Google Analytics interfering with page loading
Herb
<http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15639> (or indeed any other
link from this site's e-newsletter, e.g.
<http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15649>) in FF, it hangs and
I see "Read www.google-analytics.com" in the bottom left corner.
The page opens OK in IE7.
Any comments/solutions?
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
> On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 12:02:54 +0000, Herb wrote:
>
>> When I try and open this page
>> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15639> (or indeed any other
>> link from this site's e-newsletter, e.g.
>> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15649>) in FF, it hangs and
>> I see "Read www.google-analytics.com" in the bottom left corner.
>>
>> The page opens OK in IE7.
>>
>> Any comments/solutions?
>
>
> google-analytics.com/*
Thanks, but I'm not sure whether your solution assumes that Adblock Plus
is already installed or whether you are suggesting that I should install it.
In any case, I uninstalled it a while back and I don't really want to
reinstall it do to its 'overkill effect'.
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
> On 03.12.2008 13:02, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused Herb to
> generate the following:? :
>> When I try and open this page
>> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15639> (or indeed any other
>> link from this site's e-newsletter, e.g.
>> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15649>) in FF, it hangs and
>> I see "Read www.google-analytics.com" in the bottom left corner.
>>
>> The page opens OK in IE7.
>>
>> Any comments/solutions?
>>
>>
Thanks for the feedback.
> is that Google site the spam database that is used to identify scamsites??
I don't think so - see <http://www.google.com/analytics/>
> how are your cookies and popups set?? mine are to allow.
Mine are set to ask for permission, but those links don't ask for
permission - they just result in FF hanging indefinitely.
> Is Adblock (or whatever you use) set to allow those URLs ?
I don't use Adblock - I wonder if FlashBlock could be the culprit?
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
I just added www.edie.net to my FlashBlock whitelist, and the problem
persists - FWIW, I'm running FF 3.0.4 on XP SP3.
Any other ideas?
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Tarkus
> On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 12:02:54 +0000, Herb wrote:
>
>> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15639> (or indeed any other
>> link from this site's e-newsletter, e.g.
>> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15649>) in FF, it hangs and
>> I see "Read www.google-analytics.com" in the bottom left corner.
>>
>> The page opens OK in IE7.
>>
>> Any comments/solutions?
>
Adblock Plus with the USA filter subscription does the trick on that
page, without that rule.
Herb
Are you saying I need Adblock Plus to get this working!?
As I said, I don't really want to re-install Adblock Plus.
There must be something else on my system that's preventing these pages
from loading, but I'm not sure where else to look.
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
David McRitchie
> When I try and open this page
> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15639> (or indeed any other
> link from this site's e-newsletter, e.g.
> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15649>) in FF, it hangs and
> I see "Read www.google-analytics.com" in the bottom left corner.
>
> The page opens OK in IE7.
>
> Any comments/solutions?
Works fine for me , Firefox 3.04, broadband connection,
Dell® Inspiron® 1521 (laptop) with pre installed Windows® Vista® Basic Home (32 bit),
hardware: 1.60 gigahertz, AMD TurionT 64 X2 Mobil Technology TL-50, 1.87 GB RAM, ATI Radeon XL270
I allow google.com cookies
and that was with "Adblock" already disabled, but with style 299 "Ad Blocking FiltersetP" enabled,
same result with both disabled.
blocked in hosts file [ http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm ]
127.0.0.1 www.google-analytics.com
127.0.0.1 pagead.googlesyndication.com
127.0.0.1 pagead2.googlesyndication.com <== one of this one is used on your page
I would definitely install a hosts file as your first line of defense for future.
but you can block same files with the other two as well.
Try deleting your Google.com cookies, to see if you get a different set of ads that don't hang
--
HTH,
David McRitchie, extensions I use are briefly documented on my site
Firefox Custom: http://www.mvps.org/dmcritchie/firefox/firefox.htm
Tarkus
> On 03.12.2008 16:52 UK Time, Tarkus wrote:
>> Rom wrote:
>>> On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 12:02:54 +0000, Herb wrote:
>>>
>>>> When I try and open this page
>>>> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15639> (or indeed any other
>>>> link from this site's e-newsletter, e.g.
>>>> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15649>) in FF, it hangs and
>>>> I see "Read www.google-analytics.com" in the bottom left corner.
>>>>
>>>> The page opens OK in IE7.
>>>>
>>>> Any comments/solutions?
>>>
>>> Adblock Plus and a filter rule:
>>>
>>> google-analytics.com/*
>>
>> Adblock Plus with the USA filter subscription does the trick on that
>> page, without that rule.
>
> Are you saying I need Adblock Plus to get this working!?
>
> As I said, I don't really want to re-install Adblock Plus.
Works also with Adblock Plus disabled, but NoScript enabled.
Ron Hunter
--
Ron Hunter rphu...@charter.net
Terry R.
on the keyboard:
> When I try and open this page
> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15639> (or indeed any other
> link from this site's e-newsletter, e.g.
> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15649>) in FF, it hangs and
> I see "Read www.google-analytics.com" in the bottom left corner.
>
> The page opens OK in IE7.
>
> Any comments/solutions?
>
Do you have NoScript installed? Does it happen in Safe Mode?
--
Terry R.
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
EE
> When I try and open this page
> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15639> (or indeed any other
> link from this site's e-newsletter, e.g.
> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15649>) in FF, it hangs and
> I see "Read www.google-analytics.com" in the bottom left corner.
>
> The page opens OK in IE7.
>
> Any comments/solutions?
>
Blocksite or Adblock Plus.
Herb
Thanks for your detailed reply. However, I'm getting rather confused
because I want to *access* these pages, not block them...
> Try deleting your Google.com cookies, to see if you get a different
> set of ads that don't hang
I deleted the cookies, but the 2 pages I mentioned as examples still
won't load, i.e. <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15639> and
<http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15649>
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
Herb
> On 03.12.2008 17:04, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused Herb to
> nope, sorry... I recall that you had difficulties a couple of weeks back
> (with something) and Flashblock was the culprit - but my memory didn't
> reach that far back to recall if Flashblock or Adblock.... - getting
> old, you know!
>
> I seem to remember though, that you checked all the other bits (Popups,
> cookies, Java and JS) then and they were OK....
Thanks for your reply - that other thread was under "Strange website
behaviour". I never got the site in question to work properly, but I
don't really need it on a regular basis, whereas I would like to be able
to read edie.net pages without having to resort to IE.
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
On further investigation I note that a large hosts file appears to have
been created back in September by Spybot - Search & Destroy - this was
probably the time when I first ran Spybot - Search & Destroy on this
machine.
My hosts file doesn't contain the entries you mentioned, i.e.
www.google-analytics.com, pagead2.googlesyndication.com, but I
temporarily renamed my hosts file to see if it makes a difference, but
the edie.net pages still hang on loading (presumably I don't have to
reboot to see the effect of changing the hosts file?)
For future reference, do you think the hosts file generated by Spybot -
Search & Destroy is OK, or would you recommend replacing it with the
MVPS file?
