Search Results

Search found 13705 results on 549 pages for 'out of browser'.

Page 104/549 | < Previous Page | 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111  | Next Page >

  • How to install Tor (Web Browser) in Ubuntu 12.10?

    - by Zignd
    I would like to install the Tor, but I'm having some problems. I know that someone will say "This question is a exactly duplication of How to install tor?", but it's not, because the another question can not be applied to Ubuntu 12.10 as the deb command is not available anymore. I did a research and even at the Tor's Official Website the available resource can not be applied to Ubuntu 12.10. I tried to use the deb command (as the above question says: deb http://deb.torproject.org/torproject.org <DISTRIBUTION> main) and the Terminal says deb: command not found and when I try to install it says E: Unable to locate package deb. I've also tried to use the ppa: ubun-tor, but it's not compatible with Quantal Quetzal, because it's too old. I've also tried to use sudo apt-get install tor, but browser icon don't shows up after installation and if you try to use the command tor in the Terminal I get the following error message: Nov 26 10:59:25.731 [notice] Tor v0.2.3.22-rc (git-4a0c70a817797420) running on Linux. Nov 26 10:59:25.731 [notice] Tor can't help you if you use it wrong! Learn how to be safe at https://www.torproject.org/download/download#warning Nov 26 10:59:25.731 [notice] Read configuration file "/etc/tor/torrc". Nov 26 10:59:25.737 [notice] Initialized libevent version 2.0.19-stable using method epoll (with changelist). Good. Nov 26 10:59:25.737 [notice] Opening Socks listener on 127.0.0.1:9050 Nov 26 10:59:25.737 [warn] Could not bind to 127.0.0.1:9050: Address already in use. Is Tor already running? Nov 26 10:59:25.737 [warn] Failed to parse/validate config: Failed to bind one of the listener ports. Nov 26 10:59:25.737 [err] Reading config failed--see warnings above. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • When writing tests for a Wordpress plugin, should i run them inside wordpress or in a normal browser?

    - by Nicola Peluchetti
    I have started using BDD for a wordpress plugin i'm working on and i'm rewriting the js codebase to do tests. I've encountered a few problems but i'm going steady now, i was wondering if i had the right approach, because i'm writing test that should pass in a normal browser environment and not inside wordpress. I choose to do this because i want my plugin to be totally indipendent from the wordpress environment, i'm using requirejs in a way that i don't expose any globals and i'm loading my version of jQuery that doesn't override the one that ships with Wordpress. In this way my plugin would work the same on every wordpress version and my code would not break if they cheange the jQuery version or someone use my plugin on an old wordpress version. I wonder if this is the right approach or if i should always test inside the environment i'm working in. Since wordpress implies some globals i had to write some function purely for testing purpose, like "get_ajax_url": function() { if( typeof window.ajaxurl === "undefined" ) { return "http://localhost/wordpress/wp-admin/admin-ajax.php"; } else { return window.ajaxurl; } }, but apart from that i got everything working right. What do you think?

    Read the article

  • Disallow robots.txt from being accessed in a browser but still accessible by spiders?

    - by Michael Irigoyen
    We make use of the robots.txt file to prevent Google (and other search spiders) from crawling certain pages/directories in our domain. Some of these directories/files are secret, meaning they aren't linked (except perhaps on other pages encompassed by the robots.txt file). Some of these directories/files aren't secret, we just don't want them indexed. If somebody browses directly to www.mydomain.com/robots.txt, they can see the contents of the robots.txt file. From a security standpoint, this is not something we want publicly available to anybody. Any directories that contain secure information are set behind authentication, but we still don't want them to be discoverable unless the user specifically knows about them. Is there a way to provide a robots.txt file but to have it's presence masked by John Doe accessing it from his browser? Perhaps by using PHP to generate the document based on certain criteria? Perhaps something I'm not thinking of? We'd prefer a way to centrally do it (meaning a <meta> tag solution is less than ideal).

