there. Bloomin' upgrade only my phone can see it. As my phone can see it BT want me to take my PC to an expert (like PC World) to get the network working again.  It was working the connecting is rocky at best, you have sent my parents a faulty Hub the first time this upgrade was tried that blocked the telephone line. The replacement has the batch code (possible manufacturing boob?) and my parents have to pay BT Open Reach to come and set up the network...
The rage is boiling up I feel the need to kick something! 
|
|
|
|
|
Did you try switching it all off and back on again. 
|
|
|
|
|
Once the rage subsided, that was very funny. Yes I did, what I love is the fact you can get conflicting advice from the elves on the help desk, split the signal, don't split the signal. The best one is "can you hook up using an ethernet cabel?", reply "No I can't", reply "It's easy use the yellow wire in the box and plug it into the laptops port", reply "I can't, I'm using a desktop tower machine", reply "well pick it up and carry it to the hub or carry the hub to the desktop", reply "I can't they are in seperate rooms" & the crowing reply "well if you are not able to carry your laptop to the hub..." reply "IT IS NOT A LAPTOP", reply "Well use your tablet" reply "I Have not got a tablet" reply "How are you thinking of connecting to the internet" put the phone down and find a small dog to kick to low earth orbit...
|
|
|
|
|
I think you and Nagy might get together and solve each other's problems.
Your need to kick something.
His need for a dog neutering.
|
|
|
|
|
It's funny you say that, I was just going over the lounge posts and thought the exact same, so if Nagy would deliver said dawg, I will return at his convience via gravity! 
|
|
|
|
|
glennPattonWork wrote: My parents had an 'upgrade' done by BT changing the copper to fibre. Guess what, it didn't work. So I spent a most of saturday fighting with it. BT won't do anything as there is a good signal to the property. Before the upgrade everything was good Win10 PC on the network, Ubuntu/Redhat XP pc & My phone when I was there. Bloomin' upgrade only my phone can see it.
Glenn,
Are all the devices connecting via WiFi? If so, I bet that only the 5GHz WiFi is enabled on the router and your phone is the only devices that is 5GHz capable, therefore nothing else will connect.
Had the same problem with a customer and his brand new top of the line Telstra 4G hot spot (Netgear Nighthawk?). Only 5GHz enabled on the WiFi, all his devices 2.4Ghz, once I logged in to the router and turned on 2.4GHz all was good in the world again.
Michael Martin
Australia
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible."
- Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
|
|
|
|
|
Tried seperating the 2.4 & 5 GHz wifi (as 5GHz will get blocked by a poorly placed piece of paper) and was told by two seperate help desk employees that it was "a good idea" and "not safe, so not recommended", it would help if they gave joined up advice. 
|
|
|
|
|
glennPattonWork wrote: Tried seperating the 2.4 & 5 GHz wifi (as 5GHz will get blocked by a poorly placed piece of paper) and was told by two seperate help desk employees that it was "a good idea" and "not safe, so not recommended", it would help if they gave joined up advice.
Not sure what you mean when you say separating 2.4GHz and 5GHz.
If you phone is Android install WiFi Analyzer and check that the signal strength is strong enough to be picked up in the other rooms. Another thought maybe the WiFi encryption. Are the other devices capable of WPA2 as I reckon the new router has this and the old one was WEP or WPA.
01:15 here, need to shower, will check back from tablet in 30 minutes or so and see if you have another update for me.
Michael Martin
Australia
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible."
- Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
|
|
|
|
|
Cheers for that! Sadly I can't test it until next weekend however I have the tool from the Play to do a little more digging and a new wifi adaptor from Amazon I will be prepared to do battle.
|
|
|
|
|
glennPattonWork wrote: Cheers for that! Sadly I can't test it until next weekend however I have the tool from the Play to do a little more digging and a new wifi adaptor from Amazon I will be prepared to do battle.
The new card and the driver should fix your problems as WPA2 will be supported. I think I remember you mentioning XP in the mix, once upon a time a separate patch was required to support WPA2 on XP.
Michael Martin
Australia
"I controlled my laughter and simple said "No,I am very busy,so I can't write any code for you". The moment they heard this all the smiling face turned into a sad looking face and one of them farted. So I had to leave the place as soon as possible."
- Mr.Prakash One Fine Saturday. 24/04/2004
|
|
|
|
|
Cheers, thank you!
|
|
|
|
|
I hate it when you copy some code from the web and, when you paste it, the quotation marks are wrong and you have to search and replace all the “ and ” with " and ".
Yeah, not hard...but annoying.
edit: The “ doesn't show up here as the incorrect opening quote. More weirdness.
modified 4-Dec-17 2:46am.
|
|
|
|
|
It is weird isnt it, it looks exactly the same, but wont compile. Only happened to me once, took minutes to work it out, a strange character set that looks like ascii but isnt.
I guess it has some benefits, it makes the 'codes plz' brigade do some f***ing work.
|
|
|
|
|
This used to happen at my old job with deploy instructions written in a Word document. Everything about the deploy was here and in order. Mainly to minimise the chances of any production down time, but it was also used to sync development machines after a major deploy (There was dozens of devs). Copy and pasting Web.Config entries from the word doc into a config file would cause frustration for everyone at least once.
But Hey-ho, who really expects mickeysoft tech to play well with others, even family.
|
|
|
|
|
Rule One for copy/paste of code and stuff:
First, paste into a featureless wort processor, like Notepad, to get rid of all the hidden features. You can make sure it only shows in your preferred font and crazy stuff is basically destroyed/replaced.
