DarkPhoenix

Most software firewalls are bad at that. It seems to me like you've set the firewall to block your incoming connections to port 80. As I don't use Norton Personal Firewall myself, and since it has been months since I helped a friend of mine with a similar problem, I can't really help you too much, but what I did was that I went into the rules of the firewall and removed the rule(s) that were wrong. That's what I suggest you go on do too. If that doesn't work, remove all rules, and just set them all over again. When you get the request for an incoming connection on port 80, accept it. HTH

Yeah, so can I, but eh... let me quote myself. I think you missed something that I find very important. Take a good look at that. It might be that you don't think all men are created equal, but in my opinion, they are, and so should have equal opportunities, even on the web. In any case, I can't reply here in over a week, since I'm going on vacation, so have a nice time everyone.

I said I was done in this thread, but I really have to comment on this. You say that aesthetics should not be part of this discussion. If you take a close look, that is what I based my initial post on, and so it should have a great deal to say in this discussion. It was others who actually started talking about functionality and security issues. I initially only wanted to discuss the way a browser renders a page. It's what concerns me the most. I love looking at things that look good, be it a lovely drawing, a pretty 3D-model, or.. a good-looking web page. Ok, you always tell us that you want proof why Mozilla (or any other browser) is better than IE.. I'll put it the other way around for you. I claim that (for instance) Mozilla, which I use, offers me the same amount of functionality and ease of use as IE does and IN ADDITION it gives me support for good looking CSS-sites. Not to mention that it has a correct DOM parser (both for Javascript and for (X)HTML). So why go for only half the deal, when you can get it all from a better browser? As for DHTML, I doubt it can surpass CSS. You know what DHTML is? It's very good for those who don't have any disabilities, and can use a visual browser without any concern. But for those who cannot see, or have trouble seeing, or have trouble using a mouse or have any other disabilities, CSS and pure structural (X)HTML is the only way to go. With IE, you can't go far with that. So you'll most likely either have a rather boring page, or a rather inaccessable. However, using proper CSS and (X)HTML, you can make the site look really pretty to those with no disabilities (assuming of course they use a good browser), while keeping it perfectly useable for those who have disabilities.

I was just about to say the same thing. Although I started this topic, I'm getting dead tired of it, it's becoming redundant; people don't come up with new arguments.. so.. I'm out. Oh, and talking about whining -- I don't see you do any better. Your so called proof pro-IE are just as bad as mine against it. If you call my reasoning bad, then yours is at least equally so. But anyway, I'm through with this. I won't bother telling you why, once again.. so.. this is my last sentence here.

Now who's interpreting who wrong here? I said that what you meant by "best" was "most compatible", like you said, "most used", and not actually best. Since it's not. Once again. And if you actually think it is best, then I'm confused, since you go on telling people to see reviews, and taking note of IE always being last. And, uh... I think this sentence are missing a few verbs or something. I don't really understand it completely: What does this mean? I'm not native in English, and I honestly have no idea what's missing in this sentence, but I sorta know something is.

I made it work without a batch file... here's my line: If you use a program outside the %path% environment, you need to specify full path of course.. and most likely you'll need to change the "Start in" path (Of the shortcut). But else, it works.

Oh.. Well, I'm not really there for an uptime record.. I rarely leave my PC on for more than a couple of days before restarting it or shutting it off, unless I'm downloading something big. As for Linux, I've got news for you.. I'm downloading a distro right now. It's called MEPIS, a friend of mine told me to get it. He said RedHat was nothing but configuration upon configuration.. which, although I like configuring, is not really something I want at the moment. I'll keep my Windows until I don't feel like I need it anymore, but yeah.. You were the last drop to make me try Linux. Now, feel honoured, or else..

Wow.. just wow. If that was a poem, I'd say it was beautiful. I really can't beat that one when it comes to arguments. I couldn't even have come up with so good arguments. I've told myself that "One day, I'm gonna drop the whole Microsoft crap and switch to Linux" I'm a couple of steps on the way, since I don't use MS' browser, and MS' Media Player... but I'm gonna take the whole step one day. As a matter of fact, I have a 10 GiB unformatted HD partition prepared for Linux, that I haven't had the time to set up yet. I'll get into that some time soon. Amen. The ideal computer world would be a place where everything was compatible, where every OS supported whatever the other OSes supported (intercompability) so one could choose, yet still be able to do all. Of course this'll never be, but it'd be fun. The same goes for browsers.. and as long as MS sets their own standards, this won't work either. It's amusing that MS are the only ones doing this, eh? Netscape did it very early on, but afaik, they try being standard like all others now. Unlike OSes, browsers could all work together in harmony.. just if... *sigh*

No offense, but that was sorta stating the obvious... I was thinking more of the uh... Gold Members and I think one was part of a group called "Validating" and such. And I think I've seen more... but I don't remember them all. Anyway, as nobody has answered me, I guess it's a secret then. It wouldn't take too much time answering me if it weren't.

