[PHP] Re: Why the difference in email transit times?
On 13/08/2013 16:20, Tedd Sperling wrote: Hi gang: I'm using the class.phpmailer.php code to send email -- it works neat -- very classy (no pun intended). I can send an email from my sperling.com domain and it arrives almost immediately. However, when I use the exact same code (except for the FROM address) from kvyv.com (another domain I own), the email literally takes hours (up to 12) to arrive. Any idea of why there is a difference of email transit times between the two domains? Cheers, tedd PS: Note, my receiving email addresses are handled by gmail.com. Hi, Have a look at the Received: headers of each email. They are in reverse order. I.e. the one at the top is the most recently added. Take into account timezone differences too. 12 hours seems like a very long time for a delay. I suspect one of the receiving hosts in the chain employs greylisting, and the sending network employs many different sending servers (ie like Google) in a round-robin fashion. The greylisting server may not be configured to recognise the many different servers as one 'set'. All speculation of course ;) Feel free to send the headers off list and I'll take a look. Regards Ian -- -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: why is this SIMPLE elseif not firing?
nevermind.. sorry for the noise. It was my if clause that was firing too much, and never even reaching that elseif. -G -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
Ashley Sheridan wrote: Would it be totally off topic if everyone were to say what their favourite OS was and why? I'm just a little curious as to what OS's people use in this field. Well I've been using various flavours of Linux since uni where it was used in most to the labs. It was a RH version and as I started playing with it on my own PCs I opted for a RH derivative that gaining momentum at the time, Mandrake. I've been using it ever since with little forrays into Fedora, Ubuntu and Suse land. For me Mandriva is an ideal distro. It's secure, business orientated but still very desktop friendly. The people involved are excellent and the community is both very supportive and fun (similar feeling to this list). For me a linux distro is not all about having the latest and greatest packages shoved at you whenever they are available. To me the job of the distro is to have defined cycles and defined distribution channels. While they have their place, having random repositories of packages is IMO not a good idea. Different people package things in different ways and with different names etc. which can make upgrading difficult when official packages conflict with third party ones. So the Mandriva system for me works best. I can use happily in my home computing life and I can deploy it to the network of machines in my office without worry. I have a lot of time of OSX, but I like to fiddle and break and be different, and OSX doesn't give me quite what I want in that respect. Windows? Nah. -- Colin Guthrie gmane(at)colin.guthr.ie http://colin.guthr.ie/ Day Job: Tribalogic Limited [http://www.tribalogic.net/] Open Source: Mandriva Linux Contributor [http://www.mandriva.com/] PulseAudio Hacker [http://www.pulseaudio.org/] Trac Hacker [http://trac.edgewall.org/] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 20:11 +0100, Ashley Sheridan wrote: Would it be totally off topic if everyone were to say what their favourite OS was and why? I'm just a little curious as to what OS's people use in this field. I originally started using Linux 8 years ago at my first job out of school. At that time I was using Debian. At home though I started playing around with Mandrake. Over time though I liked Mandrake less and less and Finally moved to Ubuntu about 3 years ago for my desktop. I haven't looked back since I find the apt repositories have plenty of bleeding edge stuff while I can still compile whatever else I need from source. For server side stuff though, I still find myself leaning towards Debian although I'm quite at home using Red Hat, Fedora, and Cent OS also. Ultimately though, I have to say I much prefer apt over yum. Cheers, Rob. -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On Sep 16, 2008, at 6:26 PM, tedd wrote: At 8:11 PM +0100 9/16/08, Ashley Sheridan wrote: Would it be totally off topic if everyone were to say what their favourite OS was and why? I'm just a little curious as to what OS's people use in this field. Obviously, mine is Mac and OSX 10.4.11. My next one will be whatever is the top of the line Apple has at the time I have to money for it. The question is... why aren't you on 10.5.4? I never miss an update... =D ~Philip -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On 16 Sep 2008, at 23:54, tedd wrote: At 7:40 PM +0100 9/16/08, Stut wrote: On 16 Sep 2008, at 15:59, tedd wrote: Then one day, M$ sent out notice that they would no longer support QuickBasic and that was the end of that. All of our current, and past work, was on a dead-end street. We were left to fend for ourselves. I don't mean any disrespect but devoting your livelihood on a technology with a single provider is probably not the smartest move you've made. No offense taken and what you say at face value is true. However, that was a past lifetime -- how smart were you 20 years ago? I was 11 so it's kinda hard to tell, but I remember thinking I was doing ok ;) And I didn't really devote MY livelihood to one technology nor industry for that matter -- never have. That's the reason why I have several businesses going concurrently. I just wished one of them would hit the log-ball so I could retire and program for a hobby. Don't we all! It's not nice for Microsoft to have pulled support for it but they're a business and they made that decision because they didn't see a profitable future there, they weren't out to screw you. Of course they were not out to screw me, but even if they were, that's not relevant. I think the important point here is that if you create a development product which requires others to have faith in you, then you also inherent a responsibility to those who have invested their time into helping you secure your product. Software development is a symbiotic relationship. Indeed it is, but in any one to many arrangement the first to go is the smallest. My guess would be that QuickBasic was *the* smallest in terms of user base. If you want to pull the plug and cut that relationship, that's your choice. But that action comes with a cost. From my perspective, M$ is just reaping what it sowed. I just love the way everyone ignores all the good they've done and focuses on the evil. With so many customers/users do you really expect them to be able to keep them all happy? Seriously? If you feel you need to hold a grudge, by all means do so, but I personally have grown out of name-calling and stick to logical argument instead. Does wonders for my BP! Besides, grant me my windmills to tilt. Gimme a sec to mount my trusty steed. Imagine if PHP suddenly stopped development and you had to find a different language (i.e., ruby). Sure we could all do it, but we picked this language for a reason and now we have to choose again -- and perhaps that choice was our second choice. I don't like being forced to settle for my second choice. Speaking only for myself I would have no problem with it at all, for a few reasons... I've been there before and survived -- like you, I have numerous languages under my belt -- in fact they all look the same to me now. So, that wouldn't be a big problem, just an annoying one. While I have no faith of which to speak in anything except science, I try to live by the philosophy set out in the serenity prayer. It's worked pretty well for me so far. Now, should have M$ continued to support a product that wasn't making sufficient money for them? I dunno, but I don't care either -- they screwed with my life and I'll spend the rest of it calling M$, M$. That's your choice, but don't take offence when I say that's changed my opinion of you somewhat. No offense taken, but if your opinion of me has changed over that, be advised I've done far worse than name calling. I realize that you take the high-road on things like this -- I respect that -- that used to be my practice as well. It's very predicable from a business perspective. But times change and I kind of like telling people what I really think -- somewhat like the member of the family who no longer cares if he farts in public -- if you get the drift. I have no issue with people giving their opinion, but to do so with childish (IMHO) name-calling makes the reasonable argument, if there is one, much harder to take seriously. Similarly, I had a run-in with American Express over 30 years ago and even to this day I return all their sales promotion in their self-addressed no-postage envelope they provide. Over the years, I suspect they have paid postage for over 100 pounds of profitless correspondence and the time for their staff to examine it. You're not alone in doing this, but how much a dent do you really think you've made in their profits? It's like spam, if it wasn't worth doing they wouldn't do it. Your efforts would be better spent trying to get your address blacklisted... or learning Scala! Well... that was the idea, to get blacklisted. Just about every thing I sent back had my address on it and included a message which basically said This what I think of your service and you just paid the postage for me to say it. Now take me off your list! But, it hasn't happened yet.
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On Sep 17, 2008, at 3:24 PM, Stut wrote: On 16 Sep 2008, at 23:54, tedd wrote: At 7:40 PM +0100 9/16/08, Stut wrote: On 16 Sep 2008, at 15:59, tedd wrote: Snail-mail spam relies upon the same basic fact that electronic spam does... everyone hates it until it offers them something they want. Unfortunately in most cases it happens often enough to be profitable. Oh, and because everyone's doing it these days there doesn't seem to be any noticeable effect on a company's reputation which is unfortunate. I like what you said right here stut... It's only junk until someone hits the nail on the head with it! Maybe 9 out of 10 people don't need another credit card... but it's that 1 person they do it for. Average response rates to direct mail marketing campaigns are about 2% being considered good. It's possible that if more people returned it, possible with some extra weight they might stop, but I don't see it happening. You might have better luck getting removed if you mark the envelope No longer at this address rather than writing a rant. They're less likely to continue sending you stuff if they don't think you're there anymore. I do the same with spam email using the bounce feature in Apple Mail and it's worked pretty well both on and offline. As the resident direct mail specialist on this list... :) I can say that the amount of mail that is returned to the customer won't affect in any way shape or form how much mail they send out. Presumably they are working of a rented list where you can get any info you could possible ever think of... I registered a domain and not more then 1 month later I had a business credit card offer from Capitol One... Who is the largest direct mailer in the US. I barely even had a crappy site up before that happened! :) And as far as returning the mail to them in their envelopes, it doesn't cost that much... $500/year for the permit, per piece returned fee + Weighted first class rate... All in all, not that big of a deal :) But what ever makes you happy! :) -- Jason Pruim Raoset Inc. Technology Manager MQC Specialist 11287 James St Holland, MI 49424 www.raoset.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On Wed, 2008-09-17 at 15:36 -0400, Jason Pruim wrote: On Sep 17, 2008, at 3:24 PM, Stut wrote: On 16 Sep 2008, at 23:54, tedd wrote: At 7:40 PM +0100 9/16/08, Stut wrote: On 16 Sep 2008, at 15:59, tedd wrote: Snail-mail spam relies upon the same basic fact that electronic spam does... everyone hates it until it offers them something they want. Unfortunately in most cases it happens often enough to be profitable. Oh, and because everyone's doing it these days there doesn't seem to be any noticeable effect on a company's reputation which is unfortunate. I like what you said right here stut... It's only junk until someone hits the nail on the head with it! Maybe 9 out of 10 people don't need another credit card... but it's that 1 person they do it for. Average response rates to direct mail marketing campaigns are about 2% being considered good. It's possible that if more people returned it, possible with some extra weight they might stop, but I don't see it happening. You might have better luck getting removed if you mark the envelope No longer at this address rather than writing a rant. They're less likely to continue sending you stuff if they don't think you're there anymore. I do the same with spam email using the bounce feature in Apple Mail and it's worked pretty well both on and offline. As the resident direct mail specialist on this list... :) I can say that the amount of mail that is returned to the customer won't affect in any way shape or form how much mail they send out. Presumably they are working of a rented list where you can get any info you could possible ever think of... I registered a domain and not more then 1 month later I had a business credit card offer from Capitol One... Who is the largest direct mailer in the US. I barely even had a crappy site up before that happened! :) And as far as returning the mail to them in their envelopes, it doesn't cost that much... $500/year for the permit, per piece returned fee + Weighted first class rate... All in all, not that big of a deal :) But what ever makes you happy! :) -- Jason Pruim Raoset Inc. Technology Manager MQC Specialist 11287 James St Holland, MI 49424 www.raoset.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] It's all about weighing those suckers down some more with loose change that we all have accumulating everywhere. For the cost of 10p of mine, I know i've just put their costs up way more. Of course, if you don't have coins to spare, stones work equally well... As for weighing the good merits of Microshaft, well it's all relative isn't it? For everything they do good, there's a bunch of things they've done on the way, whether it was muscling someone else out of the market, or just making it even easier for virus writers to attack us. At the end of the day, everyone will weigh this out on both their own experience and what they've heard. If the majority of what is said about them is bad, well, no smoke without fire and all that... Ash www.ashleysheridan.co.uk -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
At 4:27 PM -0500 9/15/08, Philip Thompson wrote: Has anyone seen the new M$ commercial where they are asking these people to review the next version of their OS. Some of the responses of the people were that they really thought this new OS was cool/neat/whatever. Then afterwards, M$ told them it was Vista. Yes, I saw that commercial. It's one of those type of commercials that if you like the product, you'll like the commercial -- if you don't, then you'll find fault with it. I look at the commercial as M$'s attempt to try to patch up a failing product. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
At 10:35 PM +0100 9/15/08, Ashley Sheridan wrote: Ah I'd heard of this story. What you've forgotten to mention was that the computers were all set up on hardware chosen by Microsoft, and all running software especially picked by Microsoft. Now, I'd hazard a guess that even Microsoft is smart enough to pick a combination that is extremely unlikely to crash on the end user. I'd love to see the same test on the same people set up by Mac people and Linux gurus. I think that as this is not really a fair test, you can pretty much get any answer you want. Ash www.ashleysheridan.co.uk Of course, when it's your dime, you present things the way you like. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
At 9:53 PM +0100 9/15/08, Stut wrote: As for Microsoft (will people please stop screwing with their name, it's impolite), they've certainly made some bad choices over the years and Windows has suffered for it. I screw with the M$ name because I don't like them! It's not due to their questionable business practices that ultimately ended Gates in front of Congress answering questions; or running Netscape out of business; or the hundreds of other instances of them being a dick, but rather what they did to *me*. You see, many years ago M$ developed and provided QuickBasic for the Mac. Myself and hundreds of other developers devoted our livelihoods to that product. Then one day, M$ sent out notice that they would no longer support QuickBasic and that was the end of that. All of our current, and past work, was on a dead-end street. We were left to fend for ourselves. Imagine if PHP suddenly stopped development and you had to find a different language (i.e., ruby). Sure we could all do it, but we picked this language for a reason and now we have to choose again -- and perhaps that choice was our second choice. I don't like being forced to settle for my second choice. Now, should have M$ continued to support a product that wasn't making sufficient money for them? I dunno, but I don't care either -- they screwed with my life and I'll spend the rest of it calling M$, M$. Similarly, I had a run-in with American Express over 30 years ago and even to this day I return all their sales promotion in their self-addressed no-postage envelope they provide. Over the years, I suspect they have paid postage for over 100 pounds of profitless correspondence and the time for their staff to examine it. Now, do I have problems? Perhaps, but I'm happy. :-) Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
At 11:30 PM +0100 9/15/08, Stut wrote: Wow, talk about hitting the nail on the head. When Microsoft pick the hardware their OS runs on and the software it runs with it works perfectly. Not exactly. I seem to remember when Gates gave a presentation at Mac World and his slide show locked up. I actually felt sorry for the guy, but I had a cookie and the feeling passed. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
