From: Digest To: "OS/2GenAu Digest" Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 00:01:09 EST-10EDT,10,-1,0,7200,3,-1,0,7200,3600 Subject: [os2genau_digest] No. 879 Reply-To: X-List-Unsubscribe: www.os2site.com/list/ ************************************************** Monday 28 June 2004 Number 879 ************************************************** Subjects for today 1 Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla : freiherr at earthlink dot net 2 Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla : Ed Durrant 3 Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla : Mark Dodel" 4 Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla : John Angelico" 5 Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla : Kris Steenhaut 6 Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla : Kris Steenhaut 7 Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla : John Angelico" 8 Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla : Kris Steenhaut 9 Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla : John Angelico" 10 Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla : David Forrester" 11 Most stable Browser ? : Ed Durrant 12 Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla : John Angelico" 13 Re: Most stable Browser ? : John Angelico" **= Email 1 ==========================** Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 09:18:55 -0400 From: freiherr at earthlink dot net Subject: Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla On 06/27/04 at 09:58 AM, "Mark Dodel" wrote: > Please don't announce it anywhere else. Umm, isn't a bit too late for that admonition? Regards, Eric Schilke Copyright (c) 2004. All rights reserved. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 2 ==========================** Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 07:01:11 +1000 From: Ed Durrant Subject: Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla Hi Mark, You have confirmed my suspecions ! I did not announce it here or elsewhere - I have been simply querying what it was and who it actually came from. Cheers/2 Ed. Mark Dodel wrote: > In <40DEAA56.AD436AE6 at bigpond dot net dot au>, on 06/27/04 at 09:07 PM, > Ed Durrant said: > > > Yes a couple of other people have referenced this corespondance, so I > >guess Macromedia have no problems with someone porting it - and it does > >seem to work very well from my trials, however since the plugin reports > >itself as being fromInnotek, it seems strange that the code is coming > >from a russian eComstation site, rather than Innoteks own site in > >Germany. > > It is a leaked drop of an internal development version from Innotek. This > is not a legal release of Flash for OS/2. It was not intended for public > release. I know this because I asked Innotek. Please don't announce it > anywhere else. > > Mark > > -- > > From the eComStation Desktop of: Mark Dodel > > Warpstock 2004, Denver, Colorado, October 21 - 24, 2004 http://www.warpstock dot org > Warpstock Europe 2004, Arnhem, The Netherlands, November 26-28th, 2004 http://www.warpstock dot net > > For a choice in the future of personal computing, Join VOICE - http://www.os2voice dot org > > "The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That in it's essence, is Fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Message proposing the Monopoly Investigation, 1938 > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 3 ==========================** Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2004 21:15:17 -0300 From: "Mark Dodel" Subject: Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla In <40DF3597.4420174D at bigpond dot net dot au>, on 06/28/04 at 07:01 AM, Ed Durrant said: > You have confirmed my suspecions ! I did not announce it here or >elsewhere - I have been simply querying what it was and who it actually >came from. Sorry, I was directing that to everyone on this list, not you Ed. Since its on a .ru site I don't think Innotek can do much to stop it, they just would prefer to keep the damage controlled, as it contains Macromedia copyrighted material. People will do what they will, but since Innotek is still trying to get it released legally, it would help if the illegal version wasn't spread around. Mark -- From the eComStation Desktop of: Mark Dodel Warpstock 2004, Denver, Colorado, October 21 - 24, 2004 http://www.warpstock dot org Warpstock Europe 2004, Arnhem, The Netherlands, November 26-28th, 2004 http://www.warpstock dot net For a choice in the future of personal computing, Join VOICE - http://www.os2voice dot org "The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That in it's essence, is Fascism - ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power." Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Message proposing the Monopoly Investigation, 1938 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 4 ==========================** Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 13:04:16 +1000 (AEST) From: "John Angelico" Subject: Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla On Sun, 27 Jun 2004 21:15:17 -0300, Mark Dodel wrote: Hi Mark and Ed. >In <40DF3597.4420174D at bigpond dot net dot au>, on 06/28/04 at 07:01 AM, > Ed Durrant said: > >> You have confirmed my suspecions ! I did not announce it here or >>elsewhere - I have been simply querying what it was and who it actually >>came from. Thanks both of you for the advice and caution. > >Sorry, I was directing that to everyone on this list, not you Ed. Since >its on a .ru site I don't think Innotek can do much to stop it, they just >would prefer to keep the damage controlled, as it contains Macromedia >copyrighted material. People will do what they will, but since Innotek is >still trying to get it released legally, it would help if the illegal >version wasn't