In any case, I'm still looking for a solution for the edie.net access
problem.
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
Thanks, I checked the hosts file situation (see my reply to David) and
it looks as if the problem isn't related to the hosts file.
As for the firewall, it seems I have both the Kaspersky firewall and the
Windows XP firewall enabled. I can't see anything in Kaspersky that
would block access to the edie.net pages, but I'm not sure how to
examine the finer details of what's going on inside the XP firewall.
In any case, I remember reading somewhere that one probably shouldn't
have 2 firewalls operating at the same time (or am I getting confused
with anti-virus software?).
I temporarily disabled the XP firewall, but the edie.net pages still
don't load. Should I leave the XP firewall disabled anyway (in view of
the fact the I have the Kaspersky firewall running?)
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
> The date and time was 12/3/2008 4:02 AM, and on a whim, Herb pounded out
> on the keyboard:
>
>> When I try and open this page
>> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15639> (or indeed any other
>> link from this site's e-newsletter, e.g.
>> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15649>) in FF, it hangs and
>> I see "Read www.google-analytics.com" in the bottom left corner.
>>
>> The page opens OK in IE7.
>>
>> Any comments/solutions?
>>
>
> Do you have NoScript installed? Does it happen in Safe Mode?
>
I don't think I have NoScript installed - presumably I would see it in
the list of Add-ons if it was installed?
Yes, it does happen in Safe Mode.
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
Herb
> On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 15:58:00 +0000, Herb wrote:
>
>> On 03.12.2008 13:19 UK Time, Rom wrote:
>>> On Wed, 03 Dec 2008 12:02:54 +0000, Herb wrote:
>>>
>>>> When I try and open this page
>>>> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15639> (or indeed any other
>>>> link from this site's e-newsletter, e.g.
>>>> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15649>) in FF, it hangs and
>>>> I see "Read www.google-analytics.com" in the bottom left corner.
>>>>
>>>> The page opens OK in IE7.
>>>>
>>>> Any comments/solutions?
>>> Adblock Plus and a filter rule:
>>>
>>> google-analytics.com/*
>> Thanks, but I'm not sure whether your solution assumes that Adblock Plus
>> is already installed or whether you are suggesting that I should install it.
>
> problem often experienced but with (some, or random, or at times)
> sites being slow or not loading in Firefox.
>
> m.webtrends.com/* was another filter rule I added for the same reason
> of interfering with page loading.
>
>> In any case, I uninstalled it a while back and I don't really want to
>> reinstall it do to its 'overkill effect'.
>
> just stuff you want to block or your own filter rules. Hopefully from
> the other comments, suggestions or solutions offered in the thread,
> you find the cause and/or an acceptable solution.
>
Okay, I installed Adblock Plus and added the filter you recommended,
i.e. google-analytics.com/* but disabled everything else (except a
whitelist Adblock Plus seems to have imported from somewhere - perhaps
the previous Adblock Plus installation?)
It still doesn't work, but the behaviour of the hanging edie.net pages
has changed slightly, i.e. in the bottom left corner of the FF window I
no longer see "Reading www.google-analytics.com", it simply says
"Stopped" now.
Ron Hunter
off the Windows firewall, renaming the hosts file to something else, and
then rebooting. The pages load normally here with FF3 and Windows XP
SP2, and Outpost Firewall (no AV).
--
Ron Hunter rphu...@charter.net
Tarkus
> I don't want to block it, I want to enable it!
Have you tried Ctrl+5?
Tarkus
Er, Ctrl+F5.
Herb
Thanks for your persistence :-)
I did all that, but the problem persists =-O
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
Is this equivalent to Reload?
I tried, but the result is the same :-(
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
> On Thu, 04 Dec 2008 07:27:44 +0000, Herb wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>> Okay, I installed Adblock Plus and added the filter you recommended,
>> i.e. google-analytics.com/* but disabled everything else (except a
>> whitelist Adblock Plus seems to have imported from somewhere - perhaps
>> the previous Adblock Plus installation?)
>
> installation (uninstalling extensions doesn't necessarily remove all
> data or prefs from the profile - like the adblockplus folder), and it
> can now be deleted by selecting it and hitting the Delete key or
> Delete on the context menu, leaving Adblock Plus itself and the newly
> added filter still enabled.
Thanks for your persistence :-)
I deactivated all Adblock Plus entries and filters, leaving only
google-analytics.com/* active.
Initially this didn't seem to have any effect, but suddenly the pages
started loading!
Intriguingly, it now seems to work with or without Adblock Plus enabled.
>> It still doesn't work, but the behaviour of the hanging edie.net pages
>> has changed slightly, i.e. in the bottom left corner of the FF window I
>> no longer see "Reading www.google-analytics.com", it simply says
>> "Stopped" now.
>
> "Stopped" usually displays if Stop is hit while loading.
Mmmmm, I certainly didn't hit Stop during loading.
> See if these make any difference or change in behaviour:
> Try Shift + Refresh on pages from the site.
> In Fx3 Tools > Options > Content, UNcheck "Enable JavaScript" to
> temporarily disable it, then try reloading pages from the site.
Thanks, but none of these helped.
>> Any other ideas?
>
> I don't use either, but in another post mentioning HOSTS file and
> Spybot, does Spybot have settings to disable (unimmunise?) the HOSTS
> file? After disabling HOSTS and with browsers closed, would the
> command ipconfig /flushdns be needed and/or make any difference?
Not sure, but in any case, the problem persisted after the earlier
reboot recommended by Ron.
I'll see what happens after the next reboot and report back.
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
> I'll see what happens after the next reboot and report back.
I'm afraid the problem persists.
I'm usually pretty persistent and try and get to the bottom of things,
but I have a feeling that I (and everyone else who tried to help) has
already wasted enough time on this and I probably have to leave it for
now...
The question is whether I should reinstate the hosts file generated by
Spybot - Search & Destroy or used the MVPS file recommended by David?
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Jay Garcia
--- Original Message ---
No problems of any kind with the site and I don't have NoScript or any
other blocking type extension installed. Try turning off your anti-virus
application, clearing cache, etc. If none of the replies help, disable
ALL of your extensions and see what happens.
--
Jay Garcia - Netscape/Flock Champion
www.ufaq.org
Netscape - Flock - Firefox - Thunderbird - Seamonkey Support
Tarkus
> On 04.12.2008 10:03 UK Time, Tarkus wrote:
>> Tarkus wrote:
>>> Herb wrote:
>>>> I don't want to block it, I want to enable it!
>>>
>>> Have you tried Ctrl+5?
>>
>> Er, Ctrl+F5.
>
> Is this equivalent to Reload?
>
> I tried, but the result is the same :-(
No, it's the equivalent of reloading while replacing the site's data in
your cache. Quite often sites that don't work simply have some bad data
in your cache, and Ctrl+F5 fixes the problem. A regular refresh simply
reloads the existing data in your cache.
clay
> On 04.12.2008 11:53 UK Time, Herb wrote:
>
>> I'll see what happens after the next reboot and report back.
>
> I'm afraid the problem persists.