At 11:57 PM +0100 9/15/08, Ashley Sheridan wrote: I agree on your point about trying before bashing. I've tried Vista. Hell, I had to use it for 2 months solid while I was working in India, so I really got to test it out. I had more crashes on that in the 2 months I was using it than I had on Fedora in 2 years. Now, admittedly I was working on Vista during every working hour, and I only use my Fedora machine at weekends and evenings, but I think if you tally up the total time, it was really not in Windows' favour. As an OS, XP was not all that bad, but I've found I really do prefer the way Linux behaves, that and I can get pretty much whatever software I want for free, which just isn't always so easy with Windows. I spend at least 10 to 12 hours per day (including weekends) working on my machine and I've been running my current Mac for over 6 years with my Mac experience dating back to 1984 (the original 128k Mac, which I still have). In the last 6 years, I remember my current Mac locking up only once and that was on start-up after I had installed additional drive. I had to hold the on button to get it to shut down. But, the next boot was uneventful. Yet people think that the occasional crash is acceptable when working with computers. I can only say, they must not be Mac people. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
tedd wrote: Imagine if PHP suddenly stopped development and you had to find a different language (i.e., ruby). Sure we could all do it, but we picked this language for a reason and now we have to choose again -- and perhaps that choice was our second choice. I don't like being forced to settle for my second choice. Careful Tedd... that came perilously close to being on-topic again there! :p /me hides for playing no small part in stretching out this thread... Col -- Colin Guthrie gmane(at)colin.guthr.ie http://colin.guthr.ie/ Day Job: Tribalogic Limited [http://www.tribalogic.net/] Open Source: Mandriva Linux Contributor [http://www.mandriva.com/] PulseAudio Hacker [http://www.pulseaudio.org/] Trac Hacker [http://trac.edgewall.org/] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
At 8:42 AM +0100 9/16/08, Colin Guthrie wrote: tedd wrote: 3. wasn't something I was going to work on -- not because I refused to do it for her but rather because I refuse to work with windozes -- period. In this case I would have blitzed windows and slapped on linux distro of choice instread (see below for *my* choice :)) I've done this recently... a friend aquired a tablet PC thing. It didn't let him in as it came with some XP+admin password and while I could have just made windows work, there were no apps on it and he only wanted it for surfing the web from his sofa... so the simple answer there is: put linux on it! Personally, if I have to help out someone who has a niche little computer or a niche need, it's a no brainer these days. Linux isn't hard to use, and if I have to help out my friends every couple years doing an upgrade than so be it. It's a price I pay gladly for making my life far less painful in the meantime! Co: Yes, but this is where I lack the experience you have. All of the above you say is foreign to me. My abilities (if any) are to be found elsewhere. I know how to set Mac's up -- actually that's not an accomplishment because you don't have to do anything, so there's nothing complicated about that -- you just need to explain to people how to use them. I often set the elderly (yes, there are people older than me) up with Mac's so they can email one another and surf the net. The biggest problem I've encountered with older-than-me types is having them RTM -- they simply don't want to do it! So the more obvious things are, the better it is and I've found Macs to be more obvious and easier for the elderly to use. Many years ago (circa 1987) I created a survey about computer usage and sent it to over 10,000 companies world-wide. I received about a 12 percent return -- this was an outstanding return because 2 percent is common. I think the survey hit a nerve. One of the questions I asked on the survey was On a scale of 1-10, should a computer be as easy to use as a telephone? I sorted the answers per age and found the older you are, the more you want the computer to be as easy to use as a telephone. There were a lot of interesting things that came from that survey and I published my results in the AAPG. But the point here was there are differences between how people use computers and how useful computers are -- it's almost a clique that Mac's are easier and my experience supports that. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
At 4:41 PM +0100 9/16/08, Colin Guthrie wrote: tedd wrote: Imagine if PHP suddenly stopped development and you had to find a different language (i.e., ruby). Sure we could all do it, but we picked this language for a reason and now we have to choose again -- and perhaps that choice was our second choice. I don't like being forced to settle for my second choice. Careful Tedd... that came perilously close to being on-topic again there! :p /me hides for playing no small part in stretching out this thread... Col LOL !!! My meandering often makes wide circles but usually returns to the point. My first and second posts to a thread are usually on topic. But if it takes more than that, then something went horribly wrong. My post are like salt and pepper. You can't make a whole meal of them, but they're nice to have around to spice things up. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On 16 Sep 2008, at 16:06, tedd wrote: At 11:30 PM +0100 9/15/08, Stut wrote: Wow, talk about hitting the nail on the head. When Microsoft pick the hardware their OS runs on and the software it runs with it works perfectly. Not exactly. I seem to remember when Gates gave a presentation at Mac World and his slide show locked up. I actually felt sorry for the guy, but I had a cookie and the feeling passed. You're making the huge assumption that they chose the hardware on that occasion, something that is in no way reasonable to do in my opinion. -Stut -- http://stut.net/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On 16 Sep 2008, at 15:59, tedd wrote: At 9:53 PM +0100 9/15/08, Stut wrote: As for Microsoft (will people please stop screwing with their name, it's impolite), they've certainly made some bad choices over the years and Windows has suffered for it. I screw with the M$ name because I don't like them! It's not due to their questionable business practices that ultimately ended Gates in front of Congress answering questions; or running Netscape out of business; or the hundreds of other instances of them being a dick, but rather what they did to *me*. You see, many years ago M$ developed and provided QuickBasic for the Mac. Myself and hundreds of other developers devoted our livelihoods to that product. Then one day, M$ sent out notice that they would no longer support QuickBasic and that was the end of that. All of our current, and past work, was on a dead-end street. We were left to fend for ourselves. I don't mean any disrespect but devoting your livelihood on a technology with a single provider is probably not the smartest move you've made. It's not nice for Microsoft to have pulled support for it but they're a business and they made that decision because they didn't see a profitable future there, they weren't out to screw you. Imagine if PHP suddenly stopped development and you had to find a different language (i.e., ruby). Sure we could all do it, but we picked this language for a reason and now we have to choose again -- and perhaps that choice was our second choice. I don't like being forced to settle for my second choice. Speaking only for myself I would have no problem with it at all, for a few reasons... 1) PHP is open source so the chances of development stopping dead is highly unlikely even if Zend were to cease to be. 2) PHP is not my strongest language, and it definitely isn't the only language I know. I work hard to make sure I'm up with current developments in C/C++, C#, Ruby and a number of other languages. I've recently started learning Scala. I've also engineered my career so it involves more than one core language/technology at any one time so my CV stays fresh and my options stay plentiful. 