1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

[redesign] How about some responsive goodness for the UI ?

Discussion in 'Tomato Firmware' started by AlexF, Jun 1, 2012.

  1. AlexF

    AlexF Serious Server Member

    windozer, azdps, Elfew and 3 others like this.
  2. Elfew

    Elfew Addicted to LI Member

    Nice! Keep good work, I would like to have this theme - it could save time
  3. lancethepants

    lancethepants Network Guru Member

    That looks totally awesome, would be great to have that in some new builds.
  4. Gaius

    Gaius Networkin' Nut Member

    Seems a little too iPhoneish, no?
  5. AlexF

    AlexF Serious Server Member

    I dont think it looks specifically iPhoneish. Anyhow, the designs are supposed to be completely CSS styled, so if you don't like the theme you can just change a few lines of CSS and get a more customised experience. Hopefully, I can create a more "tomato-ish" styled theme. This is pretty much the original Bootstrap style, with some color modifications.
  6. nick ant0ny

    nick ant0ny Networkin' Nut Member

    seems really promising and useful/ user friendly! I really like it. Hope you continue and be able to provide it so that mods can insert it in builds

    Best regards
  7. AlexF

    AlexF Serious Server Member

    I'd be glad to see Toastman get in touch with me, I'm using his branch as base (Toastman-RT). Would be awesome to have someone familiar with the codebase to ask, in case of trouble.

    I've also added some new screenshots for your pleasure.
  8. azdps

    azdps Addicted to LI Member

    AlexF you've done some nice work, and your idea to port the Tomato webui is very much welcome here. The current Tomato webui is copyrighted by Jonathan Zarate, and can't be modified without his express permission. Although Jonathan has done an absolutely amazing job on it, I would prefer to see an open source alternative such as yours. My suggestion would be to keep looking as close as possible to the existing webui. Your current webui vision is looking pretty darn good, and I'm looking forward to what you will eventually come up with.
  9. macbrian

    macbrian Networkin' Nut Member

    Anything new about this exciting project?
  10. AlexF

    AlexF Serious Server Member

    Not really, no.
    I'm in my home town during the summer, and I have no access to my tomato router unfortunately. This means there will be no significant progress in this project (from me) in another 7-8 weeks or so. I'm sorry!
  11. koitsu

    koitsu Network Guru Member

    1. So what happens when someone uses a browser which doesn't support HTML 5 and CSS 3? There are many people who do not have such browsers; for example, Internet Explorer 8 -- which is the last IE available for Windows XP (which over 40% of the world still runs) -- only has partial HTML 5 support (IE9 is a different story).
    2. HTML 5 is far from standardised at this point. All there is is a working draft. Please see Wikipedia for details (last paragraph of linked section).
    3. CSS 3 is absolute chaos. Again, please see Wikipedia for details (specifically the insane number of "modules"; note how many there are vs. how many have been adopted by W3C standard).

    I would be very careful with such a project. I'm not crapping on your work -- honest, that isn't my intention -- but you need to be made aware of the reality of the world right now when it comes to browsers and usability. Embracing bleeding-edge technology in something as key/core as a router is not necessarily the way to go. Just my two cents as a UNIX and network SA + programmer.

    I guess a more politely phrased version of this is: what exactly does a router need from HTML 5 and CSS 3 that cannot be done via HTML 4 and CSS 1 and/or 2? Ask yourself that. Don't reply here immediately, just really sit down and ponder it for a while.
  12. AlexF

    AlexF Serious Server Member

    To answer your question, I'd like the tomato UI to be a bit more modern and have a responsive design, just as the topic says, so it looks good on other devices than just desktops.

