On 2006-03-17 at 18:20 -0600, Jeremy Weathers wrote:
> I've used a webmail app that has a popup for checking for new mail
> every n minutes and sounding an alert if new mail has arrived. When
> I was using it, I closed the main window completely and left the
> popup in the background.
On 2006-03-1
what about web-based IM clients? until someone sells enough souls to
break through my uni's fuckhead-wall, we're going to like them. and
what's with the lack of mac-friendly versions?
fuckers
On 3/18/06, Smylers wrote:
Phil Pennock writes:
> Is there any legitimate use for popups which remain
Phil Pennock writes:
> Is there any legitimate use for popups which remain popped up when the
> page which triggered them changes URL?
At work I use a site which displays the real-time running times of buses
from the stop just outside our office. It offers these in a small
pop-up window, which I
Is there any legitimate use for popups which remain popped up
when the page which triggered them changes URL?
I've used a webmail app that has a popup for checking for new mail
every n minutes and sounding an alert if new mail has arrived. When
I was using it, I closed the main window completely
On 2006-03-16 at 17:56 +, Simon Wilcox wrote:
> I've seen sites that are using regular links, like wot you would really
> want to click on, to trigger a pop-under as you head off to the next page.
Is there any legitimate use for popups which remain popped up when the
page which triggered them
> By "click on" I mean "mouse down and mouse up at the same point", like
> what you do when you click on a link. Selecting text is completely
> different. It's "mouse down, move, mouse up".
Double-click selects a word. Click and shift-click select a range of text.
Idly
Double-click selects a w
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, David Cantrell wrote:
> By "click on" I mean "mouse down and mouse up at the same point", like
> what you do when you click on a link. Selecting text is completely
> different. It's "mouse down, move, mouse up".
I've seen sites that are using regular links, like wot you wou
On Thu, Mar 16, 2006 at 01:49:35AM +0100, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> * David Cantrell [2006-03-15 20:10]:
> >You mean that something pops up when you click on something?
> >That's precisely what my cunning plan would permit.
> Well, there are popups which exploit that, so an idle click on a
> page (say
* David Cantrell [2006-03-15 20:10]:
>You mean that something pops up when you click on something?
>That's precisely what my cunning plan would permit.
Well, there are popups which exploit that, so an idle click on a
page (say, to select some text) will bring up an ad.
Regards,
--
Aristotle Pag
On Tue, Mar 14, 2006 at 08:41:47PM +0100, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> * David Cantrell [2006-03-14 11:50]:
> >On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 01:07:17PM +0100, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> >> That is a fine theory, except so many webapps would cease to
> >> work (yes, they're hateful; no, that doesn't mean Firefox can
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 03:44:12PM +0100, Philip Newton wrote:
> On 3/11/06, Chris Devers wrote:
> > Why can't we (as users, as developers, whatever) tell
> > the browser to direct new windows into tabs in the current window?
>
> Because then you get what I had for a while: a popup opening in a n
* David Cantrell [2006-03-14 11:50]:
>On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 01:07:17PM +0100, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
>> * David Cantrell [2006-03-13 12:55]:
>> > Creating a new window under any other circumstance is WRONG.
>> That is a fine theory, except so many webapps would cease to
>> work (yes, they're hatef
On Mon, Mar 13, 2006 at 01:07:17PM +0100, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> * David Cantrell [2006-03-13 12:55]:
> > Creating a new window under any other circumstance is WRONG.
> That is a fine theory, except so many webapps would cease to work
> (yes, they're hateful; no, that doesn't mean Firefox can ignor
Hi David,
* David Champion [2006-03-13 18:55]:
>* On 2006.03.13, in <20060313163617.gd9...@klangraum>,
>> Hidden pref in Firefox lingo just means a setting for which
>> there's no particular UI. You get at those using
>> `about:config`, which is standard across all platforms -- no
>> need to pani
* On 2006.03.13, in <20060313163617.gd9...@klangraum>,
* "A. Pagaltzis" wrote:
> * David Champion [2006-03-13 17:25]:
> >Hidden? No, thanks. Nobody should need any special
> >command-line voodoo (that's likely to change from one supported
> >platform to another) to enable basic features,
* David Champion [2006-03-13 17:25]:
>Hidden? No, thanks. Nobody should need any special
>command-line voodoo (that's likely to change from one supported
>platform to another) to enable basic features, regardless of how
>"this can break things if your brain shuts down" they are.
