×

Give a tip

7twenty

MX Master
  • Posts

    4,695
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    79

 Content Type 

Profiles

Forums

Release Notes

Bug Tracker

Help page

Help page-CN

Release Note5

Rules and recruitment

Release Note6

Posts posted by 7twenty

  1. So it seems Spotify have decided to update their web player to something that isn't as good as their old one, and just to top it off has issues running in Maxthon. Before the update it was flawless.

    If you open https://open.spotify.com/ you get the error Oooops, something went wrong with the playback. Reload at the top of the page.

    Reloading does nothing. Clicking the play button doesn't play anything, although you can still go through your music etc.

    Tested in Opera and it works fine. Now this is where it gets weird. With Opera still open, Spotify "seems" to run fine in Maxthon. I can play/pause change tracks no problem. Close Opera, then Maxthon doesn't work.

    What's weirder is that the music isn't actually being played from Maxthon (no sound icon on the tab) it's actually Opera playing the music, but being controlled via Maxthon (or through whatever web sync feature they have)

    UA changes don't help. Using Retro mode works (and using the old player!!).

    Just thought I'd throw this out there seeing as it's a somewhat weird issue.

    • Like 1
  2. The built in tools icons (downloader/sniffer etc) change colour depending on theme colour. He's asking if the same can be done for extension icons.

    I think you probably could but you'd need to find out how to detect the status of the theme (dark/light). Not sure where about that is saved. And i'm not sure what you would use as a trigger. If the check is only done on click then the icon will stay till you click the button or page refresh etc.

    On top of that I think that the icon change feature might be broken in MX5. Was testing an extension with code that I know worked (and tested with MX4.9), but the same extension doesn't work in MX5.

  3. How do i stop an extension that runs at "doc_start" from running on it's own options page?

    Have tried the "exclude" setting in the def.json file, but no matter how it's written it won't stop it from running.

    Have even tried adding code to check the URL and if it's the GUID for the extension to stop running the script... but somehow it still continues? Makes no sense to me.

    PS if I get a reply to this i'll be completely surprised!

  4. I have two scripts. One that I want running at doc_start (script#1) and another on pressing the toolbar/sidebar button (script #2).

    Script #1 calls for a function in Script #2, but seeing as they're separate scripts it fails at that point. Doing some reading it seems it can be done, and using the standard HTML code adding all scripts required for a page should allow that to work. But it seems when starting a script via an extension that has no effect, even if the HTML file that calls all the scripts is set to run as a background service.

    Any tips on what I should be doing?

  5. Quote

    The upgrade path from the Windows 10 Anniversary Update (Build 14393) to this Windows 10 Creators Update build is not yet live and will be live tomorrow morning.

    Given that sentence, it sounds like this is the final build.

    The rest of the bugs will probably be fixed in a future Patch Tuesday update.

  6. Just noticed this when I was playing around with packing a skin file.

    It seems the old version of the MXpacker file does actually compress the extensions/skins files. On the test that I did using the skins and an addon it shrunk the file by approx 40-50%.

    IIRC your extension is one of the larger ones, so if you want to compress it then use the old version. Apart from that and it's command line based (although you can drag n drop) i'm not sure what else thee is different. But the files created still work.

    Attached below as i'm unsure if it's still available anywhere else.

    MXpacker_old.zip

    • Like 2
  7. 3 hours ago, No.1MaxthonFan said:

    What in the heck is going on

    Well it is the fast ring :p 

    Maybe using it as a means of testing the new differential updates system? Although given the small-ish amount of changes it seems the download is still relatively large..

    • Like 1
  8. 5 hours ago, BelieverZ said:

    I've downloaded the skin from MX4, where do I add into MX5?

    Doubt it would work, or might cause some issues seeing as there's quite a few differences in the default UI in MX5. Unless the skin was a complete UI update, I think it will have some problems displaying. Haven't tested though.

    1 hour ago, A.S. said:

    think this is about .mxskin support

    This. Seems they've added support to allow using .mxskin files... now if only there was someone to create a skin...

  9. 3 hours ago, PHYR said:

    This build mostly deals with Edge bug fixes

    A little annoying to download the whole thing again just for some fixes to Edge. Would make more sense if Edge was treated like an actual app and updated itself.

    On the plus side, the new update system should help by at least making the downloads a little smaller.

  10. just an update with this.

    Working on adding a settings page to adjust the colours.

    Code's a bit of a mess but does the job. But that's what happens when you learn as you go.

    Will hopefully have the updated version up within the next few days.

    Still haven't got around to seeing if it can be enabled on all pages. Might be next on the to do list.

    • Like 2
  11. Probably not going to get a reply... but will give it a go and see what happens.

    I'm having trouble getting the "activate" parameter of the newtab function to work when the string is called from a variable.

    In:

     mxTabs.newTab({url:"url", activate:true, position:"afterCurrrent"});

    when activate is set to true or false directly in that line it works fine. If I have a variable "openTab" set to true or false and called in that same line "activate:openTab" it also works.

    But if I have a variable "openTab" with a value set to true or false which is determined from some javascript, and then saved and called via the mx.storage api, it never seems to work and always defaults to "true".

    Doing an alert (openTab) or rt.storage.getConfig("openTab") shows that the string is correct.

    Getting quite annoying, as I know what I want to do and i'm pretty sure i've got it all right, but this just won't work.

  12. 15 hours ago, PHYR said:

    What is it that you think you can't control with win 10 that you could with Linux? Or win 7 or 8 for that matter.

    I'd like to know the answer to this as well.

     

    20 hours ago, RH said:

    recommend switching to Linux.

    Yep, the OS that almost no one in the mainstream uses. Then you have to deal with getting all the programs you run in Windows working on Linux, not to mentioned drivers. And while Linux these days is considerably better than what it used to be, and sure there's lot's of native programs that will do the same, people like what is comfortable. All the complaining when MS added the ribbon in Office, or the Start Screen in Win8 are testament to that.

    • Like 1
  13. 52 minutes ago, BugSir006 said:

    sorry that I don't understand the issue you are talking about. 

    This is what Google has for developers: https://developer.chrome.com/extensions
    This is what Microsoft has for developers: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-edge/extensions/api-support/supported-apis
    This is what Mozilla has for developers: https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/Add-ons
    This is what Opera has for developers: https://dev.opera.com/extensions/

    All the information related to extensions (and other stuff) is on their developer pages.

    Maxthon on the other hand, requires you to go to the extension/skins sites (not an issue), but then the links Maxthon Extension SDK / Beginner Tutorials / Submission and Update Process / Approval Criteria, all lead you to the MX forum... then you have to download a compressed version of a MS word file to access the info.

    We're in 2017, and this is a web browser company yet still making people do things in such a convoluted way like we're still in the 90's.

    No one is asking that it's as complex or in depth as the sites above. Just bring the info to the web where it should be. All the info in the forum posts mentioned above should be on this "MX developer site", and any competent coder should be able to convert those .doc files into a website relatively easily.

    That plus direct download links to the examples and the MXpacker.

    This is just one example of the "many are issues that could be updated fairly easily" but not done, mentioned by MaxthonGuy. This would take someone less than a few days to come up a perfectly workable site, and would rarely be needed to be updated (given how often that info has been in the past). And even when it does it's just a matter of updating those sections that's required, the same way the .doc file would have been updated anyway.

  14. 24 minutes ago, MaxthonGuy said:

    when many are issues that could be updated fairly easily

    Preaching to the choir there buddy! :D

    I've been forever harping on about exactly that... small things that can be fixed quickly and may never have to be touched till the next major update, yet they still don't change, update after update after update.

  15. 22 minutes ago, MaxthonGuy said:

    (Why is that link in a thread, anyway?) 

    I've asked that question countless times... never got an answer, It's just the way it is...

    Maybe one day they'll actually make a proper developer site for things like this, like all the browsers have.

    Their web design team put together the MX5 launch pages and revamped maxthon.com, but can't quickly knock up a small mini-site (1 or 2 pages) for SDK instructions and relevant downloads (or update the skins/extensions sites)!?

  16. 1 hour ago, KILVA said:

    however it can't be that simple. Yeah, CSS and HTM stuff to edit, but there must be some file I need to change in order to make it compatible with other versions.

    Could somebody tell me what that is or am I expected to figure that out myself?

    Why can't it be that simple? Many versions don't change anything, or just minor things like a text placeholder etc. Others completely change the code for UI elements. Just looking back at my current 4.9 skin to the 5.x skins, while things look similar on the outside, there's been quite a few changes of code behind the scenes. And in whichever version they change the names of the files, hopefully related to the talk of a proper skin system being put back in place.

    So it's hard to say what exactly needs to be changed, as it's not a case of changing a line that says "version=5.0.1" to "version=5.0.2" to make it compatible.

    It really does depend on what was changed. It might be just a text string placeholder, where you'll get the placeholder instead of the actual text. It might be a link to something outside of the HTML files which was moved/changed, in which case just renaming the files won't work, and you need to rewrite/update the code to allow for that.