    About your criticism, I believe:

    1. Someone administrating a router should be quite able to install a modern browser like Chrome or Firefox.

    2 and 3. My redesign is almost completely based on Bootstrap from Twitter. If you believe that CSS 3 is "absolute chaos" and HTML5 isn't a standard worth using today, you should go talk to the designers of Bootstrap. They are making a huuuge mistake, if you're correct.
  13. koitsu

    koitsu Network Guru Member

    I think you're missing the picture here. I want you to think about this carefully:

    * A person using Windows XP with, say, IE6 (default) upgrades TomatoUSB. After the upgrade, they find the UI to render wrong and does not work for them. How do they roll back to the previous release when an HTML 5 / CSS 3 browser is required to even get to the firmware upload dialog?

    * Expecting a person to change or upgrade their web browser just so they can access their router UI is unreasonable. No, I'm not saying a router UI should work with, say, lynx from 1992 ( :) ), but in all honesty most features SHOULD work with that. There is nothing "fancy" that's needed in a router UI.

    I will happily admit that things like the bandwidth graphs in Tomato are amazingly useful (I rely on them daily), especially since they're SVG (which is a problem for Internet Explorer 8 and earlier which has no SVG support and the Adobe SVG plugin for IE is known to have security holes and is no longer supported -- starting see my point?), and those rely on newer technology. But the rest of the user interface is fine with HTML 4 and CSS 1/2, plus some Javascript bits throughout.

    So I'd still like to know what HTML 5 and CSS 3 offer, for a router UI, that the existing HTML 4 and CSS 1/2 do not provide.

    As for Twitter Bootstrap... heh. You asked for it.

    I wouldn't say they're making a mistake, I would say that the intended use of Bootstrap is for a significantly different purpose and that, like every tech company these days (it has to do with the mindset of a younger generation): people get "bored" doing the same thing and want something new/fancy to play with -- whether or not it's still under development (working draft) doesn't matter, because the employees are bored and want new toys to distract themselves with. It's a mentality I can't relate to (we UNIX SAs are very stagnant; we support and maintain. But I'm also a programmer/developer)

    You have to step back and think about what it is Twitter does as a company (meaning what their driving force is) then see if those interests match that of a router UI. Bootstrap, much like any of the free things Google/Microsoft/Facebook releases, are just projects/things that bored developers within the company did and got approval for public release. It doesn't mean those things have to be used, and it absolutely doesn't mean those developers know what's best for a router UI. Just because something exists does not mean its the best choice/solution.

    This is why one has to step back and really think about things practically and not jump on the "latest technology" bleeding-edge bandwagon. By keeping extra fluff out, more often than not, usability tends to improve. Let me give you a real-world example:

    This web page at Canon. You need to be using Firefox for this (either 9, 10, 11, 12, or 13). Choose Drivers & Software. Now you'll be prompted to pick your OS and OS Version. As anyone knows, you can navigate pulldown menus with either the mouse or the keyboard. Use the Tab key to select the "Select Operating System" pulldown, then use your arrow keys to pick an OS -- now notice how the OS Version pulldown is still greyed out. If you alt-tab or switch windows you'll find that when clicking back in the Canon window suddenly the "Select OS Version" menu is no longer greyed out. (The latter looks to be a bug in Firefox, but whatever)

    Why does this happen? It shouldn't happen, regardless of said bug.

    Well, it has to do with people using Javascript. The site author obviously wanted a form of dynamic HTML, where when selecting one pulldown menu item (OS), the other menu (OS Version) would change its content.

    Without use of Javascript, this would Just Work(tm) -- you can use a keyboard or mouse to navigate menus just fine; there's no onChange() crap getting in your way. There's less overhead in this regard too (oh Javascript, how you hurt me...)

    So how do we solve this problem without Javascript? Simple: you don't use menu pulldowns that require content that dynamically changes. Instead, you use a different UI model for selecting an OS. But no, this isn't part of the thought process that goes on with "wow I love new toys and all this bleeding-edge stuff is awesome!!!" developers -- they're too enthralled by their latest toy, which when added to a public project everyone else has to tolerate.

