What is Digg?70 Comments
- surfing, on 10/12/2007, -4/+41Browsershots is a free though.
- tedrock, on 10/12/2007, -1/+28Pretty sweet... Something tells me their queue is about to sky rocket from all our requests though...
- lcarsdeveloper, on 10/12/2007, -4/+22I don't normally yell 'DUPE', but in this case I will.
Unlike the others, I will actually include proof:
http://digg.com/tech_news/Browsershots (www.browsershots.org)
http://digg.com/design/Browsershots.org_-_see_your_site_in_different_browsers (browsershots.org)
http://digg.com/design/So_what_does_your_website_look_like_in_different_browsers_ (browsershots.org)
http://digg.com/design/Neat_tool_for_design_decisions (www.browsershots.org)
http://digg.com/tech_news/Test_your_web_design_in_different_browsers_for_FREE (v03.browsershots.org)
http://digg.com/design/Test_Your_Web_Design_in_20_Different_Browsers_+_More_for_FREE! (v03.browsershots.org)
There are 3 possible URL's on Browsershots. That means there's no possible way for this person to submit Browsershots and not be notified it was a dupe.
I feel sorry for the webmaster, his site gets dugg so often because people don't bother to check. - mvprj84, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12This is from the Browsershots blog:
Hello and welcome everybody. Browsershots is on the frontpage of http://digg.com/ again. Sorry for bad server performance, but there's just too many of you. I increased MaxClients? from 64 to 256, but http://browsershots.org/server-status shows that the server is still overloaded. This is the first time that the new server gets some actual load, so thank you for the testing.
Some screenshots may come back blank because the server takes too long to redirect when it's overloaded. If this happens, please try again later.
And for all of you wondering about the length of the queue: the maximum wait is now 4 hours, and if you don't change it from the default it's only 30 minutes. After that, your screenshot requests simply expire. That means you'll get some screenshots quickly, and some of your requests will be ignored, but the queue will always be 4 hours or less.
Update: There were also some errors because the database connection limit was exceeded. I increased that from 100 to 300. Sorry for the hiccups, and thanks for posting your comments.
http://trac.browsershots.org/wiki/BlogDuggAgain - shiftt, on 10/12/2007, -1/+13the site has been around for a while. Their queue usually takes a few days, but with all the digg traffic coming in that'll probably turn into a few weeks :)
Offtopic, you can test for most browser platforms yourself. Konqueror renders CSS almost entirely the same way that Safari does, so grab that spare Ubuntu disk and install Konqueror. (easier than buying a mac).. as for IE, Opera, and FF, you should have no excuse. - foolfromhell, on 10/12/2007, -5/+16How can the queue skyrocket if the site wont load?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12What if I want to see what my site looks like in AleFox?
- Tialys, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Browsercam costs MONEY though. Lots of it.
- SpikeX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8Doesn't do much good if the queue is still a mile long.
- invader, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9googling for something > wishing for something
- knightblade2oo4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6yeah this was on digg a little while ago... and it was raped to oblivion just like this is.
- trib4lmaniac, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6And yet I am still grateful this was submitted. Because until now, I didn't know it existed.
- splammo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Unfortinately if digg did that, many websites would be perpetually dugg.
- chadu, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6dude, old news... seriously, use the search before you post this type of stuff.
- qwerty967, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Download Swift and have all the major rendering engines on your Windows PC: Trident, Gecko, Presto, and WebKit.
http://www.getswift.org/ - noseeme, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5That's an incredibly useful tool for webdevs! What a roster of browsers!
- pixel, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Dugg too... for when it's up. Now it would be nice if Digg would alert you that a site has come back from being Dugg.
- eplawless, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3It's good for getting an initial look, but it's not going to replace actually testing the site.
- Rsulliv1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3When this was dugg a few weeks ago, there was a 4 hour max queue time. I'm not sure how you could wait for days to get your screenshots.
And even after the digg effect died down, I was amazed to get four or five browser shots back. Firefox on (linux,mac,win), ie7, safari, ie6, and Konq were the only things I've ever seen. Also, I've only received one screenshot below 1024x768 when specified.
It's a great idea, but I hope this release works better. - egarc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4My conclusion, Josie Maran looks hot on any browser.
- lcarsdeveloper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Well you can't test them now, you've got to wait another few days for the digg effect to die down.
Makes you wonder, if the site keeps getting dugg like this, will the webmaster keep running the site and paying for bandwidth? Or will he just close down and say "it's your own fault for killing my server!"? - lcarsdeveloper, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4OK, but nothing has really changed on the site since the last time it was submitted. Think of a real news service on TV. Now, there are things that happened before I was born that I don't know anything about. If they showed those old stories again like they were the latest news, I know that I (and 99% of the other viewers) would get angry that the headline news is actually very old and out of date. If there had been some kind of development, then it would be fine. This would be fine if the site was just launching. It would be fine also if the service was improved or upgraded, or new features added. But just because some people don't know about it doesn't mean you should replay it as a news story.
In the news today on September 7, 2006:
-Two planes hit the World Trade Centre
-Saddam Hussein Captured
-William Shatner shocked as Star Trek is canceled after only 3 seasons
That last one happened before I was born, I never got to see the media coverage. FOX, NBC, CNN, please rerun all those stories for me so I can see them, I missed it the first time around!!!
I think I've made my point. - airencracken, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Very nice find. I'm betting it's going to get the digg effect though.
- Xenif, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Thanks for posting this, I was trying to remember this site a few days ago, and I was like damn, I wish I remembered it. Now you posted it, I can use it to test my sites.
Thanks ;0 - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Gotta love it - go in the comments and they're 95% of the "Shoot! We killed that, what do we do now?" variety.
Digg : the site you go to to find cool new sites just after they've been freshly slaughtered. - Manuel, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Cool Idea, but site is broken now that a lot of people are trying to hit it.
- corcoran, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1It's really a great idea, a simple and obvious step that surprisingly, many firms unfortunately overlook. Having a 15" monitor on my laptop, it's quite clear to me when a company has failed to test their websites on different monitors, browers or resolutions. Now that I've got a Treo, I can easily see how resolution/browser issues are only magnified with the proliferation of Palms and Blackberries (which, at least based on some of my colleagues, is the primary means of online interaction for some).
Unfortunately, after half a dozen attempts ; twice I got an erroneous error (telling me to add something that was already in the URL I typed), and the other few times I encountered an "internal traceback" error. Still, if the service actually does what it says it does, I'm going to give it a few more chances and hope the bugs get worked out. - RootWebGod, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5Re: surfing
You made a valid and good point in your reply; I mistakenly dugg your post down after misreading it. :(
Would some of you--please--digg 'surfing' back up for me! :) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1wow a lot of diggs, didn't think this would hit front page xD
- PepperMinty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I can't even get on the queue! All I get is a bunch of non-rendered pages.
- Ryosen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I don't know how they're doing it, but if I was going to do it I would create a farm of virtual machines, one for each OS and browser version needed. When a request comes in, I would submit that request to the clients, automate the screenshot process and return the graphic back to the main server. Then, deliver the snapshots down to the client.
The actual implementation would be a little more complex to handle things such as load balancing and such, but that's the basic idea. - lcarsdeveloper, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Die spammer :)
- 4NDr01D, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1they need more mobile browser screen shots
- Rsulliv1, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Open the queue and select any site at the top of the queue.
That's the best the site has to offer. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Can't understand why that site doesn't just email you when it's done - rather than crapping out after 4 hours.
- wkdown, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Digg : the site you go to to find cool new sites just after they've been freshly slaughtered.
TOO TRUE! - scronline, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'll save many of you the trouble. This never works in it's entirety.
- seandfeeney, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1this takes forever to give you results
- nreynolds, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1ye, it's really buggy. The 'Queue' link doesnt even work for me.
- Soulhuntre, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1THats how I got into it and it's a great way to get all set up.
- itanshi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2its down *bookmarks it for later*
very nice concept - scantly, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Glad to see that I'm in a 4 hour queue behind an error 404 page...
- RootWebGod, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2It surely couldn't hurt though as a final review before publishing or releasing for sale. :)
- JessCoffman, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0How do you set it up? I wouldnt mind adding some factory servers to the collection to speed things up down the road.
- Kokichi, on 10/12/2007, -1/+130 minutes? I'll take your word that it's cool. Digg :p
- lftl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@Tialys
The most affordable way to get a browsercam account is to buy one of their annual plans and split it up the 25 accounts they allow between different people. There is almost always a group on fundable.org looking to do exactly that. $25 for a year of access is actually quite reasonable. - bmwboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Yeah, If you wanna help you can run a factory, ain't too much work, and lessens the queue :)
Currentely my machine(s) (slowpoke and brandonspc) are the only IE 6 machines...
Totally dugg :) - NiX0n, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1When I see a story that I like and is a dupe, I digg the older story and REPORT THE DUPE!
Give credit where credit is due.
Digg This...
http://digg.com/design/Neat_tool_for_design_decisions - goinhome, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0A couple posters here mentioned the corporate account at Browsercam.com - that works if you have a group of folks that want to go in on this tool. At $25/year you can't beat the testing time. Far faster than 30 min-4 hours. But, I really appreciate the fact that Browsershots is giving a shot (no pun intended) at an 'open source' type tool to accomplish this same task. Browsershots just needs a shot (s%# - another pun) in the arm with funding to make the open source a reality - or, perhaps - get with the folks at open source? That would help gear the site up for queing time and situations like Digg overloads on the server, right?
-
Show 51 - 69 of 69 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is