    Read the article

  • The broken Promise of the Mobile Web

    - by Rick Strahl
    High end mobile devices have been with us now for almost 7 years and they have utterly transformed the way we access information. Mobile phones and smartphones that have access to the Internet and host smart applications are in the hands of a large percentage of the population of the world. In many places even very remote, cell phones and even smart phones are a common sight. I’ll never forget when I was in India in 2011 I was up in the Southern Indian mountains riding an elephant out of a tiny local village, with an elephant herder in front riding atop of the elephant in front of us. He was dressed in traditional garb with the loin wrap and head cloth/turban as did quite a few of the locals in this small out of the way and not so touristy village. So we’re slowly trundling along in the forest and he’s lazily using his stick to guide the elephant and… 10 minutes in he pulls out his cell phone from his sash and starts texting. In the middle of texting a huge pig jumps out from the side of the trail and he takes a picture running across our path in the jungle! So yeah, mobile technology is very pervasive and it’s reached into even very buried and unexpected parts of this world. Apps are still King Apps currently rule the roost when it comes to mobile devices and the applications that run on them. If there’s something that you need on your mobile device your first step usually is to look for an app, not use your browser. But native app development remains a pain in the butt, with the requirement to have to support 2 or 3 completely separate platforms. There are solutions that try to bridge that gap. Xamarin is on a tear at the moment, providing their cross-device toolkit to build applications using C#. While Xamarin tools are impressive – and also *very* expensive – they only address part of the development madness that is app development. There are still specific device integration isssues, dealing with the different developer programs, security and certificate setups and all that other noise that surrounds app development. There’s also PhoneGap/Cordova which provides a hybrid solution that involves creating local HTML/CSS/JavaScript based applications, and then packaging them to run in a specialized App container that can run on most mobile device platforms using a WebView interface. This allows for using of HTML technology, but it also still requires all the set up, configuration of APIs, security keys and certification and submission and deployment process just like native applications – you actually lose many of the benefits that  Web based apps bring. The big selling point of Cordova is that you get to use HTML have the ability to build your UI once for all platforms and run across all of them – but the rest of the app process remains in place. Apps can be a big pain to create and manage especially when we are talking about specialized or vertical business applications that aren’t geared at the mainstream market and that don’t fit the ‘store’ model. If you’re building a small intra department application you don’t want to deal with multiple device platforms and certification etc. for various public or corporate app stores. That model is simply not a good fit both from the development and deployment perspective. Even for commercial, big ticket apps, HTML as a UI platform offers many advantages over native, from write-once run-anywhere, to remote maintenance, single point of management and failure to having full control over the application as opposed to have the app store overloads censor you. In a lot of ways Web based HTML/CSS/JavaScript applications have so much potential for building better solutions based on existing Web technologies for the very same reasons a lot of content years ago moved off the desktop to the Web. To me the Web as a mobile platform makes perfect sense, but the reality of today’s Mobile Web unfortunately looks a little different… Where’s the Love for the Mobile Web? Yet here we are in the middle of 2014, nearly 7 years after the first iPhone was released and brought the promise of rich interactive information at your fingertips, and yet we still don’t really have a solid mobile Web platform. I know what you’re thinking: “But we have lots of HTML/JavaScript/CSS features that allows us to build nice mobile interfaces”. I agree to a point – it’s actually quite possible to build nice looking, rich and capable Web UI today. We have media queries to deal with varied display sizes, CSS transforms for smooth animations and transitions, tons of CSS improvements in CSS 3 that facilitate rich layout, a host of APIs geared towards mobile device features and lately even a number of JavaScript framework choices that facilitate development of multi-screen apps in a consistent manner. Personally I’ve been working a lot with AngularJs and heavily modified Bootstrap themes to build mobile first UIs and that’s been working very well to provide highly usable and attractive UI for typical mobile business applications. From the pure UI perspective things actually look very good. Not just about the UI But it’s not just about the UI - it’s also about integration with the mobile device. When it comes to putting all those pieces together into what amounts to a consolidated platform to build mobile Web applications, I think we still have a ways to go… there are a lot of missing pieces to make it all work together and integrate with the device more smoothly, and more importantly to make it work uniformly across the majority of devices. I think there are a number of reasons for this. Slow Standards Adoption HTML standards implementations and ratification has been dreadfully slow, and browser vendors all seem to pick and choose different pieces of the technology they implement. The end result is that we have a capable UI platform that’s missing some of the infrastructure pieces to make it whole on mobile devices. There’s lots of potential but what is lacking that final 10% to build truly compelling mobile applications that can compete favorably with native applications. Some of it is the fragmentation of browsers and the slow evolution of the mobile specific HTML APIs. A host of mobile standards exist but many of the standards are in the early review stage and they have been there stuck for long periods of time and seem to move at a glacial pace. Browser vendors seem even slower to implement them, and for good reason – non-ratified standards mean that implementations may change and vendor implementations tend to be experimental and  likely have to be changed later. Neither Vendors or developers are not keen on changing standards. This is the typical chicken and egg scenario, but without some forward momentum from some party we end up stuck in the mud. It seems that either the standards bodies or the vendors need to carry the torch forward and that doesn’t seem to be happening quickly enough. Mobile Device Integration just isn’t good enough Current standards are not far reaching enough to address a number of the use case scenarios necessary for many mobile applications. While not every application needs to have access to all mobile device features, almost every mobile application could benefit from some integration with other parts of the mobile device platform. Integration with GPS, phone, media, messaging, notifications, linking and contacts system are benefits that are unique to mobile applications and could be widely used, but are mostly (with the exception of GPS) inaccessible for Web based applications today. Unfortunately trying to do most of this today only with a mobile Web browser is a losing battle. Aside from PhoneGap/Cordova’s app centric model with its own custom API accessing mobile device features and the token exception of the GeoLocation API, most device integration features are not widely supported by the current crop of mobile browsers. For example there’s no usable messaging API that allows access to SMS or contacts from HTML. Even obvious components like the Media Capture API are only implemented partially by mobile devices. There are alternatives and workarounds for some of these interfaces by using browser specific code, but that’s might ugly and something that I thought we were trying to leave behind with newer browser standards. But it’s not quite working out that way. It’s utterly perplexing to me that mobile standards like Media Capture and Streams, Media Gallery Access, Responsive Images, Messaging API, Contacts Manager API have only minimal or no traction at all today. Keep in mind we’ve had mobile browsers for nearly 7 years now, and yet we still have to think about how to get access to an image from the image gallery or the camera on some devices? Heck Windows Phone IE Mobile just gained the ability to upload images recently in the Windows 8.1 Update – that’s feature that HTML has had for 20 years! These are simple concepts and common problems that should have been solved a long time ago. It’s extremely frustrating to see build 90% of a mobile Web app with relative ease and then hit a brick wall for the remaining 10%, which often can be show stoppers. The remaining 10% have to do with platform integration, browser differences and working around the limitations that browsers and ‘pinned’ applications impose on HTML applications. The maddening part is that these limitations seem arbitrary as they could easily work on all mobile platforms. For example, SMS has a URL Moniker interface that sort of works on Android, works badly with iOS (only works if the address is already in the contact list) and not at all on Windows Phone. There’s no reason this shouldn’t work universally using the same interface – after all all phones have supported SMS since before the year 2000! But, it doesn’t have to be this way Change can happen very quickly. Take the GeoLocation API for example. Geolocation has taken off at the very beginning of the mobile device era and today it works well, provides the necessary security (a big concern for many mobile APIs), and is supported by just about all major mobile and even desktop browsers today. It handles security concerns via prompts to avoid unwanted access which is a model that would work for most other device APIs in a similar fashion. One time approval and occasional re-approval if code changes or caches expire. Simple and only slightly intrusive. It all works well, even though GeoLocation actually has some physical limitations, such as representing the current location when no GPS device is present. Yet this is a solved problem, where other APIs that are conceptually much simpler to implement have failed to gain any traction at all. Technically none of these APIs should be a problem to implement, but it appears that the momentum is just not there. Inadequate Web Application Linking and Activation Another important piece of the puzzle missing is the integration of HTML based Web applications. Today HTML based applications are not first class citizens on mobile operating systems. When talking about HTML based content there’s a big difference between content and applications. Content is great for search engine discovery and plain browser usage. Content is usually accessed intermittently and permanent linking is not so critical for this type of content.  