    Next we have troubleshooting/debugging: can you tell me, quickly, where in the HTML source the content for that portion of the web page is? View Source won't help you. It turns out a specific piece of HTML content is downloaded when clicking the Drivers & Software link, and that contains the HTML relevant to OS selection -- but it shoves the content into a specific CSS id (think "area of content on the web page"). Again: more dynamic stuff that really isn't needed.

    What we now have is a gigantic mess of CSS and Javascript files strewn throughout multiple HTML documents. What's important to note here is that they're all separate files/links, thus have to be downloaded (or if cached loaded off of disk). The more there is for the browser to download, the longer the user has to wait before they can actually use the web page. More on that in a bit.

    The OS selection area is not within the main HTML document. It's actually done through some horrible abstraction using, yes you guessed it, Javascript:

    <a href="/cusa/support/consumer/printers_multifunction/pixma_mx_series/pixma_mx860?selectedName=DriversAndSoftware" id="tabDriversAndSoftware" class="none" onclick="return onClick_tabDriversAndSoftware();">Drivers & Software</a>
    Ah, and now we get the HTML we want... but of course this document also includes numerous other CSS/JS files and so on. I'm not going to bother to benchmark or analyse those; what a mess. So let's look at the section of the code we care about:

    <select id="osTypeSel" onchange="dl.updateOsNames(this.selectedIndex)" style="width:175px; font-family:Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">
    <option value=""selected>Select Operating System</option>
    And there we have it -- use of onChange(), when it really isn't necessary if the UI was designed differently.

    For that Canon page, take a look at how many things are downloaded. Remember: each of these requires a separate TCP connection (or in the case of HTTP/1.1 you can download multiple documents within a single TCP connection *but not simultaneously*). Firefox does not enable HTTP pipelining by default, by the way, and see above for why assuming people use Firefox/Chrome is a bad assumption. So how much crap does it download? We can use Firebug for that.

    Excluding images:

    - 1 HTML file
    - 17 Javascript files
    - 6 CSS files

    Do you know how long the web page took? 3.52 seconds on my system, and that's with the content already cached. Know why? Because the nature of caching with HTTP requires that a client/server connection be made to do IMS (If-Modified-Since) checks, ETag comparisons, or Last-Modified checks. So a GET has to be issued, or sometimes HEAD depending on how the browser operates. So it's going to be 3-3.5 seconds constantly.

    Now what about filesizes? How much data gets downloaded during all of that, just for that web page? Including images it's 561KBytes, roughly (and I have ads disabled, if there are any). Without images, and rough estimates (I did do the math, but rounded floating points up/down):

    - 30KBytes of HTML
    - 136KBytes of Javascript
    - 68KBytes of CSS

    Welcome to web design gone wrong.

    How many times have people here actually been able to, as a human, *outrun* the web browser because it's too busy doing something? You go to some web page and you click on something... but it doesn't work because the browser is too busy loading a crapload of other nonsense. So you have to wait. I find that on most web pages these days, *I can operate faster than the UI*. Do you know how preposterous that is? Human beings are inherently slower than computers -- I'm an old 65xx assembly programmer, trust me, I know this. :) It's hilarious how a human being can be faster than a 3GHz 8-core computer with 16GB of RAM.

    This is just one example of tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of pages which suffer from the mentality I'm trying to describe.

    Back to the task of debugging/troubleshooting, because this is absolutely something that will impact developers. You gotta think about this fact too (and as the author of open-source software I can assure you this is a reality):

    Open-source projects have people which come and go. Tomato is a great example; where is Jonathan Zarate? Is he still maintaining it? No. Instead there are forks, by people who don't necessarily understand everything under the hood (that includes Toastman, teaman, and Shibby -- and I say that with respect, not disrespect!). The same goes for the HTML/CSS/JS bits. Thus a year from now the author of some content could be gone, while whoever takes over has no idea how to figure out what's where or how any of it works. Reverse-engineering is required. Thus, the less things there are to reverse-engineer, the better.