Way back in the beginning of this thread, you mentioned having cookies
set to 'ask'.
I didn't read every reply so, did you try changing to the default accept
cookies?
Herb
Thanks for the explanation - Ctrl+F5 will no doubt come in useful in future.
I remember occasions where reload didn't have any effect on pages that
had definitely changed.
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
Thanks, I'll try that - come to think if it, I'm quite tired of that
setting anyway :-)
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
It doesn't work, but I'll keep the new cooking setting anyway - thanks
for mentioning it.
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
> On 04.12.2008 06:49, Herb wrote:
>
> --- Original Message ---
>
>> On 04.12.2008 11:53 UK Time, Herb wrote:
>>
>>> I'll see what happens after the next reboot and report back.
>> I'm afraid the problem persists.
>>
>> I'm usually pretty persistent and try and get to the bottom of things,
>> but I have a feeling that I (and everyone else who tried to help) has
>> already wasted enough time on this and I probably have to leave it for
>> now...
>>
>> The question is whether I should reinstate the hosts file generated by
>> Spybot - Search & Destroy or used the MVPS file recommended by David?
>>
>
> No problems of any kind with the site and I don't have NoScript or any
> other blocking type extension installed. Try turning off your anti-virus
> application, clearing cache, etc. If none of the replies help, disable
> ALL of your extensions and see what happens.
Hi Jay,
Thanks for your reply.
I paused Kaspersky, but no luck.
I had already tried clearing the cache and safe mode earlier without
success.
Meanwhile, I have come to the conclusion that the behaviour I'm seeing
is either erratic, or it only happens for certain pages from this site.
This recent page, for example, stubbornly refuses to load:
<http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15672>
I'm not sure whether this gives any further clues, but when I
right-click in the white space on this page (while it is unsuccessfully
trying to load) and select "View Page in Ext.App." (which in my case is
set to IE 7), IE7 also refuses to load it and displays this in the
address bar:
wyciwyg://7/http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15672
With the proper address the page opens OK in IE7, but where on earth is
the "wyciwyg://7/" coming from, and is it somehow related to my display
problem?
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
wtwjgc
wyciwyg usually means "What you see is what you get"
--
wtwjgc (Joe)
Herb
Really?
Googling leads to this page: <http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/ffcache/>,
which may indicate some kind of cache problem.
By the way, what does wtwjgc mean? :-)
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
wtwjgc
You learn something every day. Yes, it seems to point that way.
wtwjgc is a combination of my website name and my initials (try Google).
I don't post link to it here because it's not relevant to Mozilla.
--
wtwjgc (Joe)
David McRitchie
> www.google-analytics.com, pagead2.googlesyndication.com, but I
> temporarily renamed my hosts file to see if it makes a difference, but
> the edie.net pages still hang on loading (presumably I don't have to
> reboot to see the effect of changing the hosts file?)
>
> For future reference, do you think the hosts file generated by Spybot -
> Search & Destroy is OK, or would you recommend replacing it with the
> MVPS file?
What system are you running on, what type of internet access do you have.
If you are on Windows 2000, *and* have dial-up access then a large hosts file
would destroy you. Anything else, probably not a problem with hosts file.
Hosts file has to be very specific though you would have to block each of
baddomain.com, www.baddomain.com, www4.baddomain.com,
virial.baddomain.com; whereas, with filters in configuration files, use of
adblock, adblock plus, styles and others you you can specify a very generic form
such as baddomain.com using a lot less items you can block more.
The hosts file applies to accessing those files from you system, blocking
applies to all of your browsers. So if you see what you want in IE then
the hosts file is not your immediate problem.
The use of ads is an unknown entity, you may be served a different ad
than others are getting, after a few days they problem might go away
because you would be served completely different set of ads. You will
likely get served different ads with different profiles, or different browsers.
So your problem could disappear within five days without you doing a thing.
Ads often contain viruses and other malware, particularly when they are
introduced by third parties. The idea of hosts files and filters is to eliminate
the sites that are known to produce problems those you always want to stay
away from and those are the really important ones to have in your hosts file.
As to whether the hosts file from others at mvps.org or from Spybot Search
and Destroy is better, I doubt that anyone could give a specific answer, the
most relevant part would probably be your .uk address and what sites you
visit. You would want to avoid duplications though in your hosts file.
You can also block sites in various ways in Firefox, but they apply only to
the profile they are installed in, but because you can turn things on and off
you can do away with annoyances which may or may not be harmful.
It would be helpful if you created an *additional* profile to see what happens.
The new profile would not have any extensions which you already tested
in Safe Mode, but it also wouldn't have any configuration changes that you
may have made.
David McRitchie
> right-click in the white space on this page (while it is unsuccessfully
> trying to load) and select "View Page in Ext.App." (which in my case is
> set to IE 7), IE7 also refuses to load it and displays this in the
> address bar:
>
> wyciwyg://7/http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15672
>
> With the proper address the page opens OK in IE7, but where on earth is
> the "wyciwyg://7/" coming from, and is it somehow related to my display
> problem?
I don't see how that has anything to do with your original problem, not yet anyway.
That context menu item is not part of Firefox, you are getting that from an extension
something that is trying to open page in an editor of some kind (wysiwyg is
what you see is what you get). Kind of looks like a prefix to purposely make it
fail if you don't tailor it for your use. If you can't figure out what extension, try...
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&newwindow=1&q=firefox+%22view+page+in%22++ext*++appl*+&btnG=Search
Tarkus
You're welcome. Did you try it on this particular site?
Pete Holsberg
> On 04.12.2008 17:06, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused Tarkus to
> generate the following:? :
>
> reload, bypassing the cached version)
>
Shift+Reload? Where is the Reload key in Wndows?
Pete Holsberg
> On 04.12.2008 23:48, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused Pete Holsberg
>
>>
>>
>
Ah, the FIREFOX reload icon!!! :-) Thx.
Mele
"Herb" <HE@UK> wrote in message
news:B5KdnRen9re2lKXU...@mozilla.org...
I always have cookies set to ask and I just went to that page on Fx 1.5
(yes, I use 1.5...I have 3 on virtual machines and 3 can't hold a candle to
1.5 which is a far superior browser) and was asked to accept two cookies
which I declined. The page loaded just fine.
I use HostsMan and I have all the google analytic addresses in my Hosts
file. I have NO cache on Fx. No disk cache and no memory cache. Fx works a
million times better with both disabled (I wouldn't do this if I was stuck
on dialup but on broadband there is no need for any cache of any type). I
don't know if either of these things have anything to do with the page
loading easily. Oh, I also use the Proxomitron and I enabled the log window
just before going there. Proxo blocked a fair amount of nasty ad related
stuff there and some other stuff but I don't think Proxo is the reason the
page loaded so quickly.
>
> --
> Herbert Eppel
> www.HETranslation.co.uk
Ron Hunter
> "Herb" <HE@UK> wrote in message
> news:B5KdnRen9re2lKXU...@mozilla.org...
>> On 04.12.2008 16:33 UK Time, clay wrote:
>>> Herb wrote:
>>>> On 04.12.2008 11:53 UK Time, Herb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I'll see what happens after the next reboot and report back.
>>>> I'm afraid the problem persists.
>>>> ...
>>> Way back in the beginning of this thread, you mentioned having cookies
>>> set to 'ask'.
>>> I didn't read every reply so, did you try changing to the default accept
>>> cookies?
>> Thanks, I'll try that - come to think if it, I'm quite tired of that
>> setting anyway :-)
>
> I always have cookies set to ask and I just went to that page on Fx 1.5
> (yes, I use 1.5...I have 3 on virtual machines and 3 can't hold a candle to
> 1.5 which is a far superior browser) and was asked to accept two cookies
> which I declined. The page loaded just fine.
>
I allow all cookies. They serve several useful purposes, and I have
never heard of any cookie causing any harm.
As for 1.5 being a better browser... I strongly disagree. If you are
happy with it, though, by all means continue to use it until it won't do
something you need to do.
> I use HostsMan and I have all the google analytic addresses in my Hosts
> file. I have NO cache on Fx. No disk cache and no memory cache. Fx works a
> million times better with both disabled (I wouldn't do this if I was stuck
> on dialup but on broadband there is no need for any cache of any type). I
> don't know if either of these things have anything to do with the page
> loading easily. Oh, I also use the Proxomitron and I enabled the log window
> just before going there. Proxo blocked a fair amount of nasty ad related
> stuff there and some other stuff but I don't think Proxo is the reason the
> page loaded so quickly.
If you have broadband, a disk cache is pretty much useless, but a memory
cache allows you to do things that are quite handy, but if you don't
mind waiting a second or two more while you use bandwidth you already
fetched something with, have at it.
>> --
>> Herbert Eppel
>> www.HETranslation.co.uk
>
>
--
Ron Hunter rphu...@charter.net
Herb
Thanks to Mele and Ron for the further comments on this issue.
FWIW, I think I intend to leave my cookies settings as they are now,
i.e. "Accept cookies from sites" and "Accept third-party cookies" plus
"Keep until I close Firefox".
And no, I don't intend to go back to FF 1.5...
>> I use HostsMan and I have all the google analytic addresses in my
>> Hosts file. I have NO cache on Fx. No disk cache and no memory cache.
>> Fx works a million times better with both disabled (I wouldn't do this
>> if I was stuck on dialup but on broadband there is no need for any
>> cache of any type). I don't know if either of these things have
>> anything to do with the page loading easily. Oh, I also use the
>> Proxomitron and I enabled the log window just before going there.
>> Proxo blocked a fair amount of nasty ad related stuff there and some
>> other stuff but I don't think Proxo is the reason the page loaded so
>> quickly.
>
> If you have broadband, a disk cache is pretty much useless, but a memory
> cache allows you to do things that are quite handy, but if you don't
> mind waiting a second or two more while you use bandwidth you already
> fetched something with, have at it.
Thanks to Mele for pointing out HostsMan. I installed it, and it offered
to update the hosts file with the MVPS hosts file mentioned by David,
which I did.
As for the cache, I'm quite happy to follow Ron's advice and keep the
memory cache, but since I'm on broadband I would be interested in trying
FF without the disk cache. The question is how do I turn it off?
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
Hi David,
Thanks for your additional helpful comments.
I'm on XP SP3 and have a broadband connection, so a large hosts file
shouldn't cause problems, and I just implemented the MVPS hosts you
mentioned (I used the HostsMan program Mele mentioned).
Thanks for your recommendation to try a different profile - you seem to
have hit the nail on the head, i.e. while some of the edie.net links
still refuse to open via my own FF profile, they open alright if I use
the default FF profile, which seems to suggest that something in my
profile is causing the blockage. Any idea what this might be?
See below for listing of my extensions and plugins.
Last updated: Mon, 08 Dec 2008 09:17:56 GMT
User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.0.4)
Gecko/2008102920 Firefox/3.0.4
Extensions (enabled: 32, disabled: 1):
* Aardvark 2.97
* Adblock Plus 1.0 [disabled]
* Adobe DLM (powered by getPlus(R)) 1.5.2.35
* AutoSlideshow 0.3.4
* British English Dictionary 1.19
* Deutsches Wörterbuch 1.0.1
* Dictionary Switcher 1.0
* Download Statusbar 0.9.6.3
* DownloadHelper 3.5.1
* Fast Video Download 1.6.1
* Flashblock 1.5.7
* Forecastfox 0.9.7.7
* Greasemonkey 0.8.20080609.0
* IE Tab 1.5.20081203
* Image Zoom 0.3.1
* InfoLister 0.10
* Java Console 6.0.03
* Java Console 6.0.05
* Java Console 6.0.07
* Java Console 5.0.12
* Java Console 6.0.04
* Java Console 6.0.10
* Java Quick Starter 1.0
* Nightly Tester Tools 2.0.2
* Open link in... 1.5.1
* Open Long Url 0.2.3
* PDF Download 2.0.0.0
* QuickNote 0.6.0.4
* ReminderFox 1.8
* SpiderZilla 1.6.0
* Unsorted Bookmarks Folder Menu 1.6
* Update Notifier 0.1.5.4
* URL Link 2.02.3
Themes (1):
* Default 3.0.4 [selected]
Plugins (17):
* Adobe Acrobat
* BBC iPlayer Plugin
* getPlus for Adobe 15235
* Google Update
* IE Tab Plug-in
* iTunes Application Detector
* Java(TM) Platform SE 6 U10
* Microsoft® DRM
* Mozilla Default Plug-in
* Photodex Presenter Plugin
* QuickTime Plug-in 7.5.5
* RealPlayer Version Plugin
* RealPlayer(tm) G2 LiveConnect-Enabled Plug-In (32-bit)
* Shockwave Flash
* Snapfish Plugin for Firefox
* Virtual Earth 3D 3.00080829001 plugin for Mozilla
* Windows Media Player Plug-in Dynamic Link Library
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
Hi David,
You mentioned wysiwyg, but what it actually says is wyciwyg.
As I said in my earlier reply to wtwjgc, Googling for wyciwyg leads to
this page: <http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/ffcache/>, which may indicate
some kind of cache problem - would you agree?
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
Yes, thanks I did, but it doesn't work. Something in my profile appears
to be blocking the access - see one of my earlier replies to David.
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
> On 04.12.2008 18:14, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused Herb to
> generate the following:? :
>
> this seems to be a cookies problem.
>
> I can load the page twice, on the third go it stays white...
> (1x 1.5.0.9 + 1x 3.0 or 2x 3.0)
>
> RIGHT click on the white space
> select "View Page info"
> click the [More] button
> click the [View Cookies] button
>
> I get these two cookies:
> edie.net ASPSESSIONIDSSRATQDA
> content HBEHDBACHGEBFLIBLCFJLFDB
>
> and
> edie.net EDIE%5FrefID
> content 87824648618795386910
>
> if I delete both, I can open the URL again
>
> At one point during this procedure, I noticed the Google URL you
> mentioned earlier, in my Status Bar....
