Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
David Debono [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... [snip] That is absolutely fascinating, thank you for your time. I will consider it for my research. Again both are still being used, but as I've not used Mainframes in anger for a few years now but doesn't MVS/XA still support CICS as a virtual machine on the bus? I personally haven't seen CICS much since about 1994, but I was standing in the Perot Systems data center when the sysops brought up the data segment after installing the first IBM TCP/IP stack for MVS/XA. Holy crap. A 4 gigaflop relational database and file server. Makes NT and Sun look like tinker toys. These little hacker geeks just don't understand.
Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
On Fri, 22 Mar 2002 22:56:22 GMT, George Copeland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Debono [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... They still exist and are being used, although not as much as before. What is interesting about TCP/IP as a way of communicating is that there are now many differing systems with a shared connectivity model. Heterogenous (sp?). hasn't made things any simpler as each has merits and disadvantages. Do you remember the original IBM 13 layer OSI model? It's funny, you are hitting all of my high points. *smile* IBM came out with their micro-channel PC architecture about 1993. It was far superior to even what is being used today, had real plug-play and lots of other advantages. It was also completely proprietary. Microsoft helped all of the hardware manufacturers come up with their own architecture standard. This effort virtually killed IBM's attempt to corner the market. I do not remember it exactly as that. MCA architecture was earlier than that IIRC. The system was no where near fool-proof with manufacturers having to pay to register their particular cards to get them certified. There was any number of problems with config discs for each card only having a specfic range of addresses, DMA etc and card clashes were frequent. Further if you did not have the disc then you could not install the cards leading many of us to make copies of the bloody things somewhere that we could get access to (a server share of some sort was favoured) if we had forgotten/lost/whatever the things. Again I am not so sure it was Microsoft that killed it off more than PCI which microsoft adopted as a way forward. True that PS2's were virtually bullet proof but relied on IB and Intel being in bed together. With the advent of other processors and cheaper PCI boards with faster subsystems IBM couldn't compete in the particular market. Again IIRC the move to RISC based RS systems still uses the technology? OSI, the nomenclature is slipping, Open Systems Interconnectivity, something like that? Came out about 1988? If that is the thing, I remember it. Very ambitious, was not adopted by industry, was the last major innovation IBM tried before their big fall. I thought that they were toast, but Gerstner brought them back from the dead. The man deserves a Nobel prize. The OSI model is still used extensively but the seven layer model. Interestingly enough TCP/IP drops between layer two and three, maybe IBM got it right in the first place? Certainly they lost out by waiting for 802.5 to be fully ratified before releasing Token passing networking. People had already gone for Ethernet 802.3 *before* the ratification which also rather put an end to Banyan Vines, Starlan and the others. Cheaper to inplement as well, only passive Cat 2 cabling instead of active components. I would have thought an avenue of research would be the almost total uptake of Cat 5 cabling as against the ATT or Type 1 systems would be a more interesting effect. Telco's like BT, Banking systems Reuters and Bloomberg capitulated totally in the end but not without a struggle. Anyway, IBM invented client/server back around 1965 with their TSO products and CICS. A lot of people forget that. Again both are still being used, but as I've not used Mainframes in anger for a few years now but doesn't MVS/XA still support CICS as a virtual machine on the bus? Anyway take care as ever David D. The Mediaeval Combat Society The Historical Reenactment Web Site http://www.montacute.net/histrenact/welcome.htm
Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
David Debono [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Out of genuine interest why? I remember the first www type browsers (they did make using the internet far easier!) but why particularly Netscape and animated gifs and not the others? Netscape was the first commercial browser to support animated gifs. At the time, it had a market share (if you can call it that) approaching 100%.
Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
Christopher Jahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Best asked in: snews://secnews.netscape.com/netcape.communicator And also try: http://ufaq.org Thanks.
Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
George Copeland wrote: I am looking for the version number of the first release of Netscape Navigator that would display animated gifs, and the exact date of its release. If anyone knows or remembers any of the details surrounding the first use of animated gifs on the web, I would be delighted to know it, especially if you have inside or detailed recollections or if you know of an online reference. My guess is version 1.1 released on March 6, 1995, but I have no confirmation of this. http://www.netscape.com/newsref/pr/newsrelease16.html I found this odd document on the w3c website which seems to imply that no animated gif support was available at the time it was written. Strangely, it is not dated, but appears to have been written in late 1994-early 1995. Later releases of Netscape put the proposed project in the dustbin. http://www.w3.org/Conferences/WWW4/Papers/100/ Thank you for your time. Try: http://sillydog.org/narchive/ -- Chris I ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
Chris I [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Try: http://sillydog.org/narchive/ Thanks that is very useful.
Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
David Debono [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Yes indeed. it rather took over from Mosaic and at the time IE was a bit of a no-goer. I suppose I was interested in your line of research really. Netscape has rather lost the plot recently with feature-bloat IMHO. Oh well I am an armchair historian and I like business history. I think it is kind of a neglected topic.
Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
On Fri, 22 Mar 2002 12:53:40 GMT, George Copeland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Debono [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Yes indeed. it rather took over from Mosaic and at the time IE was a bit of a no-goer. I suppose I was interested in your line of research really. Netscape has rather lost the plot recently with feature-bloat IMHO. Oh well I am an armchair historian and I like business history. I think it is kind of a neglected topic. Far enough. Are you going back to the internet pre-html days as well? It always makes me smile when people say the internet was created in 1991 (or whatever). Not many people remember BIX, CIX, early compuserve and things like fidonet and janet these days. Take care David D. The Mediaeval Combat Society The Historical Reenactment Web Site http://www.montacute.net/histrenact/welcome.htm
Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
David Debono [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Far enough. Are you going back to the internet pre-html days as well? It always makes me smile when people say the internet was created in 1991 (or whatever). Not many people remember BIX, CIX, early compuserve and things like fidonet and janet these days. I don't see any relevance of these issues to business history. From a business perspective, the main innovation was the TCP/IP stack, which provides a standard way to connect computers. In 1994, we (all of us in business technology) were working on systems that we called client-server, and each system pretty much had its own connection scheme. Nobody does that anymore.
Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
David Debono [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... I think that the relevance was that these dissonent systems of interconnectivity. email and such like, were brought together, struggling, and unified in a disjointed manner. Before TCP/IP, such systems could only be interconnected with custom software, so it only happened piecemeal. When networks moved to TCP/IP, all things became possible. :-)
Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
On Fri, 22 Mar 2002 16:25:05 GMT, George Copeland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Debono [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... I think that the relevance was that these dissonent systems of interconnectivity. email and such like, were brought together, struggling, and unified in a disjointed manner. Before TCP/IP, such systems could only be interconnected with custom software, so it only happened piecemeal. When networks moved to TCP/IP, all things became possible. :-) I think that is a bit simplistic. When TCP/IP was shoehorned on-top of these other systems a type of interconnectivity was achieved getting progressively better as the old systems gradually died out. Did you ever use a product called Novix? TCP/IP over/along with IPX/SPX? Yeuch! Take care David D. The Mediaeval Combat Society The Historical Reenactment Web Site http://www.montacute.net/histrenact/welcome.htm
Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
David Debono [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... I think that is a bit simplistic. When TCP/IP was shoehorned on-top of these other systems a type of interconnectivity was achieved getting progressively better as the old systems gradually died out. Did you ever use a product called Novix? TCP/IP over/along with IPX/SPX? Yeuch! Yeah, I used a lot of those products. I think one of the biggest business mistakes of the Internet era was the price that Novell charged for their first TCP/IP upgrade. At the time, every business I knew of used Novell. Now, I haven't seen a Novell network for years.
Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
On Fri, 22 Mar 2002 19:39:33 GMT, George Copeland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David Debono [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... I think that is a bit simplistic. When TCP/IP was shoehorned on-top of these other systems a type of interconnectivity was achieved getting progressively better as the old systems gradually died out. Did you ever use a product called Novix? TCP/IP over/along with IPX/SPX? Yeuch! Yeah, I used a lot of those products. I think one of the biggest business mistakes of the Internet era was the price that Novell charged for their first TCP/IP upgrade. At the time, every business I knew of used Novell. Now, I haven't seen a Novell network for years. They still exist and are being used, although not as much as before. What is interesting about TCP/IP as a way of communicating is that there are now many differing systems with a shared connectivity model. Heterogenous (sp?). hasn't made things any simpler as each has merits and disadvantages. Do you remember the original IBM 13 layer OSI model? Take care David D. The Mediaeval Combat Society The Historical Reenactment Web Site http://www.montacute.net/histrenact/welcome.htm
Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
David Debono [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... They still exist and are being used, although not as much as before. What is interesting about TCP/IP as a way of communicating is that there are now many differing systems with a shared connectivity model. Heterogenous (sp?). hasn't made things any simpler as each has merits and disadvantages. Do you remember the original IBM 13 layer OSI model? It's funny, you are hitting all of my high points. IBM came out with their micro-channel PC architecture about 1993. It was far superior to even what is being used today, had real plug-play and lots of other advantages. It was also completely proprietary. Microsoft helped all of the hardware manufacturers come up with their own architecture standard. This effort virtually killed IBM's attempt to corner the market. OSI, the nomenclature is slipping, Open Systems Interconnectivity, something like that? Came out about 1988? If that is the thing, I remember it. Very ambitious, was not adopted by industry, was the last major innovation IBM tried before their big fall. I thought that they were toast, but Gerstner brought them back from the dead. The man deserves a Nobel prize. Anyway, IBM invented client/server back around 1965 with their TSO products and CICS. A lot of people forget that.
Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
Try: http://sillydog.org/narchive/ Thanks that is very useful. Are you going to publish a paper on this? It's interesting, especially to one who has used Netscape since v.1 and is still a member of the loyal and faithful. ML
Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
ML [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Try: http://sillydog.org/narchive/ Thanks that is very useful. Are you going to publish a paper on this? It's interesting, especially to one who has used Netscape since v.1 and is still a member of the loyal and faithful. I'm not sure what I'm going to do with it. I agree it is an interesting subject. I was a loyal NS user up until IE 3.02 Beta 1 (came out about June 1996). It wasn't better than NS, but it was programmable. I started using it and never made it back.
History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
I am looking for the version number of the first release of Netscape Navigator that would display animated gifs, and the exact date of its release. If anyone knows or remembers any of the details surrounding the first use of animated gifs on the web, I would be delighted to know it, especially if you have inside or detailed recollections or if you know of an online reference. My guess is version 1.1 released on March 6, 1995, but I have no confirmation of this. http://www.netscape.com/newsref/pr/newsrelease16.html I found this odd document on the w3c website which seems to imply that no animated gif support was available at the time it was written. Strangely, it is not dated, but appears to have been written in late 1994-early 1995. Later releases of Netscape put the proposed project in the dustbin. http://www.w3.org/Conferences/WWW4/Papers/100/ Thank you for your time.
Re: History Q: Animated gifs in Netscape
And it came to pass that George Copeland wrote:
I am looking for the version number of the first release of
Netscape Navigator that would display animated gifs, and
the exact date of its release. If anyone knows or
remembers any of the details surrounding the first use of
animated gifs on the web, I would be delighted to know it,
especially if you have inside or detailed recollections or
if you know of an online reference.
My guess is version 1.1 released on March 6, 1995, but I
have no confirmation of this.
http://www.netscape.com/newsref/pr/newsrelease16.html
I found this odd document on the w3c website which seems to
imply that no animated gif support was available at the
time it was written. Strangely, it is not dated, but
appears to have been written in late 1994-early 1995. Later
releases of Netscape put the proposed project in the
dustbin.
http://www.w3.org/Conferences/WWW4/Papers/100/
Thank you for your time.
Best asked in:
snews://secnews.netscape.com/netcape.communicator
And also try:
http://ufaq.org
--
}:-) Christopher Jahn
{:-( Dionysian Reveler
Duct tape is like the force, it has a light side and a dark side
and it
holds the universe together.
To reply: xjahnATyahooDOTcom
cache history cleaner in onepush button
Is there some effective way of cleaning all lists such as cache, visited sites, history, and so on in mozilla ? In opera this can be acomplished by pressing a single button. This would be a very nice feature that, i belive would not require much programming to add to mozilla !? -- La pooh [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: cache history cleaner in onepush button
La pooh wrote: Is there some effective way of cleaning all lists such as cache, visited sites, history, and so on in mozilla ? In opera this can be acomplished by pressing a single button. This would be a very nice feature that, i belive would not require much programming to add to mozilla !? I doubt they'll add anything of this type into Mozilla proper, this is the type of thing they leave add-ons for. Yes, it would be easy to code; it should be four or five lines of XUL and about the same amount of JS, which would make it a great project to learn these two technologies on. grayrest
Re: Filling history of an input field (or alternative)
Christoph Vogelbusch wrote: Hi, I want to make a form, where people can input/select a database table and then select a field of that table. I would like to do this without select-lists to save space. So it would be nice to have either the history filled with all the possiblities OR have a Menu that appears by weither rightclicking or left clicking on the input. Is there anything like that possible in Mozilla? Ciao/2 Christoph Was too easy: select with size 1!
Filling history of an input field (or alternative)
Hi, I want to make a form, where people can input/select a database table and then select a field of that table. I would like to do this without select-lists to save space. So it would be nice to have either the history filled with all the possiblities OR have a Menu that appears by weither rightclicking or left clicking on the input. Is there anything like that possible in Mozilla? Ciao/2 Christoph
about the mozilla session history
hello, we are University students and would like to work on Mozilla for our upcoming project. Our project will be to make some modifications with the back button of mozilla. We are still reading documentation and using the cross referencer to lead us into that direction. Do you quite possibly know where we can find that code?? -as well, perhaps where the linked list of the frames/session history are declared and implemented? -What does the docSHell tree architecture have to do with the session history? thank you
Re: about the mozilla session history
SARA HUSSEIN wrote: hello, we are University students and would like to work on Mozilla for our upcoming project. Our project will be to make some modifications with the back button of mozilla. We are still reading documentation and using the cross referencer to lead us into that direction. Do you quite possibly know where we can find that code?? -as well, perhaps where the linked list of the frames/session history are declared and implemented? -What does the docSHell tree architecture have to do with the session history? thank you Somebody more qualified to answer this can help you better, but here's my layman's view on that particular aspect. First, if you haven't found www.xulplanet.com it's probably the best source of introductory info to all things not involving the underlying C++ architecture (which you seem to be more interested in). I find that the best way to trace something is to find the XUL for it, then trace it backwards in lxr till I find the soruce. The best place to get answers to your questions is on irc://moznet/ on the #mozilla channel. All the developers hang out there, and they're usually quite helpful. With that said, I believe that history is implemented as an RDF structure (you can read about it at xulplanet) and can be interfaced using JavaScript from the front end. That's about it :] grayrest
Re: history
Gregor Haddow wrote: After wrestling with IE I have decided to go with Mozilla for my project - it being open source. I am writing a program that reads the history of a user, interprets the data and then stores it in a database to be used later. Can anyone please tell me how to access and interpret the data stored in the browser history? Any advice would be helpful. It's the history.dat file in your profile directory; it's a database from Mork, which is Mozilla's built in little database for this sort of thing. I don't know how you could get the data out - you'd need to study the file. Gerv
Re: History Window: change of view not saved
David W. Fenton wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (jdavis) wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I totally agree, the history function has been totally ignored. I agree with everything you've said. I would be happy if once I got the history window in the ungrouped view and I sort it in the order of last visited, I could come back later on after closing that window and reopen it in the view I left it in, but that sort order does not stay. It is a very useful feature to quickly look where you've been. I do not want to resort it every time! In 0.9.3 it *did* retain your settings. This is something that was broken somewhere between 0.9.3 and 0.9.6. What version do you have? I am speaking of all the latest builds. Day after day, they have left the history feature buggy and a simple thing such as the sort order cannot be retained--a small but very annoying issue.
Re: History Window: change of view not saved
David W. Fenton wrote: OK, I've looked on Google and Bugzilla for this one, too, and didn't find anything. I'm using 0.9.6 on Win95 OSR2. When I open the History window (having it take over part of the browser window is an IE-copycat abomination, of course), and change the view (I hate the IE-derived Grouped view), in Mozilla 0.9.3, this would be saved so that the next time I opened the history window, it would have the same layout as I left it in. But it always opens to the stupid grouped view (which I hate). And when I do get to the ungrouped view (a tabular view, like the Windows Explorer Details view), and try to sort, it takes 3 clicks of the LAST VISITED header to get it sorted right. The first click does nothing noticeable, other than changing the top item in the list to the very last page visited (and the /\ triangle disappears). The second click sorts in date ascending order (i.e., earliest at top of list) and the third click finally gets me to last at top. Something seems to be wrong with the updating of the grid. When I then click the Last Visited header again, it changes the first item to the last item (i.e., the earliest) but leaves everything else the same. In other words, it cycles through almost the same set of 3 views described above (only two of which have any use). I suspect something is screwed up here with the basic widget, but couldn't figure out what to look for in the bug lists. Can anyone else reproduce this? The problem with the loss of your view settings was definitely *not* there in 0.9.3, though I can't say for sure if the sorting problem was there or not, as once I had it sorted correctly, the setting remained and I may never have noticed it. It's pretty annoying, in general. I totally agree, the history function has been totally ignored. I agree with everything you've said. I would be happy if once I got the history window in the ungrouped view and I sort it in the order of last visited, I could come back later on after closing that window and reopen it in the view I left it in, but that sort order does not stay. It is a very useful feature to quickly look where you've been. I do not want to resort it every time! Regards.
Re: History Window: change of view not saved
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (jdavis) wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I totally agree, the history function has been totally ignored. I agree with everything you've said. I would be happy if once I got the history window in the ungrouped view and I sort it in the order of last visited, I could come back later on after closing that window and reopen it in the view I left it in, but that sort order does not stay. It is a very useful feature to quickly look where you've been. I do not want to resort it every time! In 0.9.3 it *did* retain your settings. This is something that was broken somewhere between 0.9.3 and 0.9.6. What version do you have? -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton dfenton at bway dot nethttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
History Window: change of view not saved
OK, I've looked on Google and Bugzilla for this one, too, and didn't find anything. I'm using 0.9.6 on Win95 OSR2. When I open the History window (having it take over part of the browser window is an IE-copycat abomination, of course), and change the view (I hate the IE-derived Grouped view), in Mozilla 0.9.3, this would be saved so that the next time I opened the history window, it would have the same layout as I left it in. But it always opens to the stupid grouped view (which I hate). And when I do get to the ungrouped view (a tabular view, like the Windows Explorer Details view), and try to sort, it takes 3 clicks of the LAST VISITED header to get it sorted right. The first click does nothing noticeable, other than changing the top item in the list to the very last page visited (and the /\ triangle disappears). The second click sorts in date ascending order (i.e., earliest at top of list) and the third click finally gets me to last at top. Something seems to be wrong with the updating of the grid. When I then click the Last Visited header again, it changes the first item to the last item (i.e., the earliest) but leaves everything else the same. In other words, it cycles through almost the same set of 3 views described above (only two of which have any use). I suspect something is screwed up here with the basic widget, but couldn't figure out what to look for in the bug lists. Can anyone else reproduce this? The problem with the loss of your view settings was definitely *not* there in 0.9.3, though I can't say for sure if the sorting problem was there or not, as once I had it sorted correctly, the setting remained and I may never have noticed it. It's pretty annoying, in general. -- David W. Fentonhttp://www.bway.net/~dfenton dfenton at bway dot nethttp://www.bway.net/~dfassoc
History feature isn't quite working right
numeric or alphabetic order it was left in. It keeps reverting to a default. I used to love the history feature in Netscape 4.x. It's almost working now in Mozilla but a little buggy still.
Re: Back history problem with CNN.com
Kin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: N Gilmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in avPz7.182137$[EMAIL PROTECTED]:">news:avPz7.182137$[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Actually, I remember similar sorts of things happening at that site before I discovered that pref...previous builds, I'm guessing circa 0.9.1. 0.9.4 is fine on CNN. Something regressed along the way. Same thing with www.smh.com.au - history problems with 0.9.5 and fine on 0.9.4 ng Yes, the problem is not there with 0.9.4 but appeared during some nighlty builts before 0.9.5 and stick since then. At first I thought it was because I was using the tabs, but even with no tabs it occurs. I do have the user_pref(dom.disable_open_during_load, true); activated but I have it in 0.9.4 at home too and it works fine with CNN. Strangely, Opera 5.12 has similar behaviour on CNN in the last 2 weeks. 5.12 has been around for a few months. ng
Re: Back history problem with CNN.com
0.9.4 is fine on CNN. Something regressed along the way. Same thing with www.smh.com.au - history problems with 0.9.5 and fine on 0.9.4 Yes, the problem is not there with 0.9.4 but appeared during some nighlty builts before 0.9.5 and stick since then. At first I thought it was because I was using the tabs, but even with no tabs it occurs. I do have the user_pref(dom.disable_open_during_load, true); activated but I have it in 0.9.4 at home too and it works fine with CNN. Strangely, Opera 5.12 has similar behaviour on CNN in the last 2 weeks. 5.12 has been around for a few months. Actually, I've been using Opera's 'TP1' (v5.05 I think) release on Linux since shortly after it was publically released and I've been seeing this for much longer than 2 weeks. Hall
Back history problem with CNN.com
Hi, wheenver I go on CNN.com website and click on a link, the BACK button does not light up and I simply cannot browse back to the previous page. That behavior happens on some other webpages too, but it always happens on CNN.com. O rif I visit anotehr web pages, and then go to CNN, check a link and try to browse back, it will bring me back to the other previously visited website. It's like CNN never gets in the history. Is it the same for everyone? I use Mozilla 0.9.5 right now, but the same things happened with nightly builts before and after 0.9.5 thanks -- Kin -Remove NO_SPAM for personal replies- Key Id: 0x47873293
Re: Back history problem with CNN.com
Hi, wheenver I go on CNN.com website and click on a link, the BACK button does not light up and I simply cannot browse back to the previous page. That behavior happens on some other webpages too, but it always happens on CNN.com. O rif I visit anotehr web pages, and then go to CNN, check a link and try to browse back, it will bring me back to the other previously visited website. It's like CNN never gets in the history. Is it the same for everyone? The same thing actually happens to me with Opera. Hitting the 'Back' button does nothing, but hitting the 'Back-drop-down-history' button shows 'past' screens and I'm able to get there that way. So, it doesn't appear to be a Mozilla problem... Works fine with IE 5.5 though. Hall
Re: Back history problem with CNN.com
I get the same thing. cnn doesnt appear in the back button history drop down either. bob Kin wrote: Hi, wheenver I go on CNN.com website and click on a link, the BACK button does not light up and I simply cannot browse back to the previous page. That behavior happens on some other webpages too, but it always happens on CNN.com. O rif I visit anotehr web pages, and then go to CNN, check a link and try to browse back, it will bring me back to the other previously visited website. It's like CNN never gets in the history. Is it the same for everyone? I use Mozilla 0.9.5 right now, but the same things happened with nightly builts before and after 0.9.5 thanks
Re: Back history problem with CNN.com
Bob Davis wrote: I get the same thing. cnn doesnt appear in the back button history drop down either. bob Kin wrote: Hi, wheenver I go on CNN.com website and click on a link, the BACK button does not light up and I simply cannot browse back to the previous page. That behavior happens on some other webpages too, but it always happens on CNN.com. O rif I visit anotehr web pages, and then go to CNN, check a link and try to browse back, it will bring me back to the other previously visited website. It's like CNN never gets in the history. Is it the same for everyone? I use Mozilla 0.9.5 right now, but the same things happened with nightly builts before and after 0.9.5 thanks I was just about to report the same problem Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.5) Gecko/20011011 Try going to some other site before CNN, then go to CNN, then click on a link, hit back, you'll jump back two history entries to the site before you went to CNN.
Re: Back history problem with CNN.com
I wonder if it has anything to do with the user_pref(dom.disable_open_during_load, true); preference and whether a specific url tries to open new windows. I have this preference on. How about you? bob Lucas MacBride wrote: Bob Davis wrote: I get the same thing. cnn doesnt appear in the back button history drop down either. bob Kin wrote: Hi, wheenver I go on CNN.com website and click on a link, the BACK button does not light up and I simply cannot browse back to the previous page. That behavior happens on some other webpages too, but it always happens on CNN.com. O rif I visit anotehr web pages, and then go to CNN, check a link and try to browse back, it will bring me back to the other previously visited website. It's like CNN never gets in the history. Is it the same for everyone? I use Mozilla 0.9.5 right now, but the same things happened with nightly builts before and after 0.9.5 thanks I was just about to report the same problem Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.5) Gecko/20011011 Try going to some other site before CNN, then go to CNN, then click on a link, hit back, you'll jump back two history entries to the site before you went to CNN.
Re: Back history problem with CNN.com
Bob Davis wrote: I wonder if it has anything to do with the user_pref(dom.disable_open_during_load, true); preference and whether a specific url tries to open new windows. I have this preference on. How about you? bob Lucas MacBride wrote: Bob Davis wrote: I get the same thing. cnn doesnt appear in the back button history drop down either. bob Kin wrote: Hi, wheenver I go on CNN.com website and click on a link, the BACK button does not light up and I simply cannot browse back to the previous page. That behavior happens on some other webpages too, but it always happens on CNN.com. O rif I visit anotehr web pages, and then go to CNN, check a link and try to browse back, it will bring me back to the other previously visited website. It's like CNN never gets in the history. Is it the same for everyone? I use Mozilla 0.9.5 right now, but the same things happened with nightly builts before and after 0.9.5 thanks I was just about to report the same problem Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.5) Gecko/20011011 Try going to some other site before CNN, then go to CNN, then click on a link, hit back, you'll jump back two history entries to the site before you went to CNN. Actually, I remember similar sorts of things happening at that site before I discovered that pref...previous builds, I'm guessing circa 0.9.1.
Re: Back history problem with CNN.com
Lucas MacBride [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]:">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: Bob Davis wrote: I wonder if it has anything to do with the user_pref(dom.disable_open_during_load, true); preference and whether a specific url tries to open new windows. I have this preference on. How about you? bob Lucas MacBride wrote: Bob Davis wrote: I get the same thing. cnn doesnt appear in the back button history drop down either. bob Kin wrote: Hi, wheenver I go on CNN.com website and click on a link, the BACK button does not light up and I simply cannot browse back to the previous page. That behavior happens on some other webpages too, but it always happens on CNN.com. O rif I visit anotehr web pages, and then go to CNN, check a link and try to browse back, it will bring me back to the other previously visited website. It's like CNN never gets in the history. Is it the same for everyone? I use Mozilla 0.9.5 right now, but the same things happened with nightly builts before and after 0.9.5 thanks I was just about to report the same problem Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:0.9.5) Gecko/20011011 Try going to some other site before CNN, then go to CNN, then click on a link, hit back, you'll jump back two history entries to the site before you went to CNN. Actually, I remember similar sorts of things happening at that site before I discovered that pref...previous builds, I'm guessing circa 0.9.1. 0.9.4 is fine on CNN. Something regressed along the way. Same thing with www.smh.com.au - history problems with 0.9.5 and fine on 0.9.4 ng
history...
How do you delete history? it's become an extremely tiresome task using TaskTools Delete History. I can't remove the header of the site name, but the inside links. Also, which file stores history?
History?
Help! Ever since I installed Netscape 6.01 I haven't been able to view my previous url history. Is there something I may have missed after the install? There seems to be no place to configure the use of my History File except for the general Preferences, and that only gives me the option of clearing the History / Location Bar. No matter what I do, NOTHING gets put there! Can someone please tell me what to do? TxToast ...why, oh why didn't I just keep communicator:/
Re: History?
TxToast wrote: Help! Ever since I installed Netscape 6.01 I haven't been able to view my previous url history. Is there something I may have missed after the install? There seems to be no place to configure the use of my History File except for the general Preferences, and that only gives me the option of clearing the History / Location Bar. No matter what I do, NOTHING gets put there! Can someone please tell me what to do? TxToast ...why, oh why didn't I just keep communicator:/ Sorry, this is the wrong newsgroup. This place is for the developers and contributors of the Mozilla Open Source Project, (http://www.mozilla.org), not for help with Netscape products. Refer to the following link for a list of Netscape newsgroups, where you will be able to find support: http://help.netscape.com/nuggies/ -- Alex:3)~~ http://www.gerbilbox.com/newzilla/
I want to see HISTORY without having to search
I want to see HISTORY without having to search. I liked (after netscape crashes) I could find what pages I was on by just looking at history. But now I can't look at the history. I can just search it. I can't even search on the date because it doesn't have DATE! Please add full history and the date for each url!
Re: I want to see HISTORY without having to search
See the comments for bug 65862 http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=65862> Gregg wrote: I want to see HISTORY without having to search. I liked (after netscape crashes) I could find what pages I was on by just looking at history. But now I can't look at the history. I can just search it. I can't even search on the date because it doesn't have DATE! Please add full history and the date for each url!
Missing History
Hi, ever since the new "sort by day" history scheme came out, my history won't display anything older than "Today." I think I may have broken it by fooling with the headers and such... anyone else see this?
Re: Idea: Download History log file/button
If there isn't enough support for this feature at mozilla.org (because people want to get a product out... I've heard something about wanting 0.9 to be feature complete?) then you could start a project at mozdev.org. There are a couple other Mozilla projects there. Greg Breland wrote: XUL should really help implement a lot of browser "helper" tools like this. I think just making a download tab on the sidebar that shows all files that are currently being downloaded as well as all files that were downloaded in the past X days would be a great feature. I hate having 4 extra apps in my task bar for file downloads. I think the screen shot from icab look great. Is there already an enhancement bug on this? There has been a Download Manager in the Mac version of IE since version 4.0, or maybe even earlier. Other browsers I've used with a "download history"/"download manager" include iCab and Opera. Take a look at the existing implementations, and see what you like and don't like... -- Orrin Edenfield [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://orrinrule.com
RE: Idea: Download History log file/button
XUL should really help implement a lot of browser "helper" tools like this. I think just making a download tab on the sidebar that shows all files that are currently being downloaded as well as all files that were downloaded in the past X days would be a great feature. I hate having 4 extra apps in my task bar for file downloads. I think the screen shot from icab look great. Is there already an enhancement bug on this? There has been a Download Manager in the Mac version of IE since version 4.0, or maybe even earlier. Other browsers I've used with a "download history"/"download manager" include iCab and Opera. Take a look at the existing implementations, and see what you like and don't like...
Re: Idea: Download History log file/button
Thanks for you message and the URLs. VERY nice. I had no idea about IE for Mac since I use Windows, OS/2,Linux, FreeBSD, solaris, but not mac. :-) The big question is: anyone cares to include such a download manager, like the simple "download history" one I suggested, into Mozilla? I don't care about "current downloads" (that's what download-status windows are for). What I'd like most would be this list of previous downloads. Regards Fernando Buenos Aires, Argentina Nicholas Riley wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Fernando Cassia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyway... if anyone is interested in implementing this idea, hurry up, because I'm sure there are M$ munchkins regularly monitoring this newsgroup. I'd hate to see this implemented in M$ IE v99.x and hyped as the "biggest invention since sliced bread". There has been a Download Manager in the Mac version of IE since version 4.0, or maybe even earlier. Other browsers I've used with a "download history"/"download manager" include iCab and Opera. Take a look at the existing implementations, and see what you like and don't like... http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/ie/ http://www.icab.de/ http://www.opera.com/ If you don't have access to any of these, the following may give you an idea: http://web.sabi.net/screenshots/dm/ -- Nicholas Riley njriley@uiuc edu
Re: Idea: Download History log file/button
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Fernando Cassia [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Anyway... if anyone is interested in implementing this idea, hurry up, because I'm sure there are M$ munchkins regularly monitoring this newsgroup. I'd hate to see this implemented in M$ IE v99.x and hyped as the "biggest invention since sliced bread". There has been a Download Manager in the Mac version of IE since version 4.0, or maybe even earlier. Other browsers I've used with a "download history"/"download manager" include iCab and Opera. Take a look at the existing implementations, and see what you like and don't like... http://www.microsoft.com/mac/products/ie/ http://www.icab.de/ http://www.opera.com/ If you don't have access to any of these, the following may give you an idea: http://web.sabi.net/screenshots/dm/ -- Nicholas Riley njriley@uiuc edu
Bug for URL history
I submitted a bug for the URL history. Does anyone want to varify/vote for this, I'm not sure what needs to be done after it's submitted to be recognized as a bug. http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69265
Re: Netscape History Question:PS
Duke Ellington wrote: In netscape.public.mozilla.general the people heard Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. say these wise words: That was during the days when you paid for the product. (Back before MicroSoft decided to give IE away so they could Bankrupt Netscape and get rid of the competion. It almost worked). Anyway I paid $49.995 for a CD-ROM Disk with Netscape Naviagtor 3.0.4 Gold, on it. So, did "Gold" refer not to the quality of code but instead was only used as a branding factor? seeya. The Duke -- "A life? Sounds great! Do you know where I could download one?" Could be. But I believe it was a reference to "Deluxe" features such as Composer. -- -- Phillip M. Jones, CET |MEMBER:VPEA (LIFE) ETA-I, NESDA,ISCET, Sterling 616 Liberty Street|Who's Who. PHONE:540-632-5045, FAX:540-632-0868 Martinsville Va 24112-1809|[EMAIL PROTECTED], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet -- If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!
Re: Netscape History Question:PS
Chuck Simmons wrote: Duke Ellington wrote: In netscape.public.mozilla.general the people heard Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. say these wise words: That was during the days when you paid for the product. (Back before MicroSoft decided to give IE away so they could Bankrupt Netscape and get rid of the competion. It almost worked). Anyway I paid $49.995 for a CD-ROM Disk with Netscape Naviagtor 3.0.4 Gold, on it. So, did "Gold" refer not to the quality of code but instead was only used as a branding factor? seeya. The Duke 3.0x did not have an HTML editor (the Composer function in Communicator). 3.0x Gold had an HTML editor included, That was the only difference. Chuck -- ... The times have been, That, when the brains were out, the man would die. ... Macbeth Chuck Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED] Notice I said 3.0.4a Gold. "No version of 3 had Composer until 3.0.4.a Gold. As I have previously said I have all versions of netscape since 3.0.1. Signed up to my current ISP and started using a Supra FaxModem288 at that time. If I had signed up a Month earlier I could have used 3.0. BTW: MY ISP Supplied me with my First Netscape CD. -- -- Phillip M. Jones, CET |MEMBER:VPEA (LIFE) ETA-I, NESDA,ISCET, Sterling 616 Liberty Street|Who's Who. PHONE:540-632-5045, FAX:540-632-0868 Martinsville Va 24112-1809|[EMAIL PROTECTED], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet -- If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!
Re: Netscape History Question
That was the first version that offerred a 128 version. I know because I have kept up with every version since Navigator 3.0.1 through Communicator 4.7.6 (mac). To get 128 bit version you had to fill out a form with you name email and you had to click on check box swearing you were a US citzen under penalty of law. Supposedly the Federal G-Men could come to your house and throw you in Federal prision if you were not to be a citizen. You you could get the regular version and then use the utility Fortify from fortify.net to convert it to 128 bit. Daniel Veditz wrote: That doesn't seem right, we had segregated US vs. Export versions prior to 4.05 and the only reason for that would be cryptographic strength. -Dan Veditz "Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." wrote: Communicator 4.0.5 Casey Morton wrote: Does anyone know what the earliest version of Netscape was that offered 128 bit SSL? Casey Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- Phillip M. Jones, CET |MEMBER:VPEA (LIFE) ETA-I, NESDA,ISCET, Sterling 616 Liberty Street|Who's Who. PHONE:540-632-5045, FAX:540-632-0868 Martinsville Va 24112-1809|[EMAIL PROTECTED], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet -- If it's "fixed", don't "break it"! -- -- Phillip M. Jones, CET |MEMBER:VPEA (LIFE) ETA-I, NESDA,ISCET, Sterling 616 Liberty Street|Who's Who. PHONE:540-632-5045, FAX:540-632-0868 Martinsville Va 24112-1809|[EMAIL PROTECTED], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet -- If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!
Re: Netscape History Question
OK, thanks for the info. Now, next question: What is the earliest version of MSIE to incorporate 128-bit SSL as well? (I know im in the weong group for this question) "Chuck Simmons" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message [EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]... Daniel Veditz wrote: That doesn't seem right, we had segregated US vs. Export versions prior to 4.05 and the only reason for that would be cryptographic strength. -Dan Veditz "Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." wrote: Communicator 4.0.5 Casey Morton wrote: Does anyone know what the earliest version of Netscape was that offered 128 bit SSL? Casey Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] I thought that 1.1 had 128 bit because there was segregation then. 2.0 for sure had 128 bit. If I recall, some of the 4.0 betas had 156 bit. Chuck -- ... The times have been, That, when the brains were out, the man would die. ... Macbeth Chuck Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Netscape History Question
Chuck Simmons wrote: Daniel Veditz wrote: That doesn't seem right, we had segregated US vs. Export versions prior to 4.05 and the only reason for that would be cryptographic strength. -Dan Veditz "Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." wrote: Communicator 4.0.5 Casey Morton wrote: Does anyone know what the earliest version of Netscape was that offered 128 bit SSL? Casey Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] I thought that 1.1 had 128 bit because there was segregation then. 2.0 for sure had 128 bit. If I recall, some of the 4.0 betas had 156 bit. Chuck -- ... The times have been, That, when the brains were out, the man would die. ... Macbeth Chuck Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED] 156 bit has only been around since 4.5 at which time the necessity of swearing an oath of US citizenship was dropped. -- -- Phillip M. Jones, CET |MEMBER:VPEA (LIFE) ETA-I, NESDA,ISCET, Sterling 616 Liberty Street|Who's Who. PHONE:540-632-5045, FAX:540-632-0868 Martinsville Va 24112-1809|[EMAIL PROTECTED], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet -- If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!
Re: Netscape History Question:PS
That was the actual version Name of the First Netscape Product that had the Composer module. (The first time you could send mai with html). That was during the days when you paid for the product. (Back before MicroSoft decided to give IE away so they could Bankrupt Netscape and get rid of the competion. It almost worked). Anyway I paid $49.995 for a CD-ROM Disk with Netscape Naviagtor 3.0.4 Gold, on it. Duke Ellington wrote: In netscape.public.mozilla.general the people heard Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. say these wise words: PS: SSL itself First appeared with advent of Navigator 3.0.4a (Gold). Do you think that we'll ever see another "Gold" version of Netscape released? Personally, I certainly hope so - I'm really sick of buggy browsers! seeya. The Duke -- Religious Fundamentalism is what folk resort to practising when they feel that they are no longer in control of what is going on around them and they feel the need to promote their own sense of orthodoxy. -- -- Phillip M. Jones, CET |MEMBER:VPEA (LIFE) ETA-I, NESDA,ISCET, Sterling 616 Liberty Street|Who's Who. PHONE:540-632-5045, FAX:540-632-0868 Martinsville Va 24112-1809|[EMAIL PROTECTED], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet -- If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!
Re: Netscape History Question:PS
Duke Ellington wrote: In netscape.public.mozilla.general the people heard Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T. say these wise words: That was during the days when you paid for the product. (Back before MicroSoft decided to give IE away so they could Bankrupt Netscape and get rid of the competion. It almost worked). Anyway I paid $49.995 for a CD-ROM Disk with Netscape Naviagtor 3.0.4 Gold, on it. So, did "Gold" refer not to the quality of code but instead was only used as a branding factor? seeya. The Duke 3.0x did not have an HTML editor (the Composer function in Communicator). 3.0x Gold had an HTML editor included, That was the only difference. Chuck -- ... The times have been, That, when the brains were out, the man would die. ... Macbeth Chuck Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Netscape History Question
Does anyone know what the earliest version of Netscape was that offered 128 bit SSL? Casey Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Netscape History Question
That doesn't seem right, we had segregated US vs. Export versions prior to 4.05 and the only reason for that would be cryptographic strength. -Dan Veditz "Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." wrote: Communicator 4.0.5 Casey Morton wrote: Does anyone know what the earliest version of Netscape was that offered 128 bit SSL? Casey Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- -- Phillip M. Jones, CET |MEMBER:VPEA (LIFE) ETA-I, NESDA,ISCET, Sterling 616 Liberty Street|Who's Who. PHONE:540-632-5045, FAX:540-632-0868 Martinsville Va 24112-1809|[EMAIL PROTECTED], ICQ11269732, AIM pjonescet -- If it's "fixed", don't "break it"!
Re: Netscape History Question
Daniel Veditz wrote: That doesn't seem right, we had segregated US vs. Export versions prior to 4.05 and the only reason for that would be cryptographic strength. -Dan Veditz "Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T." wrote: Communicator 4.0.5 Casey Morton wrote: Does anyone know what the earliest version of Netscape was that offered 128 bit SSL? Casey Morton [EMAIL PROTECTED] I thought that 1.1 had 128 bit because there was segregation then. 2.0 for sure had 128 bit. If I recall, some of the 4.0 betas had 156 bit. Chuck -- ... The times have been, That, when the brains were out, the man would die. ... Macbeth Chuck Simmons [EMAIL PROTECTED]