But applications have different needs. Applications need to be started up quickly and must be easily switchable to support a multi-tasking user workflow. Therefore, it’s pretty crucial that mobile Web apps are integrated into the underlying mobile OS and work with the standard task management features. Unfortunately this integration is not as smooth as it should be. It starts with actually trying to find mobile Web applications, to ‘installing’ them onto a phone in an easily accessible manner in a prominent position. The experience of discovering a Mobile Web ‘App’ and making it sticky is by no means as easy or satisfying. Today the way you’d go about this is: Open the browser Search for a Web Site in the browser with your search engine of choice Hope that you find the right site Hope that you actually find a site that works for your mobile device Click on the link and run the app in a fully chrome’d browser instance (read tiny surface area) Pin the app to the home screen (with all the limitations outline above) Hope you pointed at the right URL when you pinned Even for you and me as developers, there are a few steps in there that are painful and annoying, but think about the average user. First figuring out how to search for a specific site or URL? And then pinning the app and hopefully from the right location? You’ve probably lost more than half of your audience at that point. This experience sucks. For developers too this process is painful since app developers can’t control the shortcut creation directly. This problem often gets solved by crazy coding schemes, with annoying pop-ups that try to get people to create shortcuts via fancy animations that are both annoying and add overhead to each and every application that implements this sort of thing differently. And that’s not the end of it - getting the link onto the home screen with an application icon varies quite a bit between browsers. Apple’s non-standard meta tags are prominent and they work with iOS and Android (only more recent versions), but not on Windows Phone. Windows Phone instead requires you to create an actual screen or rather a partial screen be captured for a shortcut in the tile manager. Who had that brilliant idea I wonder? Surprisingly Chrome on recent Android versions seems to actually get it right – icons use pngs, pinning is easy and pinned applications properly behave like standalone apps and retain the browser’s active page state and content. Each of the platforms has a different way to specify icons (WP doesn’t allow you to use an icon image at all), and the most widely used interface in use today is a bunch of Apple specific meta tags that other browsers choose to support. The question is: Why is there no standard implementation for installing shortcuts across mobile platforms using an official format rather than a proprietary one? Then there’s iOS and the crazy way it treats home screen linked URLs using a crazy hybrid format that is neither as capable as a Web app running in Safari nor a WebView hosted application. Moving off the Web ‘app’ link when switching to another app actually causes the browser and preview it to ‘blank out’ the Web application in the Task View (see screenshot on the right). Then, when the ‘app’ is reactivated it ends up completely restarting the browser with the original link. This is crazy behavior that you can’t easily work around. In some situations you might be able to store the application state and restore it using LocalStorage, but for many scenarios that involve complex data sources (like say Google Maps) that’s not a possibility. The only reason for this screwed up behavior I can think of is that it is deliberate to make Web apps a pain in the butt to use and forcing users trough the App Store/PhoneGap/Cordova route. App linking and management is a very basic problem – something that we essentially have solved in every desktop browser – yet on mobile devices where it arguably matters a lot more to have easy access to web content we have to jump through hoops to have even a remotely decent linking/activation experience across browsers. Where’s the Money? It’s not surprising that device home screen integration and Mobile Web support in general is in such dismal shape – the mobile OS vendors benefit financially from App store sales and have little to gain from Web based applications that bypass the App store and the cash cow that it presents. On top of that, platform specific vendor lock-in of both end users and developers who have invested in hardware, apps and consumables is something that mobile platform vendors actually aspire to. Web based interfaces that are cross-platform are the anti-thesis of that and so again it’s no surprise that the mobile Web is on a struggling path. But – that may be changing. More and more we’re seeing operations shifting to services that are subscription based or otherwise collect money for usage, and that may drive more progress into the Web direction in the end . Nothing like the almighty dollar to drive innovation forward. Do we need a Mobile Web App Store? As much as I dislike moderated experiences in today’s massive App Stores, they do at least provide one single place to look for apps for your device. I think we could really use some sort of registry, that could provide something akin to an app store for mobile Web apps, to make it easier to actually find mobile applications. This could take the form of a specialized search engine, or maybe a more formal store/registry like structure. Something like apt-get/chocolatey for Web apps. It could be curated and provide at least some feedback and reviews that might help with the integrity of applications. Coupled to that could be a native application on each platform that would allow searching and browsing of the registry and then also handle installation in the form of providing the home screen linking, plus maybe an initial security configuration that determines what features are allowed access to for the app. I’m not holding my breath. In order for this sort of thing to take off and gain widespread appeal, a lot of coordination would be required. And in order to get enough traction it would have to come from a well known entity – a mobile Web app store from a no name source is unlikely to gain high enough usage numbers to make a difference. In a way this would eliminate some of the freedom of the Web, but of course this would also be an optional search path in addition to the standard open Web search mechanisms to find and access content today. Security Security is a big deal, and one of the perceived reasons why so many IT professionals appear to be willing to go back to the walled garden of deployed apps is that Apps are perceived as safe due to the official review and curation of the App stores. Curated stores are supposed to protect you from malware, illegal and misleading content. It doesn’t always work out that way and all the major vendors have had issues with security and the review process at some time or another. Security is critical, but I also think that Web applications in general pose less of a security threat than native applications, by nature of the sandboxed browser and JavaScript environments. Web applications run externally completely and in the HTML and JavaScript sandboxes, with only a very few controlled APIs allowing access to device specific features. And as discussed earlier – security for any device interaction can be granted the same for mobile applications through a Web browser, as they can for native applications either via explicit policies loaded from the Web, or via prompting as GeoLocation does today. Security is important, but it’s certainly solvable problem for Web applications even those that need to access device hardware. Security shouldn’t be a reason for Web apps to be an equal player in mobile applications. Apps are winning, but haven’t we been here before? So now we’re finding ourselves back in an era of installed app, rather than Web based and managed apps. Only it’s even worse today than with Desktop applications, in that the apps are going through a gatekeeper that charges a toll and censors what you can and can’t do in your apps. Frankly it’s a mystery to me why anybody would buy into this model and why it’s lasted this long when we’ve already been through this process. It’s crazy… It’s really a shame that this regression is happening. We have the technology to make mobile Web apps much more prominent, but yet we’re basically held back by what seems little more than bureaucracy, partisan bickering and self interest of the major parties involved. Back in the day of the desktop it was Internet Explorer’s 98+%  market shareholding back the Web from improvements for many years – now it’s the combined mobile OS market in control of the mobile browsers. If mobile Web apps were allowed to be treated the same as native apps with simple ways to install and run them consistently and persistently, that would go a long way to making mobile applications much more usable and seriously viable alternatives to native apps. But as it is mobile apps have a severe disadvantage in placement and operation. There are a few bright spots in all of this. Mozilla’s FireFoxOs is embracing the Web for it’s mobile OS by essentially building every app out of HTML and JavaScript based content. It supports both packaged and certified package modes (that can be put into the app store), and Open Web apps that are loaded and run completely off the Web and can also cache locally for offline operation using a manifest. Open Web apps are treated as full class citizens in FireFoxOS and run using the same mechanism as installed apps. Unfortunately FireFoxOs is getting a slow start with minimal device support and specifically targeting the low end market. We can hope that this approach will change and catch on with other vendors, but that’s also an uphill battle given the conflict of interest with platform lock in that it represents. Recent versions of Android also seem to be working reasonably well with mobile application integration onto the desktop and activation out of the box. Although it still uses the Apple meta tags to find icons and behavior settings, everything at least works as you would expect – icons to the desktop on pinning, WebView based full screen activation, and reliable application persistence as the browser/app is treated like a real application. Hopefully iOS will at some point provide this same level of rudimentary Web app support. What’s also interesting to me is that Microsoft hasn’t picked up on the obvious need for a solid Web App platform. Being a distant third in the mobile OS war, Microsoft certainly has nothing to lose and everything to gain by using fresh ideas and expanding into areas that the other major vendors are neglecting. But instead Microsoft is trying to beat the market leaders at their own game, fighting on their adversary’s terms instead of taking a new tack. Providing a kick ass mobile Web platform that takes the lead on some of the proposed mobile APIs would be something positive that Microsoft could do to improve its miserable position in the mobile device market. Where are we at with Mobile Web? It sure sounds like I’m really down on the Mobile Web, right? I’ve built a number of mobile apps in the last year and while overall result and response has been very positive to what we were able to accomplish in terms of UI, getting that final 10% that required device integration dialed was an absolute nightmare on every single one of them. Big compromises had to be made and some features were left out or had to be modified for some devices. In two cases we opted to go the Cordova route in order to get the integration we needed, along with the extra pain involved in that process. Unless you’re not integrating with device features and you don’t care deeply about a smooth integration with the mobile desktop, mobile Web development is fraught with frustration. So, yes I’m frustrated! But it’s not for lack of wanting the mobile Web to succeed. I am still a firm believer that we will eventually arrive a much more functional mobile Web platform that allows access to the most common device features in a sensible way. It wouldn't be difficult for device platform vendors to make Web based applications first class citizens on mobile devices. But unfortunately it looks like it will still be some time before this happens. So, what’s your experience building mobile Web apps? Are you finding similar issues? Just giving up on raw Web applications and building PhoneGap apps instead? Completely skipping the Web and going native? Leave a comment for discussion. Resources Rick Strahl on DotNet Rocks talking about Mobile Web© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2014Posted in HTML5  Mobile   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • HTML5 and CSS3 Editing in Windows Live Writer

    - by Rick Strahl
    Windows Live Writer is a wonderful tool for editing blog posts and getting them posted to your blog. What makes it nice is that it has a small set of useful features, plus a simple plug-in model that has spawned many useful add-ins. Small tool with a reasonably decent plug-in model to extend equals a great solution to a simple problem. If you're running Windows, have a blog and aren’t using Live Writer you’re probably doing it wrong…One of Live Writer’s nice features is that it can download your blog’s CSS for preview and edit displays. It lets you edit your content inside of the context of that CSS using the WYSIWYG editor, so your content actually looks very close to what you’ll see on your blog while you’re editing your post. Unfortunately Live Writer renders the HTML content in the Web Browser Control’s  default IE 7 rendering mode. Yeah you read that right: IE 7 is the default for the Web Browser control and most applications that use it, are stuck in this modus unless the application explicitly overrides this default. The Web Browser control does not use the version of Internet Explorer installed on the system (IE 10 on my Win8 machine) but uses IE 7 mode for ‘compatibility’ for old applications.If you are importing your blog’s CSS that may suck if you’re using rich HTML 5 and CSS 3 formatting. Hack the Registry to get Live Writer to render using IE 9 or 10In order to get Live Writer (or any other application that uses the Web Browser Control for that matter) to render you can apply a registry hack that overrides the Web Browser Control engine usage for a specific application. I wrote about this in detail in a previous blog post a couple of years back.Here’s how you can set up Windows Live Writer to render your CSS 3 by making a change in your registry:The above is for setup on a 64 bit machine, where I configure Live Writer which is a 32 bit application for using IE 10 rendering. The keys set are as follows:32bit Configuration on 64 bit machine:HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Wow6432Node\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Main\FeatureControl\FEATURE_BROWSER_EMULATIONKey: WindowsLiveWriter.exeValue: 9000 or 10000  (IE 9 or 10 respectively) (DWORD value)On a 32 bit only machine: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\Main\FeatureControl\FEATURE_BROWSER_EMULATIONKey: WindowsLiveWriter.exeValue: 9000 or 10000  (IE 9 or 10 respectively) (DWORD value)Use decimal values of 9000, 10000 or 11000 to specify specific versions of Internet Explorer. This is a minor tweak, but it’s nice to actually see my blog posts now with the proper CSS formatting intact. Notice the rounded borders and shadow on the code blocks as well as the overflow-x and scrollbars that show up. In this particular case I can see what the code blocks actually look like in a specific resolution – much better than in the old plain view which just chopped things off at the end of the window frame. There are a few other elements that now show properly in the editor as well including block quotes and note boxes that I occasionally use. It’s minor stuff, but it makes the editing experience better yet and closer to the final things so there are less republish operations than I previously had. Sweet!Note that this approach of putting an IE version override into the registry works with most applications that use the Web Browser control. If you are using the Web Browser control in your own applications, it’s a good idea to switch the browser to a more recent version so you can take advantage of HTML 5 and CSS 3 in your browser displayed content by automatically setting this flag in the registry or as part of the application’s startup routine if not dedicated setup tool is used. At the very least you might set it to 9000 (IE 9) which supports most of the basic CSS3 features and is a decent baseline that works for most Windows 7 and 8 machines. If running pre-IE9, the browser will fall back to IE7 rendering and look bad but at least more recent browsers will see an improved experience.I’m surprised that there aren’t more vendors and third party apps using this feature. You can see in my first screen shot that there are only very few entries in the registry key group on my machine – any other apps use the Web Browser control are using IE7. Go figure. Certainly Windows Live Writer should be writing this key into the registry automatically as part of installation to support this functionality out of the box, but alas since it does not, this registry hack lets you get your way anyway…Resources.reg Files to register Live Write Browser Emulation (set for IE9)Specifying Internet Explorer Version for ApplicationsSnagIt LiveWriter Plug-inDownload Windows Live WriterDownload Windows Live Writer with Chocolatey© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2013Posted in Live Writer  Windows   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • jQuery: Stop browser scrolling on event update beyond the fold?

    - by neezer
    I have several links at the bottom of my page that update content at the top of my page (more than a viewport away). Here's the gist of what the update looks like: $('#private-photo div').fadeOut(function() { $(this).html('<%= escape_javascript(image_tag current_user.private_photo.image.url(:profile)) %>'); }).fadeIn(); Basically it's just fading out the old content and fading in the new content. My problem is that when this happens, the browser window automatically scrolls up just far enough so that the bottom of the updated content (#private-photo div) appears at the top of the browser viewport. I do not want this to happen. I want the content to be updated (still fading in and out), but without the browser viewport realigning its focus. I want to keep the animation because if the user has a big enough screen, or if they are using a link closer to the top of the page, I still want them to see the animation. Any ideas about how to prevent the browser from scrolling as described? If not, any suggestions for workarounds? FYI, I have this same problem in Safari 4, Chrome (for Mac), & Firefox 3.5. EDIT: Here's the link that calls the update action, which is itself inside a Colorbox: $('a.edit-photo').colorbox({ title: function() { return 'Edit Photo in ' + $(this).attr('rel'); }, overlayClose: false, onComplete: function() { $('#edit-photo-modal').submit(function(e) { $('#photo_submit').after('<span id="saving">Saving...</span>'); e.preventDefault(); $.post($(this).attr('action'), $(this).serialize(), function() { $('#edit-photo-modal #saving').text('Saved!'); }, "script"); }); } }); The lightbox opens, presents a form fetched through an AJAX request, then (on submit) triggers the update action mentioned above. I had these links outside of the Colorbox in an earlier design revision, and they exhibited the same problem, so I've ruled out Colorbox itself as a cause. If you need anymore info, let me know!

    Read the article

  • How to display programs, started by TSWA Remoteapp, inside a browser instead of directly on the desk

    - by richardboon
    For those not familiar with Terminal Services Web Access and Resulting Internet Communication in Windows Server 2008, here’s a brief overview: technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc754502(WS.10).aspx The problem (I am trying to solve), can be seen in the picture of step 16, where the application is display directly right on the desktop [see link below]: http://blogs.technet.com/askcore/archive/2008/07/22/publishing-the-hyper-v-management-interface-using-terminal-services.aspx I am in the process of setting up Terminal Service Web Access RemoteApp for our company. Users only want remoteapp and needs to see the remote program running within/contain-inside the browser. They don’t want to see or access the whole desktop [as the case with remote desktop, which can be displayed inside a browser].

    Read the article

  • OMG. Is Webmin safe? I can see file codes in Chrome browser without login

    - by Arwana
    When Im in File Manager of Webmin, I can double click and see the codes of the files in new tab in Firefox with its specific URL. But when I remove ?rand=xxxx... after the file.php and paste the URL in Chrome browser, I still can see the codes. This is the URL I just pasted in the Chrome browser http://xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx:10000/file/show.cgi/var/www/html/mysite.com/files/file.php And then, I logout of webmin, and I change the file.php with other file, I can see the codes. OMG. Is Webmin safe? and how to secure this?

    Read the article

  • Lotus Notes won't open a hyperlink/uri in a browser!

    - by Andy O
    I'm still new to Lotus, but I have LN 8.0.2, and have it set up to open hyperlinks "using the browser i have set as the default for this operating system" which in my case is Firefox 3.6.13. If I try to select "use the browser embedded in this client" then it just forgets it after I click save (ie if i go back into preferences it's reset to the default for this operating system option) Windows XP SP 3. Whenever I click on a link in an email...memo... then it does nothing and flashes an underscore underneath it. It's so basic and so annoying there must be something I'm missing. Any help please!

    Read the article

  • How do I get a PDF link in a Word document to open in the default browser?

    - by Tweek
    I'm trying to create a Word document with links to resources on the web. If I create a hyperlink to a regular HTML file, when I click on the link, it opens in my default browser (Google Chrome) as expected. However, if I click on a link to a PDF file on a website, it opens in Internet Explorer. Before it opens, I also get the following prompt: Microsoft Office Opening http://www.example.com/example.pdf Some files can contain viruses or otherwise be harmful to your computer. It is important to be certain that this file is from a trustworthy source. Would you like to open this file? OK Cancel I'm using Office 2010, but I'm asking for a user who is using Office 2007 and is experiencing the same issue. (His default browser is Firefox.) We're both on Windows 7.

    Read the article

  • Mozilla nonsense. Page changes size by itself

    - by Browser Madness
    I have never intentionally changed the size of font on latest mozilla browser install on windows machine. For example Google site is now 200% size, and I did nothing to make this happen. Whats worse is it does not change back but remembers this! Similarly other sites are too small and they remember this per site. What is going on here? I mean what nonsense! How can I undo this? And for extra points who came up with this absurd behavior at mozilla? Not making this up folks. 15.0.1 Not at all clear why it changes size or how to go back to default size for these sites Acutally it just happened again while editing this entry. Icon changes and than font size is too small.

    Read the article

  • How to host my own cloud so that videos are viewable via desktop web browser?

    - by jake9115
    I want to host my own cloud storage solution, something like Dropbox but entirely dependent on my own central machine. This way things are more secure if setup correctly, and there are artificial storage limitations or pay-walls. Some thing similar to ownCloud: http://owncloud.org/ There is one important feature I want to have: the ability the stream movies in a web browser from my personal cloud to anywhere in the world. In the past I tried this with a NAS, and I mapped XBMC to the NAS via SFTP, and certain media types could stream in this manner. I've also used things like PLEX. In this case, I am looking for a single solution for personal cloud storage and movie streaming from that cloud into a web browser. Does anyone know if this can be accomplished? Thanks for the suggestions!

    Read the article

  • Can I pass data via JQUERY to ASP.NET MVC controller action and have a view rendered in new browser

    - by Simon Lomax
    Hi, Can anyone advise if its possible to pass data via JQUERY to an ASP.NET MVC controller action and have a view rendered in new browser tab based on the model data passed to the action method. My scenario is that I have a Jqgrid populated with product info on a page. The user would tick the items in the grid that they would like a label produced for. After they've made their slection they would click a button and I would like (if possible) to render a view of that contains a label for each selected item and have the view render in a new browser tab. All the code to allow the selections and post the relevant data back to the action method is all working fine and I know its easy to use the Jquery $(selector).load() command to populate an element on the current page with the HTML returned from the action. But is it possible to populate an element on a page in a new browser tab. If it is how would I go about it? Hope this make sense.

    Read the article

  • how to autocenter jquery ui dialog whenb resizing browser?

    - by Jorre
    When you use jquery UI dialog, all works well, except for one thing. When the browser is resized, the dialog just stays in it's initial position which can be really annoying. You can test it out on: http://jqueryui.com/demos/dialog/ Click on the "modal dialog" example and resize your browser. I'd love to be able to let dialogs autocenter when the browser resizes. Can this be done in an efficient way for all my dialogs in my app? Thanks a lot!

    Read the article

  • How to automate testing of a browser-based app?

    - by mawg
    If it were a windows program, I would use Auto it to automate testing. Is there something similar for browser-based apps? Nothing too complex, it should just allow scripting (preferable for me to macro-recording) to simulate human interaction with the browser, which means being able to identify fields of a form by name, inject text into some, simulate mouse-click on others, etc and then, after submitting a form, should be able to read text certain named controls, check the status of others (checked, radio group index, read-only, etc). While I do appreciate a full featured product, I don't appreciate a steep learning curve. so something as simple as the scripting of Auto It woudl be fine. I don't know if it makes a difference which browser is used, but I could live with MSIE 6 or higher (maybe 7 or higher at a push).

    Read the article

  • How to change the default Help browser for VS2010?

    - by Scott Bilas
    Visual Studio 2010 changed the help system to run a little daemon and launch the system default web browser to view it. I'm using Firefox for my system browser but would like to use Chrome for VS help. Is there an option to change the Help browser that I'm not seeing in Tools|Options? If not, is there a workaround or registry setting to do this? As a backup I've been using H3Viewer but I'd like to be able to get context-sensitive F1 help from within the VS IDE.

    Read the article

  • Flash: Correctly handling click-and-drag outside the browser?