Hidden pref in
> Because then you get what I had for a while: a popup opening in a new
> tab. Which the application then attempts to resize
HATE of the day ... browsers where disabling "resize window" doesn't keep
pages from resizing the window.
> I hadn't thought of that before, but you're right -- all the platforms
> that Firefox runs on are multi-user by now, so why does it feel the need
> to duplicate that functionality?
I think of it as "alternate setups", and it'd probably take more time to
dyke out than leave in..
And on Window
* On 2006.03.13, in <20060313120717.gm2...@klangraum>,
* "A. Pagaltzis" wrote:
> * David Cantrell [2006-03-13 12:55]:
> >Creating a new window under any other circumstance is WRONG.
>
> That is a fine theory, except so many webapps would cease to work
Well, yes. That happens if I change
* Philip Newton [2006-03-13 15:45]:
>Because then you get what I had for a while: a popup opening in
>a new tab. Which the application then attempts to resize
>(thinking that the popup is in a window of its own), resulting
>in my entire browser window (including all tabs) suddenly
>shrinking to po
Philip Newton wrote:
Because then you get what I had for a while: a popup opening in a new
tab. Which the application then attempts to resize (thinking that the
popup is in a window of its own), resulting in my entire browser
window (including all tabs) suddenly shrinking to postage stamp size,
On 3/11/06, Chris Devers wrote:
Why can't we (as users, as developers, whatever) tell
the browser to direct new windows into tabs in the current window?
Because then you get what I had for a while: a popup opening in a new
tab. Which the application then attempts to resize (thinking that the
p
On Mon, 13 Mar 2006, David Cantrell wrote:
> And fuck all that stupid "user profile" shit too.
I hadn't thought of that before, but you're right -- all the platforms
that Firefox runs on are multi-user by now, so why does it feel the need
to duplicate that functionality?
At best it's redundan
* David Cantrell [2006-03-13 12:55]:
>Creating a new window under any other circumstance is WRONG.
That is a fine theory, except so many webapps would cease to work
(yes, they're hateful; no, that doesn't mean Firefox can ignore
them) that the popup blocking setting would have to be considered
ha
On Fri, Mar 10, 2006 at 08:01:48PM -0500, Michael Leuchtenburg wrote:
> On a lot of sites, the designers use multiple methods to get around all
> the various methods of blocking popups. So, if Firefox blocks one of the
> methods, but not all of them, then it'll see - and block - some popups,
> but
A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> * Peter da Silva [2006-03-12 11:05]:
>>> There have been more and more sites using flash to bypass the
>>> Firefox pop-up blocking;
>> Aha! That's why I don't see this, because flashblock keeps the
>> secret flash from running!
>
> Some sites also use `onmousedown` or other
* Peter da Silva [2006-03-12 11:05]:
>>There have been more and more sites using flash to bypass the
>>Firefox pop-up blocking;
>
>Aha! That's why I don't see this, because flashblock keeps the
>secret flash from running!
Some sites also use `onmousedown` or other such events to show
popups, beca
There have been more and more sites using flash to bypass the Firefox
pop-up blocking;
Aha! That's why I don't see this, because flashblock keeps the secret
flash from running!
On 2006-03-10 at 23:26 -0500, Chris Devers wrote:
> Where are you supposed to turn if you just don't EVER want a web page to
> open new content in a new window?
Round and round in a tight circle?
Not defending Mozilla, but since people are complaining, there's a
chance that they want to know ho
On Mar 10, 2006, at 10:26 PM, Chris Devers wrote:
Where are you supposed to turn if you just don't EVER want a web page
to
open new content in a new window?
Camino and Camioptions.
[] Always re-use active window
[] Block if link will open a new window
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006, Martin Ebourne wrote:
> I've used Galeon for ages (Mozilla based GNOME browser). I have "Open
> new windows in tabs set". I've never seen any window or popup open
> anywhere except in a tab by the one I'm currently in. It even groups the
> tabs nicely for me.
My Firefox 1.5.0
On Sat, 11 Mar 2006, Martin Ebourne wrote:
> I've used Galeon for ages (Mozilla based GNOME browser). I have "Open
> new windows in tabs set". I've never seen any window or popup open
> anywhere except in a tab by the one I'm currently in. It even groups
> the tabs nicely for me.
>
> This prob
On Fri, 2006-03-10 at 23:26 -0500, Chris Devers wrote:
> Where are you supposed to turn if you just don't EVER want a web page to
> open new content in a new window?
>
> Some web applications depend on having multiple windows open, but in
> almost every case I'd prefer one window with multiple
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, Jason Diamond wrote:
> Why do you care how windows open for people other than yourself?
Because the web applications I have to use every day aren't tested
against Firefox, so Greasemonkey doesn't help me.
:-/
But really, I don't get why we don't have a way to script this k
On 3/10/06, Chris Devers wrote:
I seem to remember a Firefox plugin that did this, but that doesn't
count, on grounds that nearly no one is using it, so web developers
can't be expected to depend on it being available. If mainline Firefox
(or one of the modern peers to it) supported scripting ta
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006, Michael Leuchtenburg wrote:
> On a lot of sites, the designers use multiple methods to get around
> all the various methods of blocking popups. So, if Firefox blocks one
> of the methods, but not all of them, then it'll see - and block - some
> popups, but others will get t
Spake Abigail:
> My hate isn't so much that it doesn't prevent a popup, my hate
> is that it proudly exclaims it prevented a popup when it didn't.
>
> Now, if you can detect there was a popup, you should be able to
> prevent it, shouldn't you?
On a lot of sites, the designers use multiple method
* Chris Nandor [2006-03-11 01:55]:
>Why is it that the biggest killer app of the Internet has, for
>more than a decade, been a big steaming pile of crap? OK, I
>admit it is better now that it was five years ago. Maybe it
>will be better still in another five, but I won't hold my
>breath...
Just
* Abigail [2006-03-11 01:45]:
>My hate isn't so much that it doesn't prevent a popup, my hate
>is that it proudly exclaims it prevented a popup when it didn't.
>
>Now, if you can detect there was a popup, you should be able to
>prevent it, shouldn't you?
Depends on how the popup is written; it ma
At 0:31 +0100 2006.03.11, Abigail wrote:
>So, you're the son of the son of the son of Mosaic, and half the geeks
>think you're the best thing since sliced bread. And you're supposed to
>be able to surpress popups - a feat you display prominently each and
>every time *you display a popup*.
>
>Not on
On Sat, Mar 11, 2006 at 01:25:46AM +0100, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> * Abigail [2006-03-11 00:35]:
> >And you're supposed to be able to surpress popups - a feat you
> >display prominently each and every time *you display a popup*.
>
> I find the blocker does work, but is not airtight. Unfortunately
>
* Abigail [2006-03-11 00:35]:
>And you're supposed to be able to surpress popups - a feat you
>display prominently each and every time *you display a popup*.
I find the blocker does work, but is not airtight. Unfortunately
marketers live in an alternate reality in which pissing me off by
overstep
Abigail skribis 2006-03-11 0:31 (+0100):
> Too bad Internet Explorer doesn't run on Linux.
Does too, with wine.
Juerd
--
http://convolution.nl/maak_juerd_blij.html
http://convolution.nl/make_juerd_happy.html
http://convolution.nl/gajigu_juerd_n.html
So, you're the son of the son of the son of Mosaic, and half the geeks
think you're the best thing since sliced bread. And you're supposed to
be able to surpress popups - a feat you display prominently each and
every time *you display a popup*.
Not only do you annoy me with the popups, you also li
44 matches
Mail list logo