3) I have no real preference for a particular language or technology. Throughout my career I've had the attitude that the method of software engineering is far more important than the tools. I feel confident that I could apply my skills using any language, something that's been tested a few times over the years. Now, should have M$ continued to support a product that wasn't making sufficient money for them? I dunno, but I don't care either -- they screwed with my life and I'll spend the rest of it calling M $, M$. That's your choice, but don't take offence when I say that's changed my opinion of you somewhat. Similarly, I had a run-in with American Express over 30 years ago and even to this day I return all their sales promotion in their self-addressed no-postage envelope they provide. Over the years, I suspect they have paid postage for over 100 pounds of profitless correspondence and the time for their staff to examine it. You're not alone in doing this, but how much a dent do you really think you've made in their profits? It's like spam, if it wasn't worth doing they wouldn't do it. Your efforts would be better spent trying to get your address blacklisted... or learning Scala! Now, do I have problems? Perhaps, but I'm happy. :-) Good for you. -Stut -- http://stut.net/ -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 10:59 -0400, tedd wrote: Similarly, I had a run-in with American Express over 30 years ago and even to this day I return all their sales promotion in their self-addressed no-postage envelope they provide. Over the years, I suspect they have paid postage for over 100 pounds of profitless correspondence and the time for their staff to examine it. I do the same with all that sort of post, but I recently found en evil use for all of that spare change in the form of 1p's and 2p's... Funnily enough, I've not had much for a while... Ash www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 11:26 -0400, tedd wrote: At 11:57 PM +0100 9/15/08, Ashley Sheridan wrote: I agree on your point about trying before bashing. I've tried Vista. Hell, I had to use it for 2 months solid while I was working in India, so I really got to test it out. I had more crashes on that in the 2 months I was using it than I had on Fedora in 2 years. Now, admittedly I was working on Vista during every working hour, and I only use my Fedora machine at weekends and evenings, but I think if you tally up the total time, it was really not in Windows' favour. As an OS, XP was not all that bad, but I've found I really do prefer the way Linux behaves, that and I can get pretty much whatever software I want for free, which just isn't always so easy with Windows. I spend at least 10 to 12 hours per day (including weekends) working on my machine and I've been running my current Mac for over 6 years with my Mac experience dating back to 1984 (the original 128k Mac, which I still have). In the last 6 years, I remember my current Mac locking up only once and that was on start-up after I had installed additional drive. I had to hold the on button to get it to shut down. But, the next boot was uneventful. Yet people think that the occasional crash is acceptable when working with computers. I can only say, they must not be Mac people. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com I rarely get any crashes with Linux, probably about the same as my flatmate gets, on his Mac. Both are very stable and secure, which is what you want from an OS. The OS is there to make your life easier, not to get in the way with dozens of warning message, blockades and workarounds. Ash www.ashleysheridan.co.uk -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 2:51 PM, Ashley Sheridan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 11:26 -0400, tedd wrote: At 11:57 PM +0100 9/15/08, Ashley Sheridan wrote: I agree on your point about trying before bashing. I've tried Vista. Hell, I had to use it for 2 months solid while I was working in India, so I really got to test it out. I had more crashes on that in the 2 months I was using it than I had on Fedora in 2 years. Now, admittedly I was working on Vista during every working hour, and I only use my Fedora machine at weekends and evenings, but I think if you tally up the total time, it was really not in Windows' favour. As an OS, XP was not all that bad, but I've found I really do prefer the way Linux behaves, that and I can get pretty much whatever software I want for free, which just isn't always so easy with Windows. I spend at least 10 to 12 hours per day (including weekends) working on my machine and I've been running my current Mac for over 6 years with my Mac experience dating back to 1984 (the original 128k Mac, which I still have). In the last 6 years, I remember my current Mac locking up only once and that was on start-up after I had installed additional drive. I had to hold the on button to get it to shut down. But, the next boot was uneventful. Yet people think that the occasional crash is acceptable when working with computers. I can only say, they must not be Mac people. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com I rarely get any crashes with Linux, probably about the same as my flatmate gets, on his Mac. Both are very stable and secure, which is what you want from an OS. The OS is there to make your life easier, not to get in the way with dozens of warning message, blockades and workarounds. Ash www.ashleysheridan.co.uk -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php I regularly use Windows XP Vista, OS X, and Ubuntu. All three do exactly what I ask of them without crashes or errors. I use them on a variety of different hardware too. Unfortunately in the year 2008 no operating system is the ultimate solution for my needs. I do have lots of opinions good and bad on each of them. I would say that Ubuntu is my favorite though. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 15:04 -0400, Eric Butera wrote: On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 2:51 PM, Ashley Sheridan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 11:26 -0400, tedd wrote: At 11:57 PM +0100 9/15/08, Ashley Sheridan wrote: I agree on your point about trying before bashing. I've tried Vista. Hell, I had to use it for 2 months solid while I was working in India, so I really got to test it out. I had more crashes on that in the 2 months I was using it than I had on Fedora in 2 years. Now, admittedly I was working on Vista during every working hour, and I only use my Fedora machine at weekends and evenings, but I think if you tally up the total time, it was really not in Windows' favour. As an OS, XP was not all that bad, but I've found I really do prefer the way Linux behaves, that and I can get pretty much whatever software I want for free, which just isn't always so easy with Windows. I spend at least 10 to 12 hours per day (including weekends) working on my machine and I've been running my current Mac for over 6 years with my Mac experience dating back to 1984 (the original 128k Mac, which I still have). In the last 6 years, I remember my current Mac locking up only once and that was on start-up after I had installed additional drive. I had to hold the on button to get it to shut down. But, the next boot was uneventful. Yet people think that the occasional crash is acceptable when working with computers. I can only say, they must not be Mac people. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com I rarely get any crashes with Linux, probably about the same as my flatmate gets, on his Mac. Both are very stable and secure, which is what you want from an OS. The OS is there to make your life easier, not to get in the way with dozens of warning message, blockades and workarounds. Ash www.ashleysheridan.co.uk -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php I regularly use Windows XP Vista, OS X, and Ubuntu. All three do exactly what I ask of them without crashes or errors. I use them on a variety of different hardware too. Unfortunately in the year 2008 no operating system is the ultimate solution for my needs. I do have lots of opinions good and bad on each of them. I would say that Ubuntu is my favorite though. Would it be totally off topic if everyone were to say what their favourite OS was and why? I'm just a little curious as to what OS's people use in this field. Ash www.ashleysheridan.co.uk
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 3:11 PM, Ashley Sheridan [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 15:04 -0400, Eric Butera wrote: On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 2:51 PM, Ashley Sheridan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 11:26 -0400, tedd wrote: At 11:57 PM +0100 9/15/08, Ashley Sheridan wrote: I agree on your point about trying before bashing. I've tried Vista. Hell, I had to use it for 2 months solid while I was working in India, so I really got to test it out. I had more crashes on that in the 2 months I was using it than I had on Fedora in 2 years. Now, admittedly I was working on Vista during every working hour, and I only use my Fedora machine at weekends and evenings, but I think if you tally up the total time, it was really not in Windows' favour. As an OS, XP was not all that bad, but I've found I really do prefer the way Linux behaves, that and I can get pretty much whatever software I want for free, which just isn't always so easy with Windows. I spend at least 10 to 12 hours per day (including weekends) working on my machine and I've been running my current Mac for over 6 years with my Mac experience dating back to 1984 (the original 128k Mac, which I still have). In the last 6 years, I remember my current Mac locking up only once and that was on start-up after I had installed additional drive. I had to hold the on button to get it to shut down. But, the next boot was uneventful. Yet people think that the occasional crash is acceptable when working with computers. I can only say, they must not be Mac people. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com I rarely get any crashes with Linux, probably about the same as my flatmate gets, on his Mac. Both are very stable and secure, which is what you want from an OS. The OS is there to make your life easier, not to get in the way with dozens of warning message, blockades and workarounds. Ash www.ashleysheridan.co.uk -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php I regularly use Windows XP Vista, OS X, and Ubuntu. All three do exactly what I ask of them without crashes or errors. I use them on a variety of different hardware too. Unfortunately in the year 2008 no operating system is the ultimate solution for my needs. I do have lots of opinions good and bad on each of them. I would say that Ubuntu is my favorite though. Would it be totally off topic if everyone were to say what their favourite OS was and why? I'm just a little curious as to what OS's people use in this field. Ash www.ashleysheridan.co.uk To paraphrase You are about to insult Microsoft. Cancel or Allow? -- Bastien Cat, the other other white meat
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 16:50 -0400, Bastien Koert wrote: On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 3:11 PM, Ashley Sheridan [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 15:04 -0400, Eric Butera wrote: On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 2:51 PM, Ashley Sheridan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 11:26 -0400, tedd wrote: At 11:57 PM +0100 9/15/08, Ashley Sheridan wrote: I agree on your point about trying before bashing. I've tried Vista. Hell, I had to use it for 2 months solid while I was working in India, so I really got to test it out. I had more crashes on that in the 2 months I was using it than I had on Fedora in 2 years. Now, admittedly I was working on Vista during every working hour, and I only use my Fedora machine at weekends and evenings, but I think if you tally up the total time, it was really not in Windows' favour. As an OS, XP was not all that bad, but I've found I really do prefer the way Linux behaves, that and I can get pretty much whatever software I want for free, which just isn't always so easy with Windows. I spend at least 10 to 12 hours per day (including weekends) working on my machine and I've been running my current Mac for over 6 years with my Mac experience dating back to 1984 (the original 128k Mac, which I still have). In the last 6 years, I remember my current Mac locking up only once and that was on start-up after I had installed additional drive. I had to hold the on button to get it to shut down. But, the next boot was uneventful. Yet people think that the occasional crash is acceptable when working with computers. I can only say, they must not be Mac people. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com I rarely get any crashes with Linux, probably about the same as my flatmate gets, on his Mac. Both are very stable and secure, which is what you want from an OS. The OS is there to make your life easier, not to get in the way with dozens of warning message, blockades and workarounds. Ash www.ashleysheridan.co.uk -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php I regularly use Windows XP Vista, OS X, and Ubuntu. All three do exactly what I ask of them without crashes or errors. I use them on a variety of different hardware too. Unfortunately in the year 2008 no operating system is the ultimate solution for my needs. I do have lots of opinions good and bad on each of them. I would say that Ubuntu is my favorite though. Would it be totally off topic if everyone were to say what their favourite OS was and why? I'm just a little curious as to what OS's people use in this field. Ash www.ashleysheridan.co.uk To paraphrase You are about to insult Microsoft. Cancel or Allow? Hmm, not sure, both ways lead to a General Protection Fault... Ash www.ashleysheridan.co.uk -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
-Original Message- From: tedd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 10:06 AM To: Stut; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Philip Thompson; PHP General list Subject: Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2 At 11:30 PM +0100 9/15/08, Stut wrote: Wow, talk about hitting the nail on the head. When Microsoft pick the hardware their OS runs on and the software it runs with it works perfectly. Not exactly. I seem to remember when Gates gave a presentation at Mac World and his slide show locked up. I actually felt sorry for the guy, but I had a cookie and the feeling passed. I read a hilarious article not too long ago (just before Gates stepped down as CEO.. or maybe after, but before he completely cut corporate ties with MSFT) about Bill Gates' end user experience with Windows XP. Needless to say: he was pissed off. Nothing worked like he wanted it to, and he had to download 8 extra software packages and STILL didn't wind up getting what he wanted (Windows Movie Maker). I found it on Fark, maybe I can track it down again. Fantastic read. Todd Boyd Web Programmer -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
At 7:40 PM +0100 9/16/08, Stut wrote: On 16 Sep 2008, at 15:59, tedd wrote: Then one day, M$ sent out notice that they would no longer support QuickBasic and that was the end of that. All of our current, and past work, was on a dead-end street. We were left to fend for ourselves. I don't mean any disrespect but devoting your livelihood on a technology with a single provider is probably not the smartest move you've made. No offense taken and what you say at face value is true. However, that was a past lifetime -- how smart were you 20 years ago? And I didn't really devote MY livelihood to one technology nor industry for that matter -- never have. That's the reason why I have several businesses going concurrently. I just wished one of them would hit the log-ball so I could retire and program for a hobby. --- It's not nice for Microsoft to have pulled support for it but they're a business and they made that decision because they didn't see a profitable future there, they weren't out to screw you. Of course they were not out to screw me, but even if they were, that's not relevant. I think the important point here is that if you create a development product which requires others to have faith in you, then you also inherent a responsibility to those who have invested their time into helping you secure your product. Software development is a symbiotic relationship. If you want to pull the plug and cut that relationship, that's your choice. But that action comes with a cost. From my perspective, M$ is just reaping what it sowed. Besides, grant me my windmills to tilt. --- Imagine if PHP suddenly stopped development and you had to find a different language (i.e., ruby). Sure we could all do it, but we picked this language for a reason and now we have to choose again -- and perhaps that choice was our second choice. I don't like being forced to settle for my second choice. Speaking only for myself I would have no problem with it at all, for a few reasons... I've been there before and survived -- like you, I have numerous languages under my belt -- in fact they all look the same to me now. So, that wouldn't be a big problem, just an annoying one. --- Now, should have M$ continued to support a product that wasn't making sufficient money for them? I dunno, but I don't care either -- they screwed with my life and I'll spend the rest of it calling M$, M$. That's your choice, but don't take offence when I say that's changed my opinion of you somewhat. No offense taken, but if your opinion of me has changed over that, be advised I've done far worse than name calling. I realize that you take the high-road on things like this -- I respect that -- that used to be my practice as well. It's very predicable from a business perspective. But times change and I kind of like telling people what I really think -- somewhat like the member of the family who no longer cares if he farts in public -- if you get the drift. --- Similarly, I had a run-in with American Express over 30 years ago and even to this day I return all their sales promotion in their self-addressed no-postage envelope they provide. Over the years, I suspect they have paid postage for over 100 pounds of profitless correspondence and the time for their staff to examine it. You're not alone in doing this, but how much a dent do you really think you've made in their profits? It's like spam, if it wasn't worth doing they wouldn't do it. Your efforts would be better spent trying to get your address blacklisted... or learning Scala! Well... that was the idea, to get blacklisted. Just about every thing I sent back had my address on it and included a message which basically said This what I think of your service and you just paid the postage for me to say it. Now take me off your list! But, it hasn't happened yet. How much has it cost them? I could estimate, but I'm sure the total amount wouldn't be substantial. However, if everyone did what I do, then spam mail would halt pretty quick. Companies don't like spending more than they take in on anything. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On Tue, 2008-09-16 at 18:54 -0400, tedd wrote: I realize that you take the high-road on things like this -- I respect that -- that used to be my practice as well. It's very predicable from a business perspective. But times change and I kind of like telling people what I really think -- somewhat like the member of the family who no longer cares if he farts in public -- if you get the drift. Mother of Mercy... it's drifitng over here!! LIGHT A MATCH! :B Cheers, Rob. -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