spread around. That will be helped by the fact that a) some Firefox/Mozilla can't see the "new" version I tried but failed to get it going here, and will stop now. b) some report no difference anyway ie. the sites they are visiting don't yet use Flash past our level 5. I responded to the original request for feedback, supporting the idea of Innotek proceeding, with a comment that it may not be much of an issue now but it will become a bigger "problem" in the future. In a perverse way, the existence of a leaked update is good news - it confirms the Innotek statement that it is not holding back, and it shows that *someone* is actually working on something... Best regards John Angelico OS/2 SIG os2 at melbpc dot org dot au or talldad at kepl dot com dot au ___________________ PMTagline v1.50 - Copyright, 1996-1997, Stephen Berg and John Angelico .... Success comes to those who practice. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 5 ==========================** Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 07:55:02 +0200 From: Kris Steenhaut Subject: Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla Mark Dodel schreef: >would prefer to keep the damage controlled, as it contains Macromedia >copyrighted material. People will do what they will, but since Innotek is >still trying to get it released legally, > It more looks like they were trying very hard not to release. > it would help if the illegal >version wasn't spread around. > > > It certainly wouldn't help us. -- Groeten uit Gent, Kris ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 6 ==========================** Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 07:56:30 +0200 From: Kris Steenhaut Subject: Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla John Angelico schreef: >In a perverse way, the existence of a leaked update is good news - it >confirms the Innotek statement that it is not holding back, > It rather seems to me they were holding it back. -- Groeten uit Gent, Kris ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 7 ==========================** Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 19:38:52 +1000 (AEST) From: "John Angelico" Subject: Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 07:56:30 +0200, Kris Steenhaut wrote: Hi Kris. >John Angelico schreef: > >>In a perverse way, the existence of a leaked update is good news - it >>confirms the Innotek statement that it is not holding back, >> >It rather seems to me they were holding it back. Well, it's hard to know. My experience (as reported) is that it failed to install, and then failed to work as designed. Others had better fortune and got it going. The overall result is that I would call it not ready for release - not really even alpha. So I would find it hard at this stage to accuse them of holding back. As the Scots would say "Not Proven" (neither Not Guilty nor Guilty, but in between and open for more evidence to be brought). Best regards John Angelico OS/2 SIG os2 at melbpc dot org dot au or talldad at kepl dot com dot au ___________________ PMTagline v1.50 - Copyright, 1996-1997, Stephen Berg and John Angelico .... The Success Escalator is still under construction. Please use the stairs. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 8 ==========================** Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 12:00:41 +0200 From: Kris Steenhaut Subject: Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla John Angelico schreef: >On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 07:56:30 +0200, Kris Steenhaut wrote: > >Hi Kris. > > > > >>John Angelico schreef: >> >> >> >>>In a perverse way, the existence of a leaked update is good news - it >>>confirms the Innotek statement that it is not holding back, >>> >>> >>> >>It rather seems to me they were holding it back. >> >> > >Well, it's hard to know. > >My experience (as reported) is that it failed to install, > Do you have the entry SET MOZ_PLUGIN_PATH= in the config? -- Groeten uit Gent, Kris ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 9 ==========================** Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 20:12:40 +1000 (AEST) From: "John Angelico" Subject: Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 12:00:41 +0200, Kris Steenhaut wrote: Hi Kris > > >John Angelico schreef: > >>On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 07:56:30 +0200, Kris Steenhaut wrote: >> >>Hi Kris. >> >> >> >> >>>John Angelico schreef: >>> >>> >>> >>>>In a perverse way, the existence of a leaked update is good news - it >>>>confirms the Innotek statement that it is not holding back, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>It rather seems to me they were holding it back. >>> >>> >> >>Well, it's hard to know. >> >>My experience (as reported) is that it failed to install, >> >Do you have the entry > >SET MOZ_PLUGIN_PATH= Yes. I have just tried again, without success, on a site that asks for the latest version of Flash (doesn't use it much but...). I am now uninstalling the new one and re-installing Flash 5. Best regards John Angelico OS/2 SIG os2 at melbpc dot org dot au or talldad at kepl dot com dot au ___________________ PMTagline v1.50 - Copyright, 1996-1997, Stephen Berg and John Angelico .... OXYMORON #575: Computer security ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 10 ==========================** Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 21:24:54 +1000 (EST) From: "David Forrester" Subject: Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 19:38:52 +1000 (AEST), John Angelico wrote: > >My experience (as reported) is that it failed to install, and then failed to >work as designed. Others had better fortune and got it going. The overall >result is that I would call it not ready for release - not really even alpha. > It seems to be