>
> This is the first time ever that I have used the right click and view
> page info....
Hi Reg,
Thanks for following this up.
Through the procedure you recommended I found 4 cookies relating to
edie.net, but deleting these cookies doesn't help, i.e. access is still
blocked - it seems the problem occurs before the site has a chance to
store any cookies. It seems something in my profile is blocking the
access - see my earlier reply to David.
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
David McRitchie
> [List of extensions and themes]
GreaseMonkey modifies and can suppress output
Flashblock block flash, but think that was already disabled before in your retesting
Forecastfox you will find that in http://kb.mozillazine.org/Problematic_extensions
memory leaks, excessive CPU usage,
even though problems look fixed in later versions, I find extensions
often continue to have same problems (or reversed problems) later on
and am thankful that old problems remain listed.
Java Console 6.0.03 -- 6.0.10 you sure have a lot of those, try to get rid of
old ones, don't expect it has anything to do with your problem.
David McRitchie
Don't even remember if I had noticed the substitution of c for s the the
letter "c" sure sounds like represented word for "s" see. Anyway you found
a page that even has the // next to the wyciswyg// and I just noticed
that was in IE7 not Firefox that you saw it, looks like Reg (squaredancer)
suggestion to check your cache settings would be what to check. The only
reason I replied this part was because you made it a question.
Herb
> "Herb" <HE@UK> (original poster) wrote ...
>> [List of extensions and themes]
>
> GreaseMonkey modifies and can suppress output
Hi David,
Thanks for your further reply and feedback on my extensions.
On closer examination of GreaseMonkey, it seems that the reason I
installed it a while back was the "Two column Google" script which used
to "place Google search results into two columns". I used to find this
quite useful, but it stopped working some time ago (perhaps after
upgarding to FF3?). Does anyone have a solution? If not, I might as well
disable GreaseMonkey (although it doesn't appear to be related to by
edie.net problem).
> Flashblock block flash, but think that was already disabled before in
> your retesting
Yes, thanks, I had already added edie.net to my Flashblock whitelist and
I just tried again with Flashblock disabled, but still no luck.
> Forecastfox you will find that in
> http://kb.mozillazine.org/Problematic_extensions
> memory leaks, excessive CPU usage, even though
> problems look fixed in later versions, I find extensions
> often continue to have same problems (or reversed problems)
> later on
> and am thankful that old problems remain listed.
Thanks for the Forecastfox warning. I didn't realise it is regarded as a
"problematic extension" - I have been using it for some time and I'm not
aware that it causes any problems on my machine.
> Java Console 6.0.03 -- 6.0.10 you sure have a lot of those, try to
> get rid of
> old ones, don't expect it has anything to do with your problem.
>
Thanks for the Java pointer. I would quite like to do a bit of a Java
cleanup, but I'm not quite sure how to go about it.
The only Java-related entry I see in the FF add-ons window is Java Quick
Starter, i.e. I see none of the other entries listed by Infolister,
although they seem to be related to the Java entries I see in the
Windows "Add or Remove Programs" window - see screenshot at
<http://www.hetranslation.co.uk/screenshots/Java.png>.
However, I was under the impression that it is best not to infefere with
multiple version entries listed in the "Add or Remove Programs" window,
but I would be grateful for further advice on this issue.
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
> On 08.12.2008 09:57, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused Herb to
> generate the following:? :
>
> about:config
> type disk in the filter
> .... there are two entries that I see may affect the disk cache...
> 1) browser.cache.disk.capacity
> 2) browser.cache.disk.enable
>
> I would imagine settin 1) to Value 0 (zero)
> and 2) to false
>
> would disable the disk cache ??
Hi Reg,
Thanks for the pointer. The consensus appears to be that I don't need
the disk cache, so I disabled the disk cache by setting
browser.cache.disk.enable to false.
By the way, for some reason, the clear cache option under Clear Private
Data doesn't seem to work for me in the sense that after using that
option my Cache folder still contained numerous items amounting to 44 MB
in total.
I therefore deleted the whole Cache folder from my FF profile, but it
doesn't seem to have resolved the edie.net issue.
> If you filter on cache you get further options, but you may need to
> look at mozillaZine KB to find any relevant information.
Thanks, I'll try and read up on some of these parameters.
> ps - Weihnachtsmarkt war gestern und Samstag - genau vor meine Haustür....
Did you have a Glühwein? :-)
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
David McRitchie
> installed it a while back was the "Two column Google" script which used
> to "place Google search results into two columns".
Whenever your output is based on output that was not designed to be
read as input to a program you are a lot more subject to changes.
So it is not surprising that old scripts are not going to work.
Google changes their appearance quite a bit. Some sites might even
purposely change appearance to prevent screen scraping which is
grabbing information to create a database. I haven't done much
with GreaseMonkey in quite a while as Platypus was not working,
so the scripts either work or don't do anything.
I like the "Stylish" extension, many of the scripts can be installed
in Stylish *or* GreaseMonkey, but with Stylish you have control over
each script . I don't like two columns myself as it makes things
hard to follow. Here is a pretty example of two columns
http://userstyles.org/styles/9844
you can check out other styles with the search at userstyles.org, or with Google
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=site%3Auserstyles.org+two%20column%20google
The repository for GreaseMonkey scripts is userscripts.org
From a comment in one of the ones there it said to use more up to date
http://userscripts.org/scripts/show/32231
but that is all for an entirely different domain than your problem.
Ed Mullen
You can safely use Add or Remove Programs to uninstall older versions of
Java. Just don't delete the newest one. Or, if you're unsure which is
which, just uninstall them all and go get the latest one from Sun and
install that afterwards.
--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
If you can smile when things go wrong, you have someone in mind to blame.
Terry R.
pounded out on the keyboard:
Apparently there are some software programs written for specific
versions of Java. Last week I uninstalled version 5.11 off of a server
and installed 6.11, and the BlackBerry Pro for Exchange software stopped
working. I was told that 5.11 was "required", even though I couldn't
find any documentation supporting that.
--
Terry R.
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
Herb
Hi Terry,
Thanks for the warning.
I seem to remember that the situation is similar with .NET Framework,
i.e. different software may require different versions, right?
However, I'm quite keen on keeping my computer as clean as possible, and
following the encouragement from David, Reg and Ed I think I'll get rid
of the older Java versions.
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
> On 08.12.2008 19:48, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused Herb to
> generate the following:? :
> a couple of weeks, you'll be on the safe side, as - should a program
> scream murder - you can "re-instate" that version.
> The same with Java Runtime - I know that StarWriter uses it - so
> probably also OpenOfficeOrg (if any user is reading this thread) -
> delete to trashbin and leave there for a couple of weeks.
Thanks, but too late re. keeping older versions on standby.
In addition to the Java-related comments in this thread, I also read the
2 previous recent related threads ("Java update 10" and "Do we really
need Java?" - sorry, I should have read these properly earlier), and I
decided to use JavaRa for a proper clean-out (after I had already
removed the older versions via "Add or Remove Programs").
The result is that "Add or Remove Programs" now reports only one
remaining version (Java 6 Update 11), and C:\Program Files\Java only
contains a single folder, i.e. jre6 (although for some reason I'm also
left with a folder C:\Program Files\JRE, containing a single file
jre-6u7-windows-i586-p.exe).
Intriguingly, InfoLister still reports all these versions:
# Java Console 5.0.12
# Java Console 6.0.10
# Java Console 6.0.11
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
>>> about:config
>>> type disk in the filter
>>> .... there are two entries that I see may affect the disk cache...
>>> 1) browser.cache.disk.capacity
>>> 2) browser.cache.disk.enable
>>>
>>> I would imagine settin 1) to Value 0 (zero)
>>> and 2) to false
>>>
>>> would disable the disk cache ??
>>>
>>
>> Hi Reg,
>>
>> Thanks for the pointer. The consensus appears to be that I don't need
>> the disk cache, so I disabled the disk cache by setting
>> browser.cache.disk.enable to false.
>>
>> By the way, for some reason, the clear cache option under Clear
>> Private Data doesn't seem to work for me in the sense that after using
>> that option my Cache folder still contained numerous items amounting
>> to 44 MB in total.
>>
>
> did you look at about:cache to see the remnants?? were they in
> Memory cache or Disk cache (they are different places)
> You can look at the (remnant...) cache entries when you go to
> about:cache ... that may give you an idea as to what is happening
> Did you re-start FF, after changing the options ??
Hi Reg,
You are a mine of information :-)
I wasn't aware of (or had forgotten about) about:cache, which indicated
that I was looking in the wrong (old?) place before, i.e. I wasn't aware
of the OfflineCache folder and had looked in the Cache folder.
about:cache now tells me this:
Memory cache device
Number of entries: 284
Maximum storage size: 24576 KiB
Storage in use: 5439 KiB
Inactive storage: 391 KiB
Offline cache device
Number of entries: 0
Maximum storage size: 512000 KiB
Storage in use: 0 KiB
Cache Directory: ....\OfflineCache
I wonder what was going on in the folder called Cache before I got rid
of it earlier - it seemed to have a lot of recent entries, including
some from earlier today...
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
Terry R.
out on the keyboard:
Hi Herb,
.NET is a bad design IMO. You're right though, software writes for a
specific version of .NET. So if you uninstall version 1 and some
software you have requires it, it doesn't matter that you have 1.1 or
anything newer, it won't work. It' stupid to have 1.0 1.1, 2, 3, 3.5
etc. WHY doesn't 3.5 have everything needed is my question.
Then again, a lot of people have NO need for .NET at all.
Just be sure none of your programs need a specific version of Java to
run before uninstalling them. Starting with Java version 6.10, it will
now uninstall a prior version, something that it never did before. So
6.11 will uninstall 6.10, but nothing earlier.
follow up set to mozilla.general
Ed Mullen
> On 08.12.2008 18:55, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused Terry R. to
> generate the following:? :
> worked ONLY with Java 4.1 and that was ages after vers 5.* was out...
>
> reg
They are both probably doing version checking. A really stupid
practice. Java, Flash, and other such environments are intended to be
backwardly compatible. It breaks because the app dev probably wrote the
check routine incorrectly and it doesn't work with any greater version
number. Then he never looked at the app again. Five years later ...
whoa! Guess what? Broken app.
It could be some incompatibility in the new Java release but, frankly,
these things are vetted really well. Unlikely to be the engine's fault,
most likely the app's fault.
--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
Advice - Do not use a hatchet to remove a fly from your forehead.
Ron Hunter
because they only look at the single digit (0), and conclude you don't
have a current version... Sigh.
Some even complain your version is 'older than version 9'. Didn't the
programmer ever consider Flash might be upgraded to 10?
--
Ron Hunter rphu...@charter.net
Herb
> On 08.12.2008 21:03, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused Herb to
> maybe though it'll work for you!
>
> you *must keep* the JRE (Java Runtime Environment) folder - that is a
> different thing to Java itself!
>
> I wonder if you can get rid of some of those Consoles via the control
> panel ?? If double-click the Java Icon, then open the [Advanced] tab,
> there is a check field for "Java Console" with sub-divisions to show,
> hide or do not start.... I have no idea as to what they are for...
> looking through my registry (where the consoles may be tucked away), I
> find entries under:
> HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Java VM
> HKU\S-1-5-21-1060284298-1965331169-839522115-1004\Software\Microsoft\Java
> VM
> each with a value to enable the console... here also, no idea what they
> are for...
>
> another place to look is in FF about:plugins if you find various
> plugin versions there, maybe you could note the *.dll and delete them.
> Mine lists Java(TM) Platform SE 6 U3 (in all 7 entries) - so if you
> find /different/ versions listed - those may be the plugins to delete.
>
> reg
>
> here is a google search resultlist for multiple java consoles there
> maybe something interesting for you there ??
> <http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22multiple%20java%20consoles%22>
>
Hi Reg,
Thanks for your further reply.
I'm still confused about the JRE folder - as I said, all it contains is
a single file called jre-6u7-windows-i586-p.exe
In any case, about:plugins mainly contains Java SE 6 U11 entries, plus
apparently a remnant from U10, i.e.
C:\Program Files\Java\jre6\bin\new_plugin\npdeploytk.dll
The apparently redundant Java Console entries (Java Console 5.0.12
and Java Console 6.0.10) appear under about:info and I have no idea
where the information comes from - never mind, I don't suppose these
entries do any harm...
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Terry R.
on the keyboard:
> Hi Reg,
>
> Thanks for your further reply.
>
> I'm still confused about the JRE folder - as I said, all it contains is
> a single file called jre-6u7-windows-i586-p.exe
>
> In any case, about:plugins mainly contains Java SE 6 U11 entries, plus
> apparently a remnant from U10, i.e.
> C:\Program Files\Java\jre6\bin\new_plugin\npdeploytk.dll
>
> The apparently redundant Java Console entries (Java Console 5.0.12
> and Java Console 6.0.10) appear under about:info and I have no idea
> where the information comes from - never mind, I don't suppose these
> entries do any harm...
>
Herb,
You can remove the folder with the 6.7 install in it.
Herb
> The date and time was 12/9/2008 6:28 AM, and on a whim, Herb pounded out
> on the keyboard:
>
>> Hi Reg,
>>
>> Thanks for your further reply.
>>
>> I'm still confused about the JRE folder - as I said, all it contains
>> is a single file called jre-6u7-windows-i586-p.exe
>>
>> In any case, about:plugins mainly contains Java SE 6 U11 entries, plus
>> apparently a remnant from U10, i.e.
>> C:\Program Files\Java\jre6\bin\new_plugin\npdeploytk.dll
>>
>> The apparently redundant Java Console entries (Java Console 5.0.12
>> and Java Console 6.0.10) appear under about:info and I have no idea
>> where the information comes from - never mind, I don't suppose these
>> entries do any harm...
>>
>
> Herb,
>
> You can remove the folder with the 6.7 install in it.
