Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Breaking down Amazon's mega dropdown

bjk5.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 203 posts

Re: Breaking down Amazon's mega dropdown

#81

Post by tjic »

null_ptr wrote: post #54
Nycto wrote: post #43

Hey all, I'm on the team that built this. We also built the redesign that launched last year. In fact, this was part of that. The article pretty much nails our implementation. Point of fact: Our team is recruiting. If you dig UX projects like this, shoot our manager Chad an email: chaddes at amazon dot com

Hi, are the blog commenters' lawsuit fears legitimate?

No one will answer this.

If they say "no", they're speaking for Amazon, and saying "we give you a right to infringe our patent". If they say "yes", they're speaking for Amazon, and making the firm look douchey.

Mu - unask the question.

Re: Breaking down Amazon's mega dropdown

#82

Post by themstheones »

alipang wrote: post #50
jimbobimbo wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think, it depends on Windows version and auto-complete behavior setting. FWIW, Windows 7 doesn't do this with default setting. I do, however, recall observing this kind of behavior on XP.

It definitely still happens in Visual Studio on Windows 7, not sure about other places. Resharper might change this behaviour, not sure as I don't currently use it. Nothing beats accidentally creating a new class instead of adding an existing one as a reference just because your cursor was in the wrong place, then spending time on wondering why nothing happens.

Another great use case for the singleton pattern.

Re: Breaking down Amazon's mega dropdown

#83

Post by spicyj »

Mahn wrote: post #80

I don't get why is detecting the mouse direction necessary in the case of the Amazon dropdown; I can see the utility in the Bootstrap example that the article highlights, but if the dropdown menu and its submenus both fit in a perfect square, wouldn't it be enough to detect whether the cursor is inside of either the menu or the submenu to properly show/hide the dropdown and its submenus? What are the drawbacks of thi…

If you move your mouse straight down within the left side, the submenu should change immediately.

Re: Breaking down Amazon's mega dropdown

#84

Post by SonicSoul »

UnoriginalGuy wrote: post #21

This has always irked me about Windows's implementation of the auto-complete box. If I start typing, in the address bar for one example, and my mouse happens to be resting over where the auto-complete will soon appear (as is likely because I just had to move the cursor to the address bar to select it) when I hit "enter" it will go to whatever my mouse cursor was over rather than what I typed. The auto-complete box sh…

just tested it on Win7 and it appears they fixed this. pressing windows key and typing reveals a list with the first item selected every time.. unless the mouse moves

Re: Breaking down Amazon's mega dropdown

#85

Post by salman89 »

Mahn wrote: post #80

I don't get why is detecting the mouse direction necessary in the case of the Amazon dropdown; I can see the utility in the Bootstrap example that the article highlights, but if the dropdown menu and its submenus both fit in a perfect square, wouldn't it be enough to detect whether the cursor is inside of either the menu or the submenu to properly show/hide the dropdown and its submenus? What are the drawbacks of thi…

The issue is that when you are hovering over a menu item, and you are aiming to hit a submenu item that is not directly to the right of the menu item. For example, if you are hovering over a menu item and wish to select a a submenu item that is to the right and down the screen, you will take a down-right path UX wise. Normally this would trigger the menu items below (before you make it to the submenu) and thus change the submenu items.

Re: Breaking down Amazon's mega dropdown

#86

Post by obviouslygreen »

calhoun137 wrote: post #55

There is an important point to be made about the quote from the end of this article. "Thanks go to Ben Alpert for helping me understand the linear algebra / cross-product magic ...I ended up going w/ a cruder slope-based approach, mostly b/c I’ve lost all intuitive understanding of linear algebra" Let that be a wake up call to all of the programmers who continue to claim that you can "get away" with out knowing much…

If your point is that it can be useful, then yeah, point made. If your point is that it is so useful that all programmers need it desperately, sorry, a single place where a more complex understanding of math might (we'll never know) have yielded a better product does not go anywhere near being a point to be made.

I loved all sorts of math while in school, have forgotten almost all of it, and have had to use almost none of what I learned in such a direct way as this. I definitely wouldn't argue that it's not important, but you are overstating it based on an outlier.

Re: Breaking down Amazon's mega dropdown

#87

Post by andrewljohnson »

calhoun137 wrote: post #68
andrewljohnson wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I took away the exact opposite - this is yet another example of not needing to know the right math. In the end, he can study up a bit and/or seek out a friend who does know, but be got the hack done without it. This is how it works with my wife and I sometimes. I write a lot of code, and she either fixes or writes or advises me on the bit I need to work much better. I admit we can't run the world or write good code w…

First of all, "getting away" with something by relying on someone else to know what you don't know but need to use is hardly a virtue. If someone wants to work like that, to each his own. The problem I have is people telling the next generation that since you can "get away" without math, that it isn't important to take it very seriously as a programmer. Second of all, like you said, you can get the "hack" done withou…

It's not a virtue to not know matrix algebra, but it's not particularly un-virtuous either. I have great respect for mathy engineers, but I also know the world needs its Jobs's and its Wozniak's, and it needs them to work together.

Re: Breaking down Amazon's mega dropdown

#89

Post by lubujackson »

calhoun137 wrote: post #68
andrewljohnson wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I took away the exact opposite - this is yet another example of not needing to know the right math. In the end, he can study up a bit and/or seek out a friend who does know, but be got the hack done without it. This is how it works with my wife and I sometimes. I write a lot of code, and she either fixes or writes or advises me on the bit I need to work much better. I admit we can't run the world or write good code w…

First of all, "getting away" with something by relying on someone else to know what you don't know but need to use is hardly a virtue. If someone wants to work like that, to each his own. The problem I have is people telling the next generation that since you can "get away" without math, that it isn't important to take it very seriously as a programmer. Second of all, like you said, you can get the "hack" done withou…

I think for programmers the constant state of learning (code techniques, browser quirks, new tools, new libraries, new algorithms) takes the edge off of learning "a bit of linear algebra" for one little part of your program. Would it help to really know linear algebra in and out? Sure, but that list of things worth learning is near infinite and the times you'll need linear algebra like this is quite small.

Web developer especially need to get their sea legs and be comfortable working on unstable ground all the time - it's inherent in the kludge we call web standards. So if you take a list of all the things a web developer needs to know to be effective, let's just agree "high math" isn't going to be near the top of that list.

Re: Breaking down Amazon's mega dropdown

#90

Post by baak »

calhoun137 wrote: post #68
andrewljohnson wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I took away the exact opposite - this is yet another example of not needing to know the right math. In the end, he can study up a bit and/or seek out a friend who does know, but be got the hack done without it. This is how it works with my wife and I sometimes. I write a lot of code, and she either fixes or writes or advises me on the bit I need to work much better. I admit we can't run the world or write good code w…

First of all, "getting away" with something by relying on someone else to know what you don't know but need to use is hardly a virtue. If someone wants to work like that, to each his own. The problem I have is people telling the next generation that since you can "get away" without math, that it isn't important to take it very seriously as a programmer. Second of all, like you said, you can get the "hack" done withou…

There's something to be said about time investment. You're suggesting that tinkering takes time. If I want to keep current on all the math I learned in school, I'd have to invest a significant amount of time in addition to the time I already invest in keeping up-to-date with languages/frameworks/platforms/algorithms/datastructures/databases/etc.

How often would I use this level of math? I know I use the others on an almost daily basis. Coming up with something I need linear algebra for, though? Few and very far between. Maybe you use linear algebra often, but most of us don't have a need for it.

And if you disagree, then I think you should actually know abstract algebra, number theory, topology, etc., so that when the next problem comes along, you can 'quickly come up with an optimal solution'.

Post reply on HN