working well here. The only problem seems to be sound. But, I suspect that might be the UniAud drivers and my soundcard. Unfortunately, it seems that all the Innotek ports have problems on different machines. I've seen reports of problems with Java, OO and Acrobat (though this seems to be the least problematic). From what I see of this, it is well past alpha stage. Hmm, do you have the other ports and ODIN installed and working? -- David Forrester davidfor at internode.on dot net http://www.os2world dot com/djfos2/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 11 ==========================** Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 22:05:34 +1000 From: Ed Durrant Subject: Most stable Browser ? Hi, I've been impressed with the latest version of the IBM Web Browser (v 2.0.3), having used various versions of Mozilla (alpha, beta and GA), it's a relief to get back to a browser that doesn't hang up, hang the system, refuse to even attempt to display a page or has to be killed to end it's operation. I'm actually seriously considering changing my default browser from Netscape 4.61 to IWB 2.0.3. I wonder what other people's experiences have been. I haven't tried the separated out Firebird browser, is it more or less stable than the complete Mozilla package ?? Cheers/2 Ed. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 12 ==========================** Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 23:19:26 +1000 (AEST) From: "John Angelico" Subject: Re: Flash 7a for Mozilla On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 21:24:54 +1000 (EST), David Forrester wrote: Hi David. >On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 19:38:52 +1000 (AEST), John Angelico wrote: > >> >>My experience (as reported) is that it failed to install, and then failed to >>work as designed. Others had better fortune and got it going. The overall >>result is that I would call it not ready for release - not really even alpha. >> > >It seems to be working well here. Good-oh. That's what I said - some people are fine! >The only problem seems to be sound. >But, I suspect that might be the UniAud drivers and my soundcard. We boring accountants are not bothered by this class of problem. >Unfortunately, it seems that all the Innotek ports have problems on >different machines. I've seen reports of problems with Java, OO and >Acrobat (though this seems to be the least problematic). From what I >see of this, it is well past alpha stage. Ah, fair comment then, I must be not hearing of those successes. Old jungle saying: Bad news travel fast! > >Hmm, do you have the other ports and ODIN installed and working? No, since I am using GSView rather than Acrobat, and I don't knowingly use ODIN.... very little in Windows; almost no installs. Java problems have only been evident in the browser (Firefox 0.8, mostly fixed now in 0.9). I have only one residual problem in browser printing, which seems to be related to sites rather than the browser itself. If anyone would like to go to http://www.rba.gov.au/Statistics/exchange_rates.html and try a) print the viewed page with menu, Print Preview or Ctrl-P b) select the print-friendly version (opens a new browser window) and print that then I would be interested to know what browser and version actually prints successfully, without closing down competely. Best regards John Angelico OS/2 SIG os2 at melbpc dot org dot au or talldad at kepl dot com dot au ___________________ PMTagline v1.50 - Copyright, 1996-1997, Stephen Berg and John Angelico .... Sure wish I could throw away this old boomerang! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- **= Email 13 ==========================** Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 23:21:43 +1000 (AEST) From: "John Angelico" Subject: Re: Most stable Browser ? On Mon, 28 Jun 2004 22:05:34 +1000, Ed Durrant wrote: >Hi, Hi Ed. > > I've been impressed with the latest version of the IBM >Web Browser (v 2.0.3), having used various versions of >Mozilla (alpha, beta and GA), it's a relief to get back to a >browser that doesn't hang up, hang the system, refuse to >even attempt to display a page or has to be killed to end >it's operation. > > I'm actually seriously considering changing my default >browser from Netscape 4.61 to IWB 2.0.3. I managedthat rite of passage when Phoenix 0.6 was released. *However*, NS4.61 is still here and used for a secure logon for credit card merchant transactions. I may have mentioned here a few times that all the new browsers handle form-filling very differently to NS4.61. Therefore I retain it to go with our nifty rexx program to spit credit card data into the form for online processing. As well as that I retain Webex 1.1h to run with HTML-Ed 0.96 for building, maintaining and testing web pages. > I wonder what other people's experiences have been. I >haven't tried the separated out Firebird browser, is it more >or less stable than the complete Mozilla package ?? Can't compare the two, since they feed off the same sources I believe. I might expect the full IBM/Mozilla to be somewhat less stable only on the presumption that more code = more complexity = more likelihood of points of failure. But Firefox 0.9 is very good, has fixed the Java/Javascript problems from 0.8 which annoyed me to blazes, and is very nifty. It is almost at the stage where one may apply the Jeeves sobriquet "At your service, sir! We endeavour to give satisfaction!" However, see my other reply re Flash 7a to see my one remaining irritant - to do with printing. Best regards John Angelico OS/2 SIG os2 at melbpc dot org dot au or talldad at kepl dot com dot au ___________________ PMTagline v1.50 - Copyright, 1996-1997, Stephen Berg and John Angelico .... WHO said Windows was a Power Tool??? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------