>
I did, thanks :-)
(I'm not sure why Reg was so keen for me to keep it :-\ )
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Terry R.
out on the keyboard:
> On 09.12.2008 15:21 UK Time, Terry R. wrote:
>> The date and time was 12/9/2008 6:28 AM, and on a whim, Herb pounded out
>> on the keyboard:
>>
>>> Hi Reg,
>>>
>>> Thanks for your further reply.
>>>
>>> I'm still confused about the JRE folder - as I said, all it contains
>>> is a single file called jre-6u7-windows-i586-p.exe
>>>
>>> In any case, about:plugins mainly contains Java SE 6 U11 entries, plus
>>> apparently a remnant from U10, i.e.
>>> C:\Program Files\Java\jre6\bin\new_plugin\npdeploytk.dll
>>>
>>> The apparently redundant Java Console entries (Java Console 5.0.12
>>> and Java Console 6.0.10) appear under about:info and I have no idea
>>> where the information comes from - never mind, I don't suppose these
>>> entries do any harm...
>>>
>> Herb,
>>
>> You can remove the folder with the 6.7 install in it.
>>
>
> I did, thanks :-)
>
> (I'm not sure why Reg was so keen for me to keep it :-\ )
>
I believe he was thinking about older versions. For quite some time the
main folder name has been Java with a jre subfolder. LONG ago it was JRE.
David McRitchie
> huh! Did Gates consider that TIME might get past the year 1999 ?? some
> PROGRAMMERS are simpls *stupid*
Year 2000 isn't the same thing as version numbers, but since
you brought it up, he probably thought it was a good way to
market the next version of every product. Uncle Sam said
otherwise and existing products had to be updated. Only
mentioned because the fact that Access was not going to
be updated was the reason I didn't bother learning it.
Herb
Ed Mullen
>
> I'm still confused about the JRE folder - as I said, all it contains is
> a single file called jre-6u7-windows-i586-p.exe
Herb, that is the Java install file (probably about 15.6 Mb in size).
If you have already installed that Java version you can delete the
installer.
--
Ed Mullen
http://edmullen.net
Analyzing humor is like dissecting a frog. Few people are interested and
the frog dies of it. - E. B. White
Herb
> Herb wrote:
>>
>> I'm still confused about the JRE folder - as I said, all it contains
>> is a single file called jre-6u7-windows-i586-p.exe
>
> Herb, that is the Java install file (probably about 15.6 Mb in size). If
> you have already installed that Java version you can delete the installer.
Duly deleted, thank you.
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
> When I try and open this page
> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15639> (or indeed any other
> link from this site's e-newsletter, e.g.
> <http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15649>) in FF, it hangs and
> I see "Read www.google-analytics.com" in the bottom left corner.
>
> The page opens OK in IE7.
>
> Any comments/solutions?
>
Believe it or not, but after the very long thread on this issue back in
December I'm still struggling with this issue, and I would like to get
to try and sort it out once and for all because it is a recurring issue
that is obstructing my flow of work, i.e. I can't add any links from the
weekly edie.net newsletter to my bookmarks because the exercise
would be pointless unless I find a way to actually open the links in FF.
I installed HostsMan and the recommended hosts file, and I disabled the
entry
127.0.0.1 www.google-analytics.com #[Google Analytics]
but when I follow links from the edie.net e-newsletter page loading
still gets stuck, i.e. the FF tab shows "Loading..." and at the bottom
left of the FF window "Transferring data from www.google-analytics.com"
appears.
Any more comments/suggestions?
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Sjouke Burry
Moz Champion (Dan)
That would be my response as well. Without the Google Toolbar, there is
no problem with FF going to those pages.
Herb
I just noticed something, which is probably significant:
The links in the edie.net e-newsletter have the form
<http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?src=nl&id=16043>
Note the "src=nl&" in the link.
Links of this form 'get stuck' at the google-analytics stage, but the
pages open OK if I manually delete the "src=nl&" from the URL.
What does "src=nl&" do, and what is its significance in this context?
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
Thanks, but I don't have the Google toolbar installed - at least I don't
think I have - how can I make sure?
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
David McRitchie
> On 26.02.2009 05:37 UK Time, Sjouke Burry wrote:
>> Herb wrote:
>>> On 03.12.2008 12:02 UK Time, Herb wrote:
>>>> When I try and open this page
>>>> I see "Read www.google-analytics.com" in the bottom left corner.
>>>>
>>>> The page opens OK in IE7.
>>>
>>> December I'm still struggling with this issue, and I would like to get
>>> to try and sort it out once and for all because it is a recurring issue
>>> that is obstructing my flow of work, i.e. I can't add any links from the
>>> weekly edie.net newsletter to my bookmarks because the exercise
>>> would be pointless unless I find a way to actually open the links in FF.
>>>
>>> I installed HostsMan and the recommended hosts file, and I disabled
>>> the entry
>>> 127.0.0.1 www.google-analytics.com #[Google Analytics]
>>> but when I follow links from the edie.net e-newsletter page loading
>>> still gets stuck, i.e. the FF tab shows "Loading..." and at the bottom
>>> left of the FF window "Transferring data from
>>> www.google-analytics.com" appears.
>
> think I have - how can I make sure?
You can see if there is a toolbar choice with View, Toolbars,
You can see if Google toolbars is in your Tools, add-ons, extensions
You indicate you have a problem with Google Analytics interfering and
you remove it from your hosts file, *why*? You want/need to block it.
Like with doubleclick.net you may get stuck on a bad ad that doesn't
load or gets stuck trying to play flash (or worse consequences) and
you will keep getting the same ad
for a few days when you have cookies turned off.
I don't know anything about Hostsman except from a quick search, and
looked like it had a lot of problems with a Beta and that was not recent
but it was what came up at top of Google search. I see that it automatically
updates according to your options.
I use http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm and I add their
additions after my own and I assure that www.google-analytics.com
is blocked in my hosts file, and it is blocked in Adblock (I do not use
Adblock Plus), it is blocked by style 299 (Ad Blocking FiltersetP)
Don't know if anything is blocked in userChrome.css but I have several
strings that appear within advertising urls blocked nothing that specifically
addresses a website though.
I have no no 3rd party software updating hosts file, no automatic updates,
I have complete control of if and when and what I replace/modify content.
I am in the US web access via Fiber on a Vista (Windows) machine, and I have
no trouble viewing the page you identified
http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15649
Try this
1) Tools, Options, Content , [x] Enable JavaScript
2) Tools, Options, Privacy
if you allow all cookies and have no exception, okay
otherwise, at least accept all cookies for session
and then you can have Exceptions to "Block", "Allow for Session", or to
"Allow" which will always take precedence over your global privacy settings.
3) Install both of these so that you have additional filters that you can turn on;/off
- Stylish extension https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/2108
- Ad Blocking FiltersetP http://userstyles.org/styles/299
4) Clear your cache (better than just using Ctrl+F5 after loading page)
5) Retest your page
The filterset style is managed by Stylish, and is easy to turn On/Off
If that does not work, maybe someone else (like in the UK) has additional suggestions.
What operating system your are on, and your access (dial-up, or ....)
--
HTH,
David McRitchie, extensions I use are briefly documented on my site
Firefox Custom: http://www.mvps.org/dmcritchie/firefox/firefox.htm
EE
to block http://*google-analytics.*
That will block the whole domain, and you will no longer be bothered by
the delays. Alternatively, you could use Blocksite and put the same
thing into its blocklist.
David McRitchie
It's a parameter on a cgi link, could be anything, but I think if you
eliminate google-analytics you would do away with your problem
A GreaseMonkey script might be able to remove it from the links
you have, but I don't know if it can, and can't help you with it.
If the name has anything to do with how src is used in other than just
images, some links:
site:http://www.google.com/support/ src - Google Search
http://www.google.com/search?&q=site:http://www.google.com/support/+src&newwindow=1&sourceid=firefox
How to specify a maximum zoom level within <iframe src="......"></iframe> ? - Maps Help
http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/maps/thread?tid=286b356415490cb2&hl=en
Adsense showing on unauthorized pages - AdSense Help
http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/AdSense/thread?tid=5e0a6aa87843cd3e&hl=en
Tracking Issue for eCommerce on a Sub Domain - Google Analytics Help
http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Google+Analytics/thread?tid=5311889fd87654ab&hl=en
Adding a rel="nofollow" attribute to the <a> tag - Webmaster Help
http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/Webmasters/thread?tid=5f68d2cf8508e90d&hl=en
How do I create a site tracking code? - AdWords Help
http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/AdWords/thread?tid=08d04395055a3931&hl=en
Herb
Thanks for your reply.
I used to have Adblock Plus installed, but I uninstalled it a while back
because I found it too intrusive.
I'll look into Blocksite, but I'll follow up David's suggestions first
to see if I can get it sorted out without having to install another
extension.
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
David,
Thank you for your message.
I can confirm that I don't have Google toolbar installed.
> You indicate you have a problem with Google Analytics interfering and
> you remove it from your hosts file, *why*? You want/need to block it.
Hmmm, I dare say this indicates the level of my confusion over these
matters :-[
I have now re-enabled www.google-analytics.com ...
> Like with doubleclick.net you may get stuck on a bad ad that doesn't
> load or gets stuck trying to play flash (or worse consequences) and
> you will keep getting the same ad
> for a few days when you have cookies turned off.
>
> I don't know anything about Hostsman except from a quick search, and
> looked like it had a lot of problems with a Beta and that was not recent
> but it was what came up at top of Google search. I see that it
> automatically
> updates according to your options.
>
> I use http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm and I add their
> additions after my own and I assure that www.google-analytics.com
> is blocked in my hosts file, and it is blocked in Adblock (I do
> not use
> Adblock Plus), it is blocked by style 299 (Ad Blocking FiltersetP)
> Don't know if anything is blocked in userChrome.css but I have several
> strings that appear within advertising urls blocked nothing that
> specifically
> addresses a website though.
> I have no no 3rd party software updating hosts file, no automatic
> updates,
> I have complete control of if and when and what I replace/modify content.
Yes, thanks, I vaguely remember that you recommended
http://www.mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm in one of the earlier messages
in this thread - I installed Hostsman at the time but I can't quite
remember the details - I thought it was merely a convenient interface
for dealing with hosts entries, and I thought the entries may even be
based on the MVPS file, but I'm probably wrong...
>
> I am in the US web access via Fiber on a Vista (Windows) machine,
> and I have no trouble viewing the page you identified
> http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?id=15649
Yes, I have no problem viewing the pages without "src=nl&" in the link -
see subsequent messages in this thread.
> Try this
> 1) Tools, Options, Content , [x] Enable JavaScript
Thanks - it is already enabled.
> 2) Tools, Options, Privacy if you allow all cookies and have no
> exception, okay
> otherwise, at least accept all cookies for session
> and then you can have Exceptions to "Block", "Allow for
> Session", or to
> "Allow" which will always take precedence over your global
> privacy settings.
I have Accept cookies from sites ticked, and Accept third-party cookies,
Keep until I close Firefox.
However, there are what looks like hundreds of exceptions. From the
previous discussion in this thread I seem to remember that FF
automatically reads these exceptions from the hosts file?
> 3) Install both of these so that you have additional filters that you
> can turn on;/off
> - Stylish extension
> https://addons.mozilla.org/firefox/2108
Thanks, I already have the Stylish extension.
- Ad Blocking
> FiltersetP http://userstyles.org/styles/299
Done, thank you.
> 4) Clear your cache (better than just using Ctrl+F5 after loading page)
> 5) Retest your page
Still the same problem with accessing the links containing "src=nl&"
from the edie.net e-newsletter via Thunderbird, e.g.
<http://www.edie.net/news/news_story.asp?src=nl&id=16033>
Time to study your other reply re. the "src=nl&" issue, methinks.
>
> The filterset style is managed by Stylish, and is easy to turn On/Off
Thanks - I uninstalled the AdBlock extension a while back, but managing
the filterset via Stylish sound like a useful option.
>
> If that does not work, maybe someone else (like in the UK) has
> additional suggestions.
I uploaded one of the edie newsletters containing these problematic
links here, and I would be interested in finding out whether others have
the same "src=nl&" problem.
> What operating system your are on, and your access (dial-up, or ....)
XP SP3, broadband access, but I'm not sure this is relevant...
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
>
> I uploaded one of the edie newsletters containing these problematic
> links here, and I would be interested in finding out whether others have
> the same "src=nl&" problem.
Sorry, forgot to include the link: <http://www.hetranslation.co.uk/temp/>
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
Thanks for your additional reply. I get the impression that the
"src=nl&" entries are indeed some kind of tracking code, but I think I
followed all your recommendations/instructions re. google-analytics and
I still have trouble following these links from the edie e-newsletter
(for temporary copy see <http://www.hetranslation.co.uk/temp/>)
I can open the links OK in Google Chrome and IE, but in FF they 'get
stuck', with "Connection to www.google-analytics.com..." showing in the
bottom lef corner of the FF window.
I can open the pages OK in FF if I manually delete src=nl& from the
address line, but the situation is somewhat unsatisfactory.
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk
Herb
> On 03.03.2009 16:19, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused Herb to
> generate the following:? :
>> On 03.03.2009 15:10 UK Time, Herb wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I uploaded one of the edie newsletters containing these problematic
>>> links here, and I would be interested in finding out whether others
>>> have the same "src=nl&" problem.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry, forgot to include the link: <http://www.hetranslation.co.uk/temp/>
>>
>>
> file "edie.eml" - an OE format ??
>
> Except for some (adverts...) graphics, it opened OK - *lol* - in OE. (my
> settings, of course)
Hi Reg,
eml is the format TB offers when you save a message from TB via File >
Save As > File.
When I double-click on an eml file it opens in TB.
Yes, sure, it opens alright, but the question is do the links
(containing "src=nl&") open alright in FF?
--
Herbert Eppel
www.HETranslation.co.uk