    - by David Wolever
    What's the correct way to detect, from Flash, when someone has started a drag within the browser (eg, a MOUSE_DOWN event), dragged the mouse outside the browser window, released the button, then moved the mouse back over the browser? For example (assuming StackOverflow was a Flash application): I've tried the "obvious" thing, checking event.buttonDown in the MOUSE_MOVE handler, but even though the mouse button is up, event.buttonDown is true in step 2 (above). So, is there any other way to check the "real" status of the mouse button? Or any other way to handle this situation?

    Read the article

  • Default controller name is removed on browser refresh (CodeigniterPHP/Nginx issue?)

    - by tim peterson
    For all pages in my codeigniter app except my default controller, when I refresh the browser the url isn't affected as one would expect. However for my default controller, main.php, when when I refresh the browser at "http://localhost/main" or "http://mysite.com/main", the main part is stripped off the url. So the browser bar shows just "http://localhost" or "http://mysite.com". Totally lost on where to start with this but was just wondering if anyone has come across this before...? Here's what I think could be the relevant part of my nginx.conf (if Nginx is the problem). if ($request_uri ~* ^(/main(/index)?|/index(.php)?)/?$) { rewrite ^(.*)$ / permanent; }

    Read the article

  • jQuery: What listener do I use to check for browser auto filling the password input field?

    - by Jannis
    Hi, I have a simple problem that I cannot seem to find a solution to. Basically on this website here: http://dev.supply.net.nz/vendorapp/ (currently in development) I have some fancy label animations sliding things in and out on focus & blur. However once the user has logged in once the browser will most likely remember the password associated with the users email address/login. (Which is good and should not be disabled.) However I run into issues triggering my label slide out animation when the browser sets the value on the #password field automatically as the event for this is neither focus nor blur. Does anyone know which listener to use to run my function when the browser 'auto fills' the users password? Here is a quick screenshot of the issue:

    Read the article

  • Regression testing with Selenium GRID

    - by Ben Adderson
    A lot of software teams out there are tasked with supporting and maintaining systems that have grown organically over time, and the web team here at Red Gate is no exception. We're about to embark on our first significant refactoring endeavour for some time, and as such its clearly paramount that the code be tested thoroughly for regressions. Unfortunately we currently find ourselves with a codebase that isn't very testable - the three layers (database, business logic and UI) are currently tightly coupled. This leaves us with the unfortunate problem that, in order to confidently refactor the code, we need unit tests. But in order to write unit tests, we need to refactor the code :S To try and ease the initial pain of decoupling these layers, I've been looking into the idea of using UI automation to provide a sort of system-level regression test suite. The idea being that these tests can help us identify regressions whilst we work towards a more testable codebase, at which point the more traditional combination of unit and integration tests can take over. Ending up with a strong battery of UI tests is also a nice bonus :) Following on from my previous posts (here, here and here) I knew I wanted to use Selenium. I also figured that this would be a good excuse to put my xUnit [Browser] attribute to good use. Pretty quickly, I had a raft of tests that looked like the following (this particular example uses Reflector Pro). In a nut shell the test traverses our shopping cart and, for a particular combination of number of users and months of support, checks that the price calculations all come up with the correct values. [BrowserTheory] [Browser(Browsers.Firefox3_6, "http://www.red-gate.com")] public void Purchase1UserLicenceNoSupport(SeleniumProvider seleniumProvider) {     //Arrange     _browser = seleniumProvider.GetBrowser();     _browser.Open("http://www.red-gate.com/dynamic/shoppingCart/ProductOption.aspx?Product=ReflectorPro");                  //Act     _browser = ShoppingCartHelpers.TraverseShoppingCart(_browser, 1, 0, ".NET Reflector Pro");     //Assert     var priceResult = PriceHelpers.GetNewPurchasePrice(db, "ReflectorPro", 1, 0, Currencies.Euros);         Assert.Equal(priceResult.Price, _browser.GetText("ctl00_content_InvoiceShoppingItemRepeater_ctl01_Price"));     Assert.Equal(priceResult.Tax, _browser.GetText("ctl00_content_InvoiceShoppingItemRepeater_ctl02_Tax"));     Assert.Equal(priceResult.Total, _browser.GetText("ctl00_content_InvoiceShoppingItemRepeater_ctl02_Total")); } These tests are pretty concise, with much of the common code in the TraverseShoppingCart() and GetNewPurchasePrice() methods. The (inevitable) problem arose when it came to execute these tests en masse. Selenium is a very slick tool, but it can't mask the fact that UI automation is very slow. To give you an idea, the set of cases that covers all of our products, for all combinations of users and support, came to 372 tests (for now only considering purchases in dollars). In the world of automated integration tests, that's a very manageable number. For unit tests, it's a trifle. However for UI automation, those 372 tests were taking just over two hours to run. Two hours may not sound like a lot, but those cases only cover one of the three currencies we deal with, and only one of the many different ways our systems can be asked to calculate a price. It was already pretty clear at this point that in order for this approach to be viable, I was going to have to find a way to speed things up. Up to this point I had been using Selenium Remote Control to automate Firefox, as this was the approach I had used previously and it had worked well. Fortunately,  the guys at SeleniumHQ also maintain a tool for executing multiple Selenium RC tests in parallel: Selenium Grid. Selenium Grid uses a central 'hub' to handle allocation of Selenium tests to individual RCs. The Remote Controls simply register themselves with the hub when they start, and then wait to be assigned work. The (for me) really clever part is that, as far as the client driver library is concerned, the grid hub looks exactly the same as a vanilla remote control. To create a new browser session against Selenium RC, the following C# code suffices: new DefaultSelenium("localhost", 4444, "*firefox", "http://www.red-gate.com"); This assumes that the RC is running on the local machine, and is listening on port 4444 (the default). Assuming the hub is running on your local machine, then to create a browser session in Selenium Grid, via the hub rather than directly against the control, the code is exactly the same! Behind the scenes, the hub will take this request and hand it off to one of the registered RCs that provides the "*firefox" execution environment. It will then pass all communications back and forth between the test runner and the remote control transparently. This makes running existing RC tests on a Selenium Grid a piece of cake, as the developers intended. For a more detailed description of exactly how Selenium Grid works, see this page. Once I had a test environment capable of running multiple tests in parallel, I needed a test runner capable of doing the same. Unfortunately, this does not currently exist for xUnit (boo!). MbUnit on the other hand, has the concept of concurrent execution baked right into the framework. So after swapping out my assembly references, and fixing up the resulting mismatches in assertions, my example test now looks like this: [Test] public void Purchase1UserLicenceNoSupport() {    //Arrange    ISelenium browser = BrowserHelpers.GetBrowser();    var db = DbHelpers.GetWebsiteDBDataContext();    browser.Start();    browser.Open("http://www.red-gate.com/dynamic/shoppingCart/ProductOption.aspx?Product=ReflectorPro");                 //Act     browser = ShoppingCartHelpers.TraverseShoppingCart(browser, 1, 0, ".NET Reflector Pro");    var priceResult = PriceHelpers.GetNewPurchasePrice(db, "ReflectorPro", 1, 0, Currencies.Euros);    //Assert     Assert.AreEqual(priceResult.Price, browser.GetText("ctl00_content_InvoiceShoppingItemRepeater_ctl01_Price"));     Assert.AreEqual(priceResult.Tax, browser.GetText("ctl00_content_InvoiceShoppingItemRepeater_ctl02_Tax"));     Assert.AreEqual(priceResult.Total, browser.GetText("ctl00_content_InvoiceShoppingItemRepeater_ctl02_Total")); } This is pretty much the same as the xUnit version. The exceptions are that the attributes have changed,  the //Arrange phase now has to handle setting up the ISelenium object, as the attribute that previously did this has gone away, and the test now sets up its own database connection. Previously I was using a shared database connection, but this approach becomes more complicated when tests are being executed concurrently. To avoid complexity each test has its own connection, which it is responsible for closing. For the sake of readability, I snipped out the code that closes the browser session and the db connection at the end of the test. With all that done, there was only one more step required before the tests would execute concurrently. It is necessary to tell the test runner which tests are eligible to run in parallel, via the [Parallelizable] attribute. This can be done at the test, fixture or assembly level. Since I wanted to run all tests concurrently, I marked mine at the assembly level in the AssemblyInfo.cs using the following: [assembly: DegreeOfParallelism(3)] [assembly: Parallelizable(TestScope.All)] The second attribute marks all tests in the assembly as [Parallelizable], whilst the first tells the test runner how many concurrent threads to use when executing the tests. I set mine to three since I was using 3 RCs in separate VMs. With everything now in place, I fired up the Icarus* test runner that comes with MbUnit. Executing my 372 tests three at a time instead of one at a time reduced the running time from 2 hours 10 minutes, to 55 minutes, that's an improvement of about 58%! I'd like to have seen an improvement of 66%, but I can understand that either inefficiencies in the hub code, my test environment or the test runner code (or some combination of all three most likely) contributes to a slightly diminished improvement. That said, I'd love to hear about any experience you have in upping this efficiency. Ultimately though, it was a saving that was most definitely worth having. It makes regression testing via UI automation a far more plausible prospect. The other obvious point to make is that this approach scales far better than executing tests serially. So if ever we need to improve performance, we just register additional RC's with the hub, and up the DegreeOfParallelism. *This was just my personal preference for a GUI runner. The MbUnit/Gallio installer also provides a command line runner, a TestDriven.net runner, and a Resharper 4.5 runner. For now at least, Resharper 5 isn't supported.

    Read the article

  • Only IE Browser gives org.springframework.web.multipart.MultipartException: The current request is not a multipart request

    - by Vicky
    I am trying to upload a file using jquery fileupload.js, spring. Code to upload files works fine for Mozilla and chrome browser. But getting following error *only for IE browser* org.springframework.web.multipart.MultipartException: The current request is not a multipart request. at org.springframework.web.method.annotation.RequestParamMethodArgumentResolver.assertIsMultipartRequest(RequestParamMethodArgumentResolver.java:183) at org.springframework.web.method.annotation.RequestParamMethodArgumentResolver.resolveName(RequestParamMethodArgumentResolver.java:149) at org.springframework.web.method.annotation.AbstractNamedValueMethodArgumentResolver.resolveArgument(AbstractNamedValueMethodArgumentResolver.java:82) at org.springframework.web.method.support.HandlerMethodArgumentResolverComposite.resolveArgument(HandlerMethodArgumentResolverComposite.java:74)

    Read the article

  • WatiN LogonDialogHandlers not working correctly in Windows 7

    - by Clint
    I have recently updated to Windows 7, VS2010 and IE8. We have an automation suite running tests against IE using WatiN. These tests require the logon dialog handler to be used in order to log different AD Users into the IE Browser. This works perfectly when using Windows XP and IE8, but now using Windows 7 has resulted in the Windows Security dialog box no longer being recognised, the dialogue box is just being ignored. This is the method being used to startup the browser: public static Browser StartBrowser(string url, string username, string password) { Browser browser = new IE(); WatiN.Core.DialogHandlers.LogonDialogHandler ldh = new WatiN.Core.DialogHandlers.LogonDialogHandler(username, password); browser.DialogWatcher.Add(ldh); browser.GoTo(url); return browser; } any suggestions or help would be greatly appreciated...

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111  | Next Page >