At 8:11 PM +0100 9/16/08, Ashley Sheridan wrote: Would it be totally off topic if everyone were to say what their favourite OS was and why? I'm just a little curious as to what OS's people use in this field. Obviously, mine is Mac and OSX 10.4.11. My next one will be whatever is the top of the line Apple has at the time I have to money for it. Why? Long story -- I won't go into my pre-Apple days building various computers, but I started my relationship with Apple in 1977 when I bought a mail order a 16k integer Apple ][. I wrote a lot of software for the critter as it evolved over the years. I bought my first Mac in 1984, and have continued with Mac's ever since. My current system provides me with everything I want better than any development system I have had before -- and I've had many. I don't want to change to something else, because this works great for me and until I'm faced with something I can't do, then I'll continue the current course. But another consideration -- I watched the micro-computer industry change from kids in a garage wanting to show the world what they can do -- to the world's largest corporations maximizing profits. Sure the kids in a garage have matured and care about profits like any other business, but they still seem to want to show people what they can do rather than maximizing profits. There appears to be a difference, at least to me. So, partly what I have chosen is not only based upon on how stable the platform is, and what it can do for me, but what I perceive the parent company to be. Call it naive if you want, maybe I'm just a treckie who doesn't know any better, or some washed up has-been -- but -- I've done some amazing things in programming efforts by simply not knowing better and relying on Apple to do their part. Thus far, they haven't let me down -- at least from a product point of view. With respect to management, advertising, and establishing their product as their product should be, they suck! How someone can lose the market share to a problem prone second rate product is beyond me -- but, that's another topic. Cheers, tedd -- --- http://sperling.com http://ancientstones.com http://earthstones.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 20:11:22 +0100, Ashley Sheridan wrote: Would it be totally off topic if everyone were to say what their favourite OS was and why? I'm just a little curious as to what OS's people use in this field. Likely yes, but: Fedora 9 works nicely for me and SWMBO. Essentially though, any Linux with a decent desktop manager would do. I just wish I could find a Linux-native data modelling tool I liked, then I could ditch WinXP for all except testing in IE! :) (actually, not quite true; some customers manage to create incredible concoctions in Microsoft Word that just don't come across right in any Linux word processor, so I still need to open up Microsoft Word occasionally) -- Ross McKay, Toronto, NSW Australia Let the laddie play wi the knife - he'll learn - The Wee Book of Calvin -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
Sancar Saran wrote: Don't expect anything good from M$... Oh I don't expect anything good from them, never have, never will, but that still doesn't change my point that sunset dates would probably be better for them in the long run... looking for a reason up upgrade a subborn user who wont drink the vista kool aid? Stop them surfing and get them to upgrade! Other browsers muscling in? just make IE not suck and deploy it on older OSes.. It's not really that hard to do (or wouldn't have been if IE wasn't a critial part of the OS!). Still not holding out much hope and there is not much point in musing over what could have's, but I really do hope that future browsers have this built in (again not much hope!) Col -- Colin Guthrie gmane(at)colin.guthr.ie http://colin.guthr.ie/ Day Job: Tribalogic Limited [http://www.tribalogic.net/] Open Source: Mandriva Linux Contributor [http://www.mandriva.com/] PulseAudio Hacker [http://www.pulseaudio.org/] Trac Hacker [http://trac.edgewall.org/] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
I wouldn't say Microsoft are strictly anti-web, anymore. They appear to be changing the model of their next operating system to cater for 'the cloud.' I think they finally see that they missed the Internet, and they need it? 2008/9/12 Colin Guthrie [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sancar Saran wrote: Don't expect anything good from M$... Oh I don't expect anything good from them, never have, never will, but that still doesn't change my point that sunset dates would probably be better for them in the long run... looking for a reason up upgrade a subborn user who wont drink the vista kool aid? Stop them surfing and get them to upgrade! Other browsers muscling in? just make IE not suck and deploy it on older OSes.. It's not really that hard to do (or wouldn't have been if IE wasn't a critial part of the OS!). Still not holding out much hope and there is not much point in musing over what could have's, but I really do hope that future browsers have this built in (again not much hope!) Col -- Colin Guthrie gmane(at)colin.guthr.ie http://colin.guthr.ie/ Day Job: Tribalogic Limited [http://www.tribalogic.net/] Open Source: Mandriva Linux Contributor [http://www.mandriva.com/] PulseAudio Hacker [http://www.pulseaudio.org/] Trac Hacker [http://trac.edgewall.org/] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php -- Luke Slater
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
Colin Guthrie wrote: Sancar Saran wrote: Don't expect anything good from M$... Oh I don't expect anything good from them, never have, never will, but that still doesn't change my point that sunset dates would probably be better for them in the long run... looking for a reason up upgrade a subborn user who wont drink the vista kool aid? Stop them surfing and get them to upgrade! Except that this is the same argument that has been applied to PHP4. There is nothing stopping people continuing to use PHP4 if they want to. Finally it is just not being supported. M$ want to end of life XP, but ITX and similar small profile systems simply can't even load Vista so what do we use then? These boxes are happier running W2k! Linux goes on fine, and in many cases all you need is a browser running accessing pages on the PHP server. But when a customer says NO to Linux where can one go? At least my sites are now happier to accept Linux simply because many have not STARTED moving to XP and already they have assessed that they can't afford the hardware upgrade for Vista! M$ may want to kill off older versions of windows, but they are also killing off whole swaths of customers in the process? -- Lester Caine - G8HFL - Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/lsces/wiki/?page=contact L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/ Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk// Firebird - http://www.firebirdsql.org/index.php -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
Lester Caine wrote: Colin Guthrie wrote: Sancar Saran wrote: Don't expect anything good from M$... Oh I don't expect anything good from them, never have, never will, but that still doesn't change my point that sunset dates would probably be better for them in the long run... looking for a reason up upgrade a subborn user who wont drink the vista kool aid? Stop them surfing and get them to upgrade! Except that this is the same argument that has been applied to PHP4. There is nothing stopping people continuing to use PHP4 if they want to. Finally it is just not being supported. That's different tho'. Being limited to PHP 4 is the choice of the people who deploy the application. Those same people cannot choose how said application is *consumed*, which then limits what techniques they can use with confidence etc. So this argument doesn't really apply here. M$ want to end of life XP, but ITX and similar small profile systems simply can't even load Vista so what do we use then? These boxes are happier running W2k! Which goes back to my previous point whereby if MS do not support their IE in older distros... sorry OSes, and people do not want to upgrade, then other browsers should fill that void. It's a MS choice pure and simple as to whether they support their own older products. M$ may want to kill off older versions of windows, but they are also killing off whole swaths of customers in the process? Well they either create a browser that continues to work for their older OS's or let someone else do it. If there is a need then someone will fill it, that's the point. A sunset date for old browsers would take any assessment out of the equation. Most devs stop supporting older browsers at some point, but the trick is knowing exactly when to do it, and doing so in a way that still allows commercial web developers to cater for their target audience. Many people running older, outdated browsers simply don't know they are out of date, but if this information is much closer to the surface (e.g. every time they start their browser and consistent and persistent nagging), then they would know about it and perhaps look at rectifying the situation so that they can have a better web experience and developers can focus on the important aspects of their projects rather than spending countless hours catering for obsoleted but still used products. Col -- Colin Guthrie gmane(at)colin.guthr.ie http://colin.guthr.ie/ Day Job: Tribalogic Limited [http://www.tribalogic.net/] Open Source: Mandriva Linux Contributor [http://www.mandriva.com/] PulseAudio Hacker [http://www.pulseaudio.org/] Trac Hacker [http://trac.edgewall.org/] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On Sep 12, 2008, at 3:13 AM, Colin Guthrie wrote: Sancar Saran wrote: Don't expect anything good from M$... Oh I don't expect anything good from them, never have, never will, [snip!] Ok, let's not forget about the Xbox! ;) ~Philip -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
-Original Message- From: Sancar Saran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 6:15 PM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2 Because, M$ earning money from Win GUI. No WinGUI no money. From the begining, M$ try to broke web compatibilty in every way... Sure M$ has bad records about software quality. But even ask yourself. WHY IE (especially 5 and 6) SO buggy even M$ standards. M$ isn't mr nice guy and they wont get a dime from web. They hate web and internet from begining. M$ is anti web IT company. They are too big they are to bold (or bald) to accept changing market and they got too much money on bank to do someting very very stupid. Like Windows VISTA. Don't expect anything good from M$... tirade Okay... here it goes. I'm sick and tired of people talking trash on Windows Vista. It came pre-installed on my laptop (Home Premium... not Business Pro, sadly) and I haven't had any issues with it whatsoever. Some of my WinXP programs don't show up in the start menu when they're installed... but it's not Microsoft's fault that software companies haven't taken the initiative to adapt to the new Vista framework (which, let's be honest, can't require all that much effort in most cases where base-level operating system stuff isn't involved in the actual program). Annoyed with the UAC that asks you to confirm every administrative decision you make on your computer? Quit being a weenie and just automate it with RegEdit (or, if you're using Business, there is an explicit option for it in the Control Panel). Annoyed with all the bells and whistles in the Aero theme that is installed by default? Don't use it! I remember the first time I installed a Linux distro that came pre-bundled with KDE... I took the time to remove all the fading, transparency, window animations, bouncing cursors, etc. (actually, I just switched to XFCE instead). I don't see the difference. If you want to get high and mighty with a retort about rolling your own Linux distribution--well, you've just sailed far beyond ANY pre-packaged OS (Mac, Windows, Linux, or otherwise) and the point is moot. Find a new scapegoat to complain about, PLEASE. Bitch about WebKit's lack of XMLDOM instantiation. Bitch about Google launching pay-for-play high resolution satellite imagery. Bitch about the Xandros EEE being squashed by Intel. Bitch about Facebook's API and their draconic limitations on markup language and Javascript... but this Vista sucks and I won't comment as to why broken record has run its course. /tirade Have a lovely day! Todd Boyd Web Programmer
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On Sep 12, 2008, at 10:18 AM, Boyd, Todd M. wrote: -Original Message- From: Sancar Saran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 6:15 PM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2 Because, M$ earning money from Win GUI. No WinGUI no money. From the begining, M$ try to broke web compatibilty in every way... Sure M$ has bad records about software quality. But even ask yourself. WHY IE (especially 5 and 6) SO buggy even M$ standards. M$ isn't mr nice guy and they wont get a dime from web. They hate web and internet from begining. M$ is anti web IT company. They are too big they are to bold (or bald) to accept changing market and they got too much money on bank to do someting very very stupid. Like Windows VISTA. Don't expect anything good from M$... tirade Okay... here it goes. I'm sick and tired of people talking trash on Windows Vista. It came pre-installed on my laptop (Home Premium... not Business Pro, sadly) and I haven't had any issues with it whatsoever. Some of my WinXP programs don't show up in the start menu when they're installed... but it's not Microsoft's fault that software companies haven't taken the initiative to adapt to the new Vista framework (which, let's be honest, can't require all that much effort in most cases where base-level operating system stuff isn't involved in the actual program). Annoyed with the UAC that asks you to confirm every administrative decision you make on your computer? Quit being a weenie and just automate it with RegEdit (or, if you're using Business, there is an explicit option for it in the Control Panel). Annoyed with all the bells and whistles in the Aero theme that is installed by default? Don't use it! I remember the first time I installed a Linux distro that came pre-bundled with KDE... I took the time to remove all the fading, transparency, window animations, bouncing cursors, etc. (actually, I just switched to XFCE instead). I don't see the difference. If you want to get high and mighty with a retort about rolling your own Linux distribution--well, you've just sailed far beyond ANY pre-packaged OS (Mac, Windows, Linux, or otherwise) and the point is moot. Find a new scapegoat to complain about, PLEASE. Bitch about WebKit's lack of XMLDOM instantiation. Bitch about Google launching pay-for- play high resolution satellite imagery. Bitch about the Xandros EEE being squashed by Intel. Bitch about Facebook's API and their draconic limitations on markup language and Javascript... but this Vista sucks and I won't comment as to why broken record has run its course. /tirade Have a lovely day! Todd Boyd Web Programmer Three Votes Todd!! In total agreement. I've been meaning to make a similar post statement not just here (in PHP mailing list), but in an abundant number of places all across the Internet horizon. And My PC didn't come bundled with Vista, in fact, I actually Upgraded from XP personally manually. I have no stock options in Microsoft, and I have nothing personal with them - Just another commodity user/customer. And I couldn't have said it any better. Cheers! --- Rahul Sitaram Johari Founder, Internet Architects Group, Inc. [Email] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Web] http://www.rahulsjohari.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
