"Re: When did RR start selling our info to spammers"
> I get these all day, both Ad-Watch, and Norton Security fail to
> stop these popups from Netpopup.com, etc.... I saw the eariler
> post about spammers, but no solution is forthcoming, I dont even
> have a browser open and they pop up anyway. Blah!
> Thanks!
It's a Windows Messenger popup. Look up "messenger popup" in Google
for several explanations and solutions.
Mike "it's everyone's friend" Yetto
--
myetto1 at nycap dot rr dot com
More is good... all is better.
- Ferengi Rule of Acquisition #242.
If it's a webbased popup, popup stopper works great.
"Mike Yetto" <mike....@check.in.my.sig> wrote in message
news:Xns93C7AE07C8...@24.24.2.165...
>I get these all day, both Ad-Watch, and Norton Security fail to stop these
>popups from Netpopup.com, etc....
One possible solution: try using a different web browser.
Mozilla (for example) has the ability to turn off web popups somewhat
selectively, or even turn them into background pages that simply show
up in another tab.
--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Eden Prairie, MN
OS/2 + BeOS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS = PC Hobbyist Heaven! :-)
Now running in text mode on a PPro/200. Eat my dust, GUI freaks!
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
He doesn't even have his browser open and he gets the pop-ups!!!! It's
windows messager!!!!
"Richard Steiner" <rste...@visi.com> wrote in message
news:NYuJ/oHpv6D...@visi.com...
Marie, gologa is being hit with the Windows Messenger spam. Not web
browsing popup windows. S/he has been advised to turn off or block the
Messenger.
The Messenger windows should more correctly be called "dialog boxes" or
"dialog windows" rather than popups (even though that is what they do
<g>).
Re the browser popups: rather than adding another layer of software like
your panicware program, why not just painlessly switch to a better
browser?
IE is quite old now as the life of browsers goes, and won't be updated
until at least 2005, according to Microsoft. Try one of these, all of
which have built-in popup stoppers, tabbed browsing, cookie management,
lots of other features, and are in a constant state of development.
Firebird - 6 MB - browser only <-- my choice
http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firebird/release-notes.html
Mozilla - 11 MB - browser, mail, news
http://www.mozilla.org/
Opera 7.11 - 3.2 MB (free version ad supported, $39USD no ads)
http://www.opera.com/
> "gologa" <gol...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:NQAVa.119106$hV.85...@twister.austin.rr.com...
> > I get these all day, both Ad-Watch, and Norton Security fail to stop these
> > popups from Netpopup.com, etc.... I saw the eariler post about spammers,
> > but no solution is forthcoming, I dont even have a browser open and they
> pop
> > up anyway. Blah!
> > Thanks!
> >
> > "Re: When did RR start selling our info to spammers"
> >
> >
>
>
>
--
-bts
-This space intentionally left blank.
Don't forget http://www.avantbrowser.com/
>I am interested in trying out Mozilla .. and I would like to know
>exactly what ver I should try ?
I have both Mozilla/Firebird 0.6 and Mozilla 1.4 running under OS/2,
Win95, and Linux here. That's one thing I like about it -- it exists
on almost all of the platforms I care about. :-)
Newer versions are beta code and potentially unstable.
The differences:
Mozilla 1.4 is the full browser using the original Mozilla interface,
and bundled with the mail, news, and instant messaging clients. It's
roughly analogous to Netscape 7.1.
Firebird is just the browser part, and it uses a different interface
from Mozilla. Some of the same ideas (tabbed browsing, etc), but some
differences as well.
The project has stated that Firebird will be the interface of the
future, which is why it might be worth looking at. I rather like it.
BTW -- Mozilla and Firebird will each install their code and their
profile info into separate directories -- there are no conflicts
that I can see.
I tend to prefer installing from ZIP files to EXE files, but you may
have a different opinion.
"Richard Steiner" <rste...@visi.com> wrote in message
news:qlMK/oHpvKC...@visi.com...
Yes.
Essentially, it's the same browser as the mozilla browser. Some
differences, but mostly the same.
Jeff
"gologa" <gol...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:NQAVa.119106$hV.85...@twister.austin.rr.com...
I like Adsubtract as a popup blocker. It is not free but it works
very well.
++ Ray Kinserlow Jr. ++
kinserlow at earthlink dot net
"Ray Kinserlow" <m...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:9475jvkn6j7p6ao87...@4ax.com...
"Ray Kinserlow" <m...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:9475jvkn6j7p6ao87...@4ax.com...
Any company that release unsecurable software I will have nothing to do with
and will not only not reccommend them but will reccommend just about anyone
else over them.
>
> Any company that release unsecurable software I will have nothing to do with
> and will not only not reccommend them but will reccommend just about anyone
> else over them.
>
>
So... You choose to use Microsoft Outlook Express because???
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.510 / Virus Database: 307 - Release Date: 8/14/03
unsecureable: not able to be secured
Your point is?
>
The point is you *can* secure them. Just because most people do not does not
mean it cannot be. If the majority of users used something else, viruses
would be written for that. We've seen Solaris worms, Linux worms, BSD worms
(this means you OSX people). No software is free from bugs, but to not even
give a way to secure software, that's just irresponsible. I've been using
the internet for a decade now and have only received one trojan, I've never
gotten an e-mail virus, even after I switched from Eurdora when they were
unable to figure out how to properly support IMAP (and still don't as of
their last version).
Check out Analog X's proxy server, it's "on" or "off". There is no way to
distinguish between LAN and WAN traffic.
"Anarchy" <conc...@hotmailNOSPAM.com> wrote in message
news:_SP0b.61176$K4.29...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 11:06:45 -0500, "Proteus"
<Pro...@somewhere.rr.com> wrote: