All the genealogy software, reviewed and rated by you.
Winnipeg, Manitoba -- September 24, 2008 -- Now there's a website that allows users of genealogy software to rate and review the programs they've used or tried. This will allow others who are looking for programs to better compare and select software that will help them.
The site is starting with 355 programs ready for review. You can select between Windows, Mac, Unix, handheld and online programs. Types include full-featured, GEDCOM utilities, website builders and other programs useful for genealogy.
The site collects ratings in five categories: Whether you enjoy using it, if you use it often, if it has easy input, useful output, and an overall rating. Then you can write a short review and list the program's biggest pro and biggest con.
It is built using WordPress, allows quick and easy searching for a particular program, and provides an RSS feed for all reviews, as well as a feed for each program.
"I created my "Louis Kessler's Genealogy Software Links" page for my website in 1997 and that page has been a popular genealogy web resource with over 400,000 hits through the years. But I've always wanted to have more than just a list of programs. The new Genealogy Software Reviews site allows interactive user input and should be a more useful resource for everyone."
The Genealogy Software Review site is free to use and does not require registration.
###
About Louis Kessler
Louis Kessler has been a genealogist and programmer for over 30 years. He has published newspaper articles on genealogy, given presentations on genealogy, and is Past President of a regional Heritage Center. He is the developer of the genealogy program known as Behold that can be found at www.beholdgenealogy.com.
In message of 25 Sep, lkessler <lkess...@lkessler.com> wrote:
> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE > GenSoftReviews Site Launched > All the genealogy software, reviewed and rated by you. > Winnipeg, Manitoba -- September 24, 2008 -- Now there's a website > that > allows users of genealogy software to rate and review the programs > they've > used or tried. This will allow others who are looking for programs to > better > compare and select software that will help them. > The site is located at: www.gensoftreviews.com
Thsi site reuqires you to have Javascript ON. My client definitely has this turned off. So his site is useless to me.
-- Tim Powys-Lybbe t...@powys.org For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/
In message of 26 Sep, lkessler <lkess...@lkessler.com> wrote:
> On Sep 25, 6:22 am, Tim Powys-Lybbe <t...@powys.org> wrote: >> Thsi site reuqires you to have Javascript ON. My client definitely >> has this turned off. So his site is useless to me. > Javascript is only required in order to post your own review. That is > part of the spam check needed, or a site like that wouldn't be > possible.
It is curious that my banks allow me to use their sites without any spam check.
-- Tim Powys-Lybbe t...@powys.org For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/
> > On Sep 25, 6:22 am, Tim Powys-Lybbe <t...@powys.org> wrote: > It is curious that my banks allow me to use their sites without any > spam check.
There's a big difference. With banks, you have to login, and that makes it secure.
At GenSoftReviews, no login or registration is required, so automated spambots can get in, and those are what have to be stopped.
A lot of sites use CAPTCHA (those hard to read words they make you type in) but a lot of people find that annoying and some spambots still can break through them.
There is nothing inherently malicious about Javascript. The fact is that 99.9% of websites use and rely on JavaScript. The wonderful new Web 2.0 AJAX functions are all JavaScript based, and people with JavaScript turned off cannot use those either.
In message of 26 Sep, lkessler <lkess...@lkessler.com> wrote:
>>> On Sep 25, 6:22 am, Tim Powys-Lybbe <t...@powys.org> wrote: >> It is curious that my banks allow me to use their sites without any >> spam check. > There's a big difference. With banks, you have to login, and that > makes it secure. > At GenSoftReviews, no login or registration is required, so automated > spambots can get in, and those are what have to be stopped.
You have provided your own answer.
Some sites recognise when javascript is not available and then move you to another page of their site, sometimes with a suitable bit of information. So you could do the same, and impose whatever security feature you feel necessary to handle the lack of Javascript.
-- Tim Powys-Lybbe t...@powys.org For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/
lkessler wrote: > Javascript is only required in order to post your own review. That is > part of the spam check needed, or a site like that wouldn't be > possible.
Javascript is not "required" for spam prevention.
Blogging sites that I maintain get several hundred spam attempts a week.
More than 95% are stopped by two tricks:
1. A hidden field put in the form that has to be passed back. If the spammer invents a value that the server did not create recently, reject.
2. If the time between creating that value and getting it back is shorter than a human can type, reject.
The other five percent are discarded by Bayesian analysis.
On Sep 26, 7:58 pm, Wes Groleau <groleau+n...@freeshell.org> wrote:
> Javascript is not "required" for spam prevention. > Blogging sites that I maintain get several hundred spam attempts a week. > More than 95% are stopped by two tricks ...
Thanks for mentioning this Wes.
I've now implemented some non-javascript spam prevention techniques at www.gensoftreviews.com and have turned off the Java-based HashCash algorithm I was using. As long as all the automated spam is prevented, I'll be happy to leave it this way.
Tim: Please go back to gensoftreviews and try again to add the reviews you originally wanted. I did test this in Firefox with Javascript turned off, and it seemed to work okay. But if you encounter any problems, please let me know.
Thanks. I didn't know that Javascript would be such a big issue with some people, but as long as a workable solution is available, I'm willing to do what I can.
In message of 27 Sep, lkessler <lkess...@lkessler.com> wrote:
> On Sep 26, 7:58 pm, Wes Groleau <groleau+n...@freeshell.org> wrote: >> Javascript is not "required" for spam prevention. >> Blogging sites that I maintain get several hundred spam attempts a week. >> More than 95% are stopped by two tricks ... > Thanks for mentioning this Wes. > I've now implemented some non-javascript spam prevention techniques at > www.gensoftreviews.com and have turned off the Java-based HashCash > algorithm I was using. As long as all the automated spam is prevented, > I'll be happy to leave it this way. > Tim: Please go back to gensoftreviews and try again to add the > reviews you originally wanted. I did test this in Firefox with > Javascript turned off, and it seemed to work okay. But if you > encounter any problems, please let me know.
Can't enter the ratings.
> Thanks. I didn't know that Javascript would be such a big issue with > some people, but as long as a workable solution is available, I'm > willing to do what I can.
There is advice going round to turn Javascript off to avoid viruses.
-- Tim Powys-Lybbe t...@powys.org For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/
> In message of 27 Sep, lkessler <lkess...@lkessler.com> wrote: >> I've now implemented some non-javascript spam prevention techniques at >> www.gensoftreviews.com and have turned off the Java-based HashCash >> algorithm I was using. As long as all the automated spam is prevented, >> I'll be happy to leave it this way.
Well, I _did_ mention that one or two a month slip through. So, if "all" is to be taken literally....
Also, if one of those methods is Bayesian analysis, there will be a training period to fine-tune the statistics. And some Bayesian implementations work better than others.
Tim Powys-Lybbe wrote: > There is advice going round to turn Javascript off to avoid viruses.
My approach to protection is multiple. (1) I disallow certain actions of Javascript, not all Javascript. (2) I surf in a non-admin account. (3) I run a proxy which filters out huge numbers of blackhat domains (4) I like websites that are SIMPLE.
On Sep 27, 4:34 am, Tim Powys-Lybbe <t...@powys.org> wrote:
> Can't enter the ratings.
Right! Sorry I didn't check that first. That was a tough one to solve, but I finally did.
You can do CSS star ratings, but unfortunately there is no way without Javascript to pass the selected value to the form. So I had to use select dropdown boxes instead which work but are not as pretty. Then I had to hide the stars when Javascript is off, so I had to use CSS to place the dropdowns on top of the stars thus hiding them.
Please try it again, and let me know if it now works. Thanks.
> There is advice going round to turn Javascript off to avoid viruses.
Javascript script viruses are possible, but are "largely theoretical". The one thing that is guaranteed by turning it off is that you will disable functionality on many webpages. See: http://www.livinginternet.com/i/is_vir_mac.htm
None-the-less, I have made these changes and you should now be able to submit a review and the ratings with Javascript off.
In message of 29 Sep, lkessler <lkess...@lkessler.com> wrote:
> On Sep 27, 4:34 am, Tim Powys-Lybbe <t...@powys.org> wrote:
>> Can't enter the ratings. > Right! Sorry I didn't check that first. That was a tough one to solve, > but I finally did. > You can do CSS star ratings, but unfortunately there is no way without > Javascript to pass the selected value to the form. So I had to use > select dropdown boxes instead which work but are not as pretty. Then I > had to hide the stars when Javascript is off, so I had to use CSS to > place the dropdowns on top of the stars thus hiding them. > Please try it again, and let me know if it now works. Thanks.
It? Where is it? (FX: Digs for IT and finds buried treasure. /FX)
"Empty Document
"The document sent by the server is empty"
-- Tim Powys-Lybbe t...@powys.org For a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/
On Sep 29, 3:00 am, Tim Powys-Lybbe <t...@powys.org> wrote:
> It? Where is it? (FX: Digs for IT and finds buried treasure. /FX) > "Empty Document > "The document sent by the server is empty"
That can happen if there is in error in the php on the page. But the page comes up okay testing for me with Javascript off in Firefox and in IE6 (although I notice that the boxes are not placed correctly over the stars in IE6. I'll have to try IE7 later). So the page itself is okay.
What webbrowser do you use?
It could also happen if the webserver is busy and times out, which unfortunately (according to my logs) happens a few times a day. Were all pages of the site giving you that, or only the pages where you can add your review?