The first question is quite simple. It uses only as much bandwith as it sends out.. that is, the size of the content that a person who uses the .cgi receives. No matter what the .cgi does "behind the scenes", the only bandwith it consumes is what it sends out. I'll assume you meant cgi script and not sgi. CGI stands for Common Gateway Interface and is usually used to do things that common web pages can't do. An example of cgi is this forum. Once you click that "Add Reply" button after writing a post, the forum sends your text to the server. The CGI part of the server then saves it to a database. When a user looks into the topic you replied in, the CGI fetches your reply, and prints it out in that nice-looking table structure, along with others' replies. I am not very good at explaining things.. I hope the example helps you understand.. basically all web-services that allow user-interaction or constantly updated info is done with CGI. Such as web-mail, forums, quizes, news-sites, etc. Commonly used CGIs are PHP, Perl, ASP and Python. There are of course more, but those are most common.

It really serves no purpose in trying to convince you or show examples to you if you've tried Mozilla yourself and you haven't discovered why it is better yourself. That is an ignorant attitude. Saying that IE has set the standard. Says who? Where can you find a validator (like the one on the W3C that can tell that your site is IE-compatible? You can't. Cause there ain't no standard. IE is try-and-fail. Ever tried making a site that uses CSS in IE? You have to add all sorts of weird "tricks" into your CSS to make IE skip some of what it wouldn't understand. Meh. Then I'd rather just give a **** about IE users, and tell them to get another browser -- A true standard has set rules and definitions that must be implemented. In IE it just seems like luck to get things to work properly. Right, right. Why do we need CSS at all? Why did 2D games evolve into 3D you think? Because there's a thing called development; evolution. The CSS3 specification will allow people to make even neater-looking pages.. and even more accessible.. only in good browsers though, but yeah. Now people have to use a lot of tables and other weird HTML strategies to get pages to look cool, and by doing that, they make pages severely inaccessible. <sarcasm>But I guess that's no big deal. Who cares about the impaired ones, anyway, huh?</sarcasm> CSS was made to separate the content from the presentation, and is a really good idea.. a redesign only requires you to change the style-sheet.. not the entire HTML code (thus moving content around inside the structural part of the site). but I guess some people like living in the past, with CSS1. (Yeah, that's right. IE can't even support CSS2, which was ready in '98) As for the rest, I don't care so much. I mostly use Mozilla because I want to be up to date. To be able to view nice sites. Sure, some horribly coded pages don't work. Your example was launch.com.. well, boo-hoo. There are more radio-providers out there. Personally, I use iTunes. And there's always another provider of whatever, if it doesn't work because of sucky HTML code (or server-side code, to cover it all).

Why thank you guys, finally a little support. I also use IE to view sites I can't view correctly with Mozilla and Opera, but why should I have to do that? If everybody just followed standards, I could actually uninstall IE and live without it.. but it's like a parasite, crawling under my skin, begging me to use it cause it "supports" everything. And SiMoNsAyS, at least be sure to put "best" in quotes like you did, cause a better word for it would be "currently most compatible". IE is far from being best. As for Firefox, I'll most likely switch from the ordinary Mozilla to it once it crosses the 1.0 barrier (thus I am anticipating it ). And yeah, Nathaniel, that about Microsoft and stealing marketshare and disobeying standards on purpose is more than likely to be the truth. Your examples are good. And Microsoft doesn't only lie in court.. They claim over and over that they actually follow web-standards.. it's silly.

Oh.. you want it to follow GMT? That's rather hard to do, as JavaScript is a client-side script system, and will adjust to the user's local time... and since (at least that script) doesn't account for hours/minutes/seconds, it'll only change when the actual date changes... I could try to modify it to take account for hours/minutes/seconds also, if you wish.. or you could do it yourself, maybe?

It looks cool.. I would just suggest that you make the left menu go all the way down... if you know what I mean? On my screen it looks like it cuts off at something like 70-80% of the site height. A screenshot of what I see Just a suggestion.

Aha! I think I discovered what you want... see this: <script> /* Count up from any date script- By JavaScript Kit (www.javascriptkit.com) Over 200+ free scripts here! */ var montharray=new Array("Jan","Feb","Mar","Apr","May","Jun","Jul","Aug","Sep","Oct","Nov","Dec") var today=new Date(); function dayssincenewyear(){ var m=01 var d=01 var todayy=today.getYear() if (todayy < 1000) todayy+=1900 var yr=todayy var todaym=today.getMonth() var todayd=today.getDate() var todaystring=montharray[todaym]+" "+todayd+", "+todayy var paststring=montharray[m-1]+" "+d+", "+yr var difference=(Math.round((Date.parse(todaystring)-Date.parse(paststring))/(24*60*60*1000))*1) //Modified by DarkPhoenix beneath line to function like intented //----------------------------------------------------------------------- difference = "" + difference; if (difference.length==1) { return "00" + difference; } else if (difference.length==2) { return "0" + difference; } else if (difference.length==3) { return difference; } } </script> Put that in the <head> part of your document, and then wherever you need the count, just get it, for instance like this: <script>alert(dayssincenewyear());</script> Works for me.

So not really the Julian calendar, but more like "Count of days since January 1"?

Here, take a look at this.. you could probably borrow some of their code or something. Julian Date Converter

Which language? Javascript? VBScript? PHP? Perl? VB.NET? I can't really suggest anything until I know.

Um... hold on a little.. It may be just me, but isn't that RunOnce running a little too early? I always thought it was supposed to be running on the first startup.. My guess is that the Windows Setup part doesn't allocate too much Virtual Memory, so that it fails when you try to use regular programs in it, this excessively.. this might be wrong, I'm just talking of what I'm used to.

Hiya I wonder what all the different member groups are, and what you're allowed to do if you're a certain kind. I tried to look for this in help and then search to see if anyone else had asked about it, but I found nothing, so I figured I'd just ask. I am not asking what it takes to become one, just wondering what they are and what you're allowed to do with them. The ones I see most commonly are Member (of course), Super Moderator, Administrator and.... uh, hold on. I just discovered that all the different Member Groups show up when clicking on the "Members" button and viewing the choices of the "Showing <All Members> by..." combo box. Ok, since the different types are cleared out, I basically just wonder what rights the different kinds of members have. I hope this isn't a secret or anything, as that would be somewhat silly of you. Anyway, thanks in advance for your replies.

The fact that you guys have your opinions is cool and all, we're all entitled to one.. what really bothers me, is that nobody has yet agreed with me... it's a shame... especially since I figured there'd be more techies and true geeks on this site, some who were somewhat non-mainstream. I can't stand ignorance, and no offense, but using MSIE unconditionally without even having tried any other browsers is in my eyes a grand example of ignorance. I don't know if you're doing that mutahir, but I guess neosapience doesn't, since he appears to have tried Mozilla with launch.com or something like that... anyway, I'm just a little put off by the fact that I appear to be alone with my opinions.. or then again, those who agree may not see a reason to post.. I don't know.

Correct me if wrong, anyone, but I think I read somewhere that on Network Installations, the $OEM$ folder has to be put in the I386 folder instead of being in the same folder as the I386.

AMDs have a tendency to do that if the CPU temp go very high. My father's computer's CPU fan slowed down seriously a few weeks ago.. the PC would start all fine, then work for a few minutes, then it'd show a BSOD. When we then restarted it, it would start half of windows and then just malfunction, and eventually, not even the BIOS text in the very beginning of startup would show up. I am aware that you said your fans(s) work fine, but his appeared to work fine too, it's just that it "worked fine" at about 2000 RPMs less than what it should've. Replacing the fan solved the entire issue.

You don't happen to use some weird program that might be doing it? Like that clock-thing that appears to be covering the real clock.. or something else? I'm not saying that I'm not using weird programs, but there are some that might mess up stuff like what you've described.. if I were you, I'd go through your installed programs, and think through what their purpose is, and if they might be doing something like that.

Unfortunately, if I may say so, Microsoft won't be getting much competition as long as all of the larger companies keep adjusting their sites and programs to Microsoft's methods. Something that would've been really amusing would be if some, or many of all the larger sites just collectively started working against Microsoft, by for instance making their web pages with so new standards that it'd look like crap in IE. After all, if everybody did it, it'd convince more people to switch browser. The real problems, if you ask me, are these:Too many sites adjust to Microsoft IE There are no ads for other browsers There are no lobbyists that work for the use of other browsers I mean, imagine the effect it would have if Google started showing Mozilla ads on some pages. I'm darned convinced that it'd cause at least some people to switch. The trouble is to make them actually read why it is better and so forth. And what about lobbyists? Professionals "lurking" in the halls of big companies, telling them stuff. I betcha, Microsoft does this all the time. Well, I'd say. The moron who programmed that page is most likely below average. Just the source code of this page makes the tech part of my brain go wacky.. Well, there's one way to circumvent Mozilla's message... or Opera's Here it is, Launch.com Radio, possible to open in all browsers.. it won't play music in anything else than IE though, but if you take a small peek at the source code, you'll most likely get as dizzy as I got. And you'll most likely also understand why it doesn't work in anything else than IE. Though I'm sure it could if the dork(s) who made it thought it out a little more carefully. It just uses Windows Media Player as a base, and I've had that work in both Mozilla and Opera before. Yep.. there's really not much more to it. What do you mean? I'm trying to help people. On my web pages I always tell them that my page won't work with IE, and tell them why they should switch into something better. It may not help immediately, but there are others who also do this, and when enough people do it, there may be a possibility that people "See the light". After all, whenever I visit friends, and I see them use IE, I tell them that there are better ways to surf, and show them Opera or Mozilla, and I can say that 90% of the people I've helped switch browser are grateful that I did. The only problem is that I have to be there in person.. it seems that just telling people in a note on a web page won't help much.