I use this when I'm sent documents (like from M$Word), the content of which is supposed to be posted to a web page. Should go a long way in fixing your problems preemptively.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you are seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
I did, actually.
I think my Notepad is set to UNICODE, though, so it happily left the characters as-is. :p
|
|
|
|
|
GenJerDan wrote: think my Notepad is set to UNICODE
So mine is set to ANSI, but it still doesn't fix the characters. Tried it with all four possible txt formats in Notepad.
I used to paste stuff in Notepad to remove all the silly characters and then one day it stopped working as expected. Notepad++ also started behaving in the same fashion which leads me to believe it is something system level.
Haven't been able to figure out what changed and I'm still dealing with it. Ended up writing a little JS applet which replaces and sanitizes whatever I paste into it. 
|
|
|
|
|
Or when you copy and paste and it includes line numbers 
|
|
|
|
|
I do not know how they came up with 50 years exactly, but it is funny...
Celebrating 50 years of Kids Coding[^]
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
'aint that cute: now they're all grown up and complaining about javascript. 
|
|
|
|
|
Nice,
The last one you can do with 5 components - even though par is 6.
Brent
|
|
|
|
|
|
In all fairness, I think I know why JavaScript can be such a pain to learn. It seems mainly due to piss-poor over complicated explanations online using different terminology than the rest of the world. I just came across another site doing just that. Since someone needs to stand up for JavaScript on CP and right some wrongs I submit to y'all a proper explanation of what was trying to be explained on this site that shall remain nameless.
One of the age old confusions with JavaScript has been dealing with the this keyword. It's actually pretty simple to understand, provided you find someone who isn't trying to act smart by over complicating crap. If you've ever found yourself wondering why things aren't working the way you'd expect from a different language, well here's the real explanation of it without the hype.
Given this code...
var fruit = 'Orange';
window.fruit = 'Apple';
function explainThis () {
alert(fruit + ' ' + this.fruit);
}
explainThis();
var stuff = new explainThis(); In JavaScript this is simply the context of the current object. Calling something as a function doesn't create a new object in scope, but newing that sucker up does. That's all there is to it. Forget about the kiddies online trying to make this sound more complicated than it is.
If this was bugging you, then I hope it helps. I just felt the need to show JavaScript some love since it really is a nifty language. You may now return back to your normal lounging.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
I think Javascript is such a PITA to learn because:
1) my bias to what I expect. I experience this with Python as well. Anything from differently named functions for string manipulation to the whole abortion called the DOM.
2) too many strings. $("#foo")
3) too many things hard to type. Shift-$. Shift paren. Shift quote. Shift pound. Unshift. The rest of the identifier. Shift quote. Shift close parent. Unshift. Dot. etc...
4) string function name or function or property? $("#foo").val(); vs. event.args.innerText vs. (jqxWidgets example) $("#menu").jqxMenu("close");
5) Standards hell: For example, single quote or double quote: $("#menu").jqxMenu('close');
6) Insane (or is that inane) document traversal:
var parentItemText = $($($("#projectTree1").jqxTree('getSelectedItem').parentElement).children("div")[1]).text();
7) Closure madness (ok, once you get familiar with the syntax, yeah, it makes sense):
myLayout.registerComponent('Output', function (container, componentState) {
container.getElement().html($("#buildOutputContainer").html().replace("buildOutput", "buildOutput1"));
container.on("resize", (function (c) {
var ct = c;
return function () {
$("#buildOutput1").jqxTextArea({ width: ct.width + "px", height: ct.height + "px" });
};
})(container));
});
8) div hell. OK, not related to Javascript
9) framework hell. Too many, too complicated, too annoying, too idiocentric.
10) Untestable. Except by trying it manually. Yeah, I've tried a variety of test frameworks, even tried writing my own. They all suck.
Should I go on?
These are all barriers to:
1) Really grocking Javascript. For example, I just discovered this cool way to eliminate the stupidity of all these strings for acquiring elements by ID or "class" name:
id = new Proxy({},
{
get: function (target, prop) {
return function () { return $("#" + prop); };
}
});
Usage: id.menubar().jqxMenu({ width: 600, height: 30 }); instead of this crap: $("#menubar").jqxMenu({ width: 600, height: 30 });
Should I do that or not? Performance penalty vs. readability? Is it more readable? Will it confuse someone who has to maintain the code.
Versus, say, a server-side replacement like !menubar.jqxMenu...
Yet again another kludge that requires that you know something totally outside of pure Javascript to understand what the Javascript is doing.
2) (barriers, remember?) Not just copying and pasting all over the place. I have to force myself to create general purpose methods, even one liners, because they improve readability, but require a ton of typing to get there. Example:
function getSelectedListBoxId(listBoxName) {
return $('#' + listBoxName).jqxListBox('getSelectedItem').value;
}
function getProjectId() {
return getSelectedListBoxId("lbProjects");
}
Why do I do this? So I can have a nice function named "getProjectId" that tells me exactly what is going on, without passing in a string and without writing the abortion that looks like this:
$('#lbProjects').jqxListBox('getSelectedItem').value;
and doesn't tell me squat about the fact that "value" is actually the ID of the item in the list box.
And since I do this for a bunch of listboxes on the page, hence the first function which is more abstract.
etc.
I hope you enjoyed this post!
modified 3-Dec-17 19:47pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: I hope you enjoyed this post!
Enjoyed it? Unsure, still reeling.
But it has helped me narrow down what I might learn next: It 'aint javascript.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
