Why are boxes now appearing around Flash files???

Thank you minstrel for the url.

 

Thank you minstrel for the url, I too experienced similar gray (on MouseOver) box around my swf files that was inserted in html pages Now the reason is clear.
(Due to some malfunction this post is duplicated. It is regretted).

 

Well, MSFT did choose to use a non-standard method of using plugins. And, it is true that Active-X is a security hole the size of five midwestern states. But, neither of those is really the issue. The issue is that MSFT uses a method patented by Eolas. Eolas owns a property that MSFT is using without permission or license.

Even though you're an MSIE fanboy, there is no need to get your shorts in a knot. The issue is not MS's fault, in my opinion, but the courts are upholding Eolas's patent. Designers that use interactive plugins will need to patch their pages if they want IE to work seamlessly. Active-X is an effort to ensure vendor lock-in, and works well for that in spite of being a security nightmare. In this case, with IE, it would have been a better bet to follow the more common practices as used in modern browsers.

cheers,

gary

 

You flatter yourself.

The point is you can't have it all ways.

1. If you want to make the case that MS violated Eola's copyright, what they're now doing can hardly be blamed on a unilateral MS whim, can it? You should applaud MS for doing the right thing finally regarding the patent.

2. If you want to make a case that Active-X isn't safe, then you should applaud MS for trying to protect the innocent from this vile threat.

Either way, MS is correcting something people have been complaining about. Would you prefer that they didn't?

At least try to be rational and consistent about your arguments.

 

You might find a remedial reading course. I have not made a case that MSFT violated Eolas's copyright, I said a court found they had used Eolas's patented methods. MSFT is making the move under pressure. I also said I thought the court was wrong in that software should not be patentable—my opinion. You don't earn praise by doing what you're forced to do, right or wrong.

I don't make the case that Active-X is unsafe, it's a longstanding and well tested truth. Now reread the last sentence above. Then read the paragraph below.

No, it corrects nothing except how plugins are to be loaded. They are still run from within Active-X and are no safer. I really don't care all that much whether people use Active-X. It is sufficient for me that no one is allowed to use IE, Word or Outlook (Express) on any machines under my control. It is also sufficient that there has been no virus, worms or Trojans, and damned little ad/spyware here in the last five years, since the policy started.

I have been completely consistent and rational. You have simply failed to read English at the eigth grade level correctly.

gary

 

Did you enjoy that little pedantic outburst?

I use all of the things you have "forbidden" and I have never had a virus or other infection on my computers either, not even spyware (note I didn't say "damn little", I said none).

But that has nothing to do with the issue. In fact not very much in your long-winded post had much to do with the issue.

If you wish to continue your anti-MS rants or even your anti-me rants, knock yourself out. I'm already bored with them.

 

I just noticed an unsigned down-rep with a sarcastic "cheers ." You kinda have to wonder why.

That seems factual enough. I'm sure a mature individual would have responded with some sort of contrary statements to rebutt any errors. Hmm, it actually says that whether Active-X is a security vulnerability looking for a home, or whether IE eschewed the more standard methods of using plugins is not the issue. It seems the only issue left is whether MSFT was found in violation of Eolas's patent. The courts said they were. Non-issue.

There's been no one to argue s/he isn't an IE fanboy, so apparently it's no harm no foul on that. Maybe someone did, indeed, get his shorts in a knot, and being embarrassed about it, down-repped me without signing in order to protect his shorts' knottedness. Gosh, I hope his bowels didn't get in an uproar too—that could be disastrous.

Let's see, what else? Designers will have to patch their documents to ensure seamlessnes. OK That's not a problem. Several people have cited examples. Can't be that.

Active-X works toward vendor lockin. Nothing wrong with that, everybody tries to do that. The security thing? That's old news.

That MSFT would have been better off using industry standard methods? That's kinda obvious.

Looks like it must be the knotted shorts thing. Hell, I'd be too embarrassed about being bothered to go throwing down-reps around.

Congrats! You definitely support a smarter bunch of lusers than do I.

My longwinded outbourst, as you put it, was in direct response to your own misreading of a to-the-point posting of mine, where I defended MSFT. How you could have got it so wrong is beyond me. If a point by point rebuttal is pedantic, then call me a pedant. But, if you're going to go off half cocked, don't be surprised when you're called on it.

As to my, again, as you put it, rants, MSFT's security model deserves a kick in passing anytime. Allowing user applications admin/root priviledge is stupid. That it has been the default configuration is more stupid and that third party software is even allowed to run with root priviledge at all is beyond belief. My real rants are directed at people that don't know any better than to think IE is a decent browser. It is an obsolete, noncompliant, buggy PoS. But, I'm at peace with it. I pretty well understand its bugs and shortcomings and can work around or hack them in my sleep. It's still a disaster.

My anti-Minstrel rants won't happen if you'll actually read before responding, and then use sane arguments. Or you could add my name to your ignore list, saving yourself eternities of boredom.

cheers,

gary

 

Its only on Internet Explorer anyway, just use FireFox

 

That won't help at all if the flash is on your site and is effecting your visitors.

 

well its Microsoft's fault what do they think there doing?

 

Did you by any chance read this thread? My guess is no....

 

That would be my guess too.