    When it comes to working on embedded devices, in every way shape and form, throughout the entire development process -- that includes HTML pages! -- you have to be slim as possible. The KISS principle applies more heavily here than anywhere else. The built-in web server to Busybox is a hunk of junk, for example; it performs horribly. Furthermore, the CPUs are not that fast (well, I mean, they ARE fast, but their intended use is not to serve web pages but to route packets).

    Currently, Tomato's main page consists of:

    - 1 HTML document
    - 4 Javascript documents (2 JS, 2 JSX (whatever that is))
    - 1 CSS document

    Now take a look at the sites developed using Bootstrap. These are mentioned right on the Bootstrap main page:


    Do the same analysis on each of those pages as I just did on Canon's site and you will find the exact same design problems there. The crux of the issue is a very broken web developer mentality where the developer does not truly understand technology, what is is they're working with, or how all of the underlying pieces they rely on actually work. I cannot tell you how many times, for example, I have met with/interviewed developers or web content folks only to find that they have absolutely *no idea* how HTTP works or how a webserver behaves/performs. They do what they do, then within 3 months get bored and start to find ways to distract themselves with new toys, then try to justify those new toys as providing "something better". And that may be true, but the majority of the time it isn't. And those those new toys may be fine for some things, they are not necessarily the toys that should be used in something like an embedded firmware project.

    I hope I've given you some things to think about.

    P.S. -- During the course of this post, I found a wonderfully hilarious bug in Firebug... *sigh*
  14. AlexF

    AlexF Serious Server Member

    I hope next time you spend some time developing stuff instead of putting criticism on paper :) I don't think you have a valid argument, the testing I've done so far has been splendid, and I'm not gonna develop for the 1% using a 10+ old web browser. So you better take a step back and think about all the other 99% who can benefit from having a modern, nice looking and responsive UI. End of discussion.
  15. koitsu

    koitsu Network Guru Member

    Criticisms aside (I'm left believing you didn't read a single thing I wrote), you still have yet to answer (without use of buzzwords) my question:

    So I'd still like to know what HTML 5 and CSS 3 offer, for a router UI, that the existing HTML 4 and CSS 1/2 do not provide.

    All you keep saying is "modern nice looking and responsive UI", when the existing UI is already responsive (I'm wondering if you know what that term means?), and "nice looking" is a matter of opinion so I won't be focusing on that. So until I see some actual hard numbers and facts backing up "responsive UI", I'm left with the belief that throwing Bootstrap into the mix doesn't actually solve or improve anything.

    All I see from the screenshots -- and screenshots cannot be used to prove "responsiveness" -- are as follows:

    1. Universally use of a different font, specifically one which uses hinting. In effect this means font smoothing + ClearType (on Windows) becomes a requirement to get decent-looking output (try turning off ClearType and font smoothing in Windows 7 -- that's how it will look for the 40% of the world still running XP).

    2. Addition of Home/About/Contact "tabs" to the top of the screen. I think doing this is excellent and completely agree with it.

    3. Navigation menu on the left has been widened. I hope it's resizeable (horizontally), otherwise a very large browser window is required to fit all the content on the screen (screenshots are 1351x763). Most people do not use a browser window that's been maximised. Use of CSS percentages or em instead of hard sizes (e.g. 78% or 1.0em, rather than 100px) can help with this.

    4. Device List pane has been changed to use table cell sizes that are larger. Font for labels for OUI lookup, static allocation, etc. have been increased in size and the colour changed to match the overall theme. I like the colour consistency change, I do not like the font size increase.

    5. Overview page has been changed to use wider width cell sizes. I can go either way on this one, but my advice in item #3 applies as well.

    6. The screenshots from a mobile device look good -- I like the fact that information is shown length-wise. I'm not a mobile phone user myself, but I imagine folks would appreciate this for certain.

    Sadly, none of these changes (from what I can tell) require Bootstrap, HTML 5, or CSS 3. So politely, can you educate me as far as what has changed from a "responsiveness" standpoint?
  16. AlexF

    AlexF Serious Server Member

    I don't know your definition on "responsive web design" but wikipedia has this to say about it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsive_Web_Design

    Again, the current tomato UI is not responsive. Bootstrap, on the other hand, is what I use in this project to make my design responsive.
  17. azdps

    azdps Addicted to LI Member

    As you can see AlexF, your obviously not going to please everyone so don't let koitsu bring you down. koitsu truly believes his words are from a higher level plane, so there's no explanation that could possibly please him. Personally, I would like to see further development.
  18. M_ars

    M_ars LI Guru Member

    I also like the idea of a new UI. Maybe there is 1% of the tomato user who will not be happy with that, but they maybe can then use a different build without the new UI. I dont see any problems with that...
    @AlexF: nice GUI :) - keep up the good work
  19. koitsu

    koitsu Network Guru Member

    Ahh, yes, I see now.! It's not your fault for using this term, but you need to understand what the word responsive means when it comes to computing as used by engineers and scientists alike (see Responsiveness vs. Performance) -- so now you understand where I was coming from and the confusion. There is already a buzzword term for what I was describing too: it's called reactive user interface. This is what happens with buzzword usage: people just need to describe what it is they're doing, rather than relying on buzzwords. :)

    A better description for "responsive web device" would be "better page layout and design for multi-device viewing". I get it now. BTW, @media was defined in CSS 2, so at least in that regard CSS 3 doesn't offer anything new that I can tell.

    Okay, so now that we're on the same wavelength, I would be more than happy to assist in this project. Web design/layout/UI usability is something I've dealt with for, oh lord, 15 years? But I happily admit I do not know HTML 5 and CSS 3 at this point (only HTML 4 / XHTML and older, as well as CSS 1/2), and I do test things on a multitude of browsers. I can also handle the performance analysis bits pertaining to how the changed design affects the underlying webserver (too many concurrent fetches, etc.).

    P.S. -- My words aren't from a higher level plane *laugh*, but I am quite opinionated and set in my old ways, absolutely, and I am very judgemental. I'm self-aware of my behaviour BTW, so never feel afraid to argue or call me out on something! I don't like debating (honest), I really like collaborative happy work. I guess it's time I give some background about myself which should help people understand my viewpoint and where I'm coming from. Please note none of this is me bragging, it's simply me saying "this is my background":

    I'm 35 and have been doing "computer stuff" since I was... 12? I was around when "the Internet" was actually still DARPA's project (it wasn't called "the Internet" then, just "being online"), and that was before the web (HTTP or HTML) even existed (anyone using Mosaic? ;-)). I've worked on embedded architectures using PIC16C84 chips, video game consoles (NES and SNES), program in 65xxx assembly, C, perl, PHP, and I'm a UNIX SA by profession but also do network analysis/administration. So programming-wise I began on an Apple II+ (that's 1MHz with 64KBytes of RAM). So I do a lot of things, and I was around during the time when computing really started to take off. So my "higher level plane" comes from a lot of experience surrounded by a lot of people in the industry who have absolutely no concept of technology or how it works, yet come in and want to revamp a bunch of things (specifically just throwing in a bunch of new crap that does nothing but obfuscate and slow stuff down). You can read my resume too; some of the companies I've worked for (and note the longevity -- I work hard and at one place for a very long time) you'll recognise.

    So I'm not here to try and cause you lots of pain or fight or be a thorn in your side, AlexF. I'm just wanting to make sure that what you're wanting to do with Tomato/TomatoUSB doesn't cause more problems than benefits. I'm here to help. Honest. We cool?
  20. WRD - EasyTomato

    WRD - EasyTomato Networkin' Nut Member

    Another +1 to keep up the good work Alex! I want to see this too! As you said, if people have problems they can either download Firefox or Chome (and you'd just have done them a favor) or make their own build... (you know, whichever is easier.)

    At this point, I think having this work on any screen size vs working on someone's computer who is only willing to run IE is far more valuable to the project. This is only going to become more and more true as time goes on, so let's get this figured out and stable now.

    Also thanks a lot for taking the time to write code!! There is a lot of posting activity, but seemly few people actively contributing to making Tomato better.
  21. hjf288

    hjf288 LI Guru Member

    You can fallback if the browser doesn't support HTML5/CSS 3 to the older theme no?
  22. AlexF

    AlexF Serious Server Member

  23. koitsu

    koitsu Network Guru Member

  24. JugsteR

    JugsteR Serious Server Member

    There are two points that are valid here IMHO.

    1) koitsu, you are absolutely right in saying that the new technology isn't really needed. You say it with more words but the meaning is still the same

    2) koitsu, you are absolutely wrong if you think you can stop the mindset of people wanting to renew themselves (or the code for that matter).

    You will just have to agree to disagree. Also you should probably read the requirements for a certain firmware before you install it anyway.

    Signature? Signature!
  25. pharma

    pharma Network Guru Member

    The main thing is respecting the wishes of the firmware author. Anyone who has used or worked with Jon's firmware, whether it was Tofu (pre-Tomato) or Tomato will know that any changes to the GUI was expressly prohibited and is the reason for his copyright. Unfortunately it requires alittle more thought than "agreeing to disagree" and is not something to be taken likely. I believe DDWRT at some point asked it they could use some ot the GUI code at which point Jon declined.

    I currently have no problems with the responsiveness with the GUI, and perhaps the same as 80% of people using Tomato. What weight do you place on making the GUI a few seconds faster? Are you prepared to troubleshoot issues this project may cause with Tomato (breaking other developer's code you may have never used), how long will you be involved, and how quickly to implement break-fixes?

    Your work looks promising but a choice on which html5 standard to use will need to be made. This is where you will need feedback from the "primary developers", and most importantly Jon's feedback is required for his GUI copyright approval for change/inclusion.

  26. JugsteR

    JugsteR Serious Server Member

    Certainly you can create a new gui without Jons approval based on new code?

    I thought responsive code had to do with it being able to adapt to special resolutions through CSS, not necessarily making the code more responsive. I certainly do not have any problems with the responsiveness of the code as it is right now.

    Signature? Signature!
  27. lancethepants

    lancethepants Network Guru Member

    When it comes to copyright, everything in tomato is copyrighted. In the USA and many other countries, essentially anything you create is automatically copyrighted. In some countries however, they don't believe any code is copyright-able (scary thought). In the USA at least, it actually takes more effort to waive your copyright in order to release it into public domain. Copyright just prevents others from taking your work, and claiming it as your own. One example I recall seeing is Keith Moyers OpenVPN interface code. There's absolutely nothing wrong with redistributing and modifying his code, he just wants the recognition that is rightfully his. You call also claim what is rightfully yours.

    All of tomato is open source, but not all of it has the same licensing, and it's really the licensing that you need to look at. The majority of it is under the GNU General Public License. The interface is a more restrictive license. Basically I think the author, Jon, didn't want people ripping off his interface and calling it their own firmware. Under the GNU license, you could fork a project, and call it whatever you want. This happens all the time (from abandoned projects no less). I think he wanted the 'tomato' name to last. If you wanted, you could take everything but the Interface, slap a new one on, and call it something else now. That, however, doesn't appear to be purpose of this project. Tomato isn't losing its Tomato monikor, it's still Jon's tomato, and it will still have his name on it. I would even go as far to say that Jon would welcome enhancements to the interface. His presence would be reassuring though.

    Or, perhaps this project has enough unique code to be free of Jon's interface licensing (any lawyers?). I would like to see a tomato entirely free from any non-GNU or more restrictive licensing. Whether or not this could qualify, I have no idea. Either Jon or a judge (or someone with sufficient copyright/licensing knowledge in court) would have to make that call. I tend to think that it is not sufficiently unique to Jon's (which is fine, because no-one is challenging his license so far).

    Now to play devil's advocate, not that I agree with the following practices (because I don't), but just to be realistic.
    All licensing is moot if there isn't anyone to defend it. It's a sad fact of life that people take recognition for other's people work. Just take tomato as a whole; who here would pay court and lawyer fees in defense of tomato if someone ripped it off for their own commercial purposes? (Sound familiar?) The developers probably don't even get enough donations to quench their thirst while coding.

    I am happy however, that open source projects overall (and tomato in particular) has been successful, and that the honor system in general has worked.

    In short, I see nothing wrong so far with the UI enhancements, and welcome them.
  28. pharma

    pharma Network Guru Member

    I don't presume to know what Jon intended with his GUI copyright, but do know the community (DDWRT et al) has honored it with regard to Tomato. In this instance it will be ultimately be up to the branch developer's (Toastman, Shibby, Victek, Teaman, etc...) decision to include/not include the GUI changes in their branch with regard to the html 5 standard issue, or he can start his own branch if he desires with break-fix support.
  29. JugsteR

    JugsteR Serious Server Member

    Surely we must be talking about different things. Are you saying that because Jon created a GUI in whatever language, someone else is not allowed to create another GUI in another language? This is starting to sound like the ongoing patent wars, your pad looks like my pad because it has rounded corners, kind of thing. Silly.

    Simply put, new interfaces are allowed to be created, modifications may be another thing though.

    And it is not up to you to tell anyone which branch gets to integrate what. If someone does something they decide how they do it, and if someone else wants to use it in their code, have at it. Perhaps you shouldn't call it Tomato though. TomatoHtml5 would be fine however, just like TomatoUsb is for that mod.

    Information needs to be free.

    Signature? Signature!
  30. AlexF

    AlexF Serious Server Member

    Whatever floats the boat works for me. :)

    As for the copyright thing, the only thing I've seen in the www-files is
    Well, only time will tell how much I'll do in the future, but everyone is free to contribute and disitribute my code so hopefully it's not a problem. Also, which "standard" to use isn't much of a problem. Right now it's just some very basic and widespread html5-elements, the rest is old html4.
  31. jyavenard

    jyavenard Network Guru Member

    I don't know if I'm just missing something very obvious, but I don't really quite get from the original pictures the point in having something that basically just look like the current interface.
  32. AlexF

    AlexF Serious Server Member

    That's my opinion as well. The copyright isn't infringed, and I'm not rebranding or removing his copyright/license notices. I'm just changing some stuff, to make it more modern.

    Wow, thank you for being rational around here!
    It's a respect thing. If one hacks around and always give credit, it usually turns out well.

    The goal of this project is to get a more modern interface that will scale well on different devices (usually referred to as "responsive webdesign"). It makes this possible by using the Bootstrap framework by Twitter (http://twitter.github.com/bootstrap/index.html).

    Also, I'd like to get in touch with the main developers (Shibby, Toastman or anyone else) to get some feedback. if you guys read this, I'd be glad to get in touch with you!
  33. AlexF

    AlexF Serious Server Member

    Some experimental builds can now be found at the following link.
    However, please do note that those are EXPERIMENTAL BUILDS and I do NOT take any responsibility whatsoever if it bricks your router, computer or the internet.
    So if you have some spare time on your hands and want to try it out, I'd love to hear about feedback, bugs etc.

  34. WRD - EasyTomato

    WRD - EasyTomato Networkin' Nut Member

    Awesome man! I'll try out out later today or tomorrow.

    Keep up the good work.
  35. WRD - EasyTomato

    WRD - EasyTomato Networkin' Nut Member

    I downloaded it and tested it quickly. Flashed with no issues and looks cool. Can't wait to see the final thing!
  36. AlexF

    AlexF Serious Server Member

    Great! I'm trying to get the <% include() %> function to work, the one you use for the easyheader.html , maybe one of your developers could help me find it in the code?
  37. WRD - EasyTomato

    WRD - EasyTomato Networkin' Nut Member

    Sent you what you should need in a PM. Hope it helps!

Share This Page