Boyd, Todd M. wrote: tirade Okay... here it goes. I'm sick and tired of people talking trash on Windows Vista. It came pre-installed on my laptop (Home Premium... not Business Pro, sadly) and I haven't had any issues with it whatsoever. Some of my WinXP programs don't show up in the start menu when they're installed... but it's not Microsoft's fault that software companies haven't taken the initiative to adapt to the new Vista framework (which, let's be honest, can't require all that much effort in most cases where base-level operating system stuff isn't involved in the actual program). Annoyed with the UAC that asks you to confirm every administrative decision you make on your computer? Quit being a weenie and just automate it with RegEdit (or, if you're using Business, there is an explicit option for it in the Control Panel). Annoyed with all the bells and whistles in the Aero theme that is installed by default? Don't use it! I remember the first time I installed a Linux distro that came pre-bundled with KDE... I took the time to remove all the fading, transparency, window animations, bouncing cursors, etc. (actually, I just switched to XFCE instead). I don't see the difference. If you want to get high and mighty with a retort about rolling your own Linux distribution--well, you've just sailed far beyond ANY pre-packaged OS (Mac, Windows, Linux, or otherwise) and the point is moot. Find a new scapegoat to complain about, PLEASE. Bitch about WebKit's lack of XMLDOM instantiation. Bitch about Google launching pay-for-play high resolution satellite imagery. Bitch about the Xandros EEE being squashed by Intel. Bitch about Facebook's API and their draconic limitations on markup language and Javascript... but this Vista sucks and I won't comment as to why broken record has run its course. /tirade All well and good. Use what you like etc. etc., I'm all for freedom, but that still doesn't mean that we wont be stuck using the legacy Vista IE8 in 10 years time because we don't want to upgrade to Windows ZX 48 or whatever at the time. And IE8 doesn't even support CSS 5 or HTML 7!!! I mean it's just sooo last decade and I don't want to have to have to spend extra time catering for people who still insist on using it. | s,IE8,IE/Firefox/Opera/Safari/etc, The fact it's MS to me doesn't matter here. The same logic applies to all browsers. I still think that sunset dates for web browsers is a good idea. Col -- Colin Guthrie gmane(at)colin.guthr.ie http://colin.guthr.ie/ Day Job: Tribalogic Limited [http://www.tribalogic.net/] Open Source: Mandriva Linux Contributor [http://www.mandriva.com/] PulseAudio Hacker [http://www.pulseaudio.org/] Trac Hacker [http://trac.edgewall.org/] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
-Original Message- From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Colin Guthrie Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 9:44 AM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2 Boyd, Todd M. wrote: tirade Okay... here it goes. I'm sick and tired of people talking trash on Windows Vista. It came pre-installed on my laptop (Home Premium... not Business Pro, sadly) and I haven't had any issues with it whatsoever. Some of my WinXP programs don't show up in the start menu when they're installed... but it's not Microsoft's fault that software companies haven't taken the initiative to adapt to the new Vista framework (which, let's be honest, can't require all that much effort in most cases where base-level operating system stuff isn't involved in the actual program). Annoyed with the UAC that asks you to confirm every administrative decision you make on your computer? Quit being a weenie and just automate it with RegEdit (or, if you're using Business, there is an explicit option for it in the Control Panel). Annoyed with all the bells and whistles in the Aero theme that is installed by default? Don't use it! I remember the first time I installed a Linux distro that came pre-bundled with KDE... I took the time to remove all the fading, transparency, window animations, bouncing cursors, etc. (actually, I just switched to XFCE instead). I don't see the difference. If you want to get high and mighty with a retort about rolling your own Linux distribution--well, you've just sailed far beyond ANY pre-packaged OS (Mac, Windows, Linux, or otherwise) and the point is moot. Find a new scapegoat to complain about, PLEASE. Bitch about WebKit's lack of XMLDOM instantiation. Bitch about Google launching pay-for-play high resolution satellite imagery. Bitch about the Xandros EEE being squashed by Intel. Bitch about Facebook's API and their draconic limitations on markup language and Javascript... but this Vista sucks and I won't comment as to why broken record has run its course. /tirade All well and good. Use what you like etc. etc., I'm all for freedom, but that still doesn't mean that we wont be stuck using the legacy Vista IE8 in 10 years time because we don't want to upgrade to Windows ZX 48 or whatever at the time. And IE8 doesn't even support CSS 5 or HTML 7!!! I mean it's just sooo last decade and I don't want to have to have to spend extra time catering for people who still insist on using it. | s,IE8,IE/Firefox/Opera/Safari/etc, The fact it's MS to me doesn't matter here. The same logic applies to all browsers. I still think that sunset dates for web browsers is a good idea. I agree wholeheartedly. Also, I despise Internet Explorer with the vehemence of a rabid dog. One of the sort-of-legacy web applications used where I work bombs out in IE every now and again due to the way IE handles cookies and sessions. It fails at random (seemingly), and I've tried every security and privacy setting imaginable to try to get it to work again. I had the EXTREME pleasure yesterday of telling one of the staff that I didn't care that she liked Internet Explorer--Firefox (or even Safari/Google/MOSAIC/WHATEVER) never had the same problem, and that she was required to install it in place of Internet Explorer in order for the app to function as intended. Booyah! Granted, that's not exactly the most professional solution. However, it works 100% of the time, and I don't have a month to dedicate to investigating every session/cookie flaw in Internet Explorer and patching either the person's installation or the back-end web application. Every now and again, the bureaucratic paranoia over spent man-hours works in my favor. Todd Boyd Web Programmer
RE: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 09:18 -0500, Boyd, Todd M. wrote: tirade Okay... here it goes. I'm sick and tired of people talking trash on Windows Vista. It came pre-installed on my laptop (Home Premium... not Business Pro, sadly) and I haven't had any issues with it whatsoever. Some of my WinXP programs don't show up in the start menu when they're installed... but it's not Microsoft's fault that software companies haven't taken the initiative to adapt to the new Vista framework (which, let's be honest, can't require all that much effort in most cases where base-level operating system stuff isn't involved in the actual program). Annoyed with the UAC that asks you to confirm every administrative decision you make on your computer? Quit being a weenie and just automate it with RegEdit (or, if you're using Business, there is an explicit option for it in the Control Panel). Annoyed with all the bells and whistles in the Aero theme that is installed by default? Don't use it! I remember the first time I installed a Linux distro that came pre-bundled with KDE... I took the time to remove all the fading, transparency, window animations, bouncing cursors, etc. (actually, I just switched to XFCE instead). I don't see the difference. If you want to get high and mighty with a retort about rolling your own Linux distribution--well, you've just sailed far beyond ANY pre-packaged OS (Mac, Windows, Linux, or otherwise) and the point is moot. Find a new scapegoat to complain about, PLEASE. Bitch about WebKit's lack of XMLDOM instantiation. Bitch about Google launching pay-for-play high resolution satellite imagery. Bitch about the Xandros EEE being squashed by Intel. Bitch about Facebook's API and their draconic limitations on markup language and Javascript... but this Vista sucks and I won't comment as to why broken record has run its course. /tirade I could give you some of your arguments... but Microsoft is still a big chunk of crap to swallow due to their artificial attempts to force users to adopt Vista despite the fact the majority of their users want to continue using XP. Cheers, Rob. -- http://www.interjinn.com Application and Templating Framework for PHP -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: InterntetExplorer 8 beater 2
-Original Message- From: Robert Cummings [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 12, 2008 1:11 PM To: Boyd, Todd M. Cc: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: RE: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: InterntetExplorer 8 beater 2 ---8--- snip /tirade I could give you some of your arguments... but Microsoft is still a big chunk of crap to swallow due to their artificial attempts to force users to adopt Vista despite the fact the majority of their users want to continue using XP. No doubt. I don't agree with their practices or their support. I'm just saying... Vista itself isn't really anything to get up in arms about. Windows is Windows is Microsoft is Microsoft. If you think it sucks, well... it all sucks. :D Todd Boyd Web Programmer -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
Wow, anyone could be mistaken for thinking you two were Microshaft employees... tirade Vista sucks because: * it uses far more memory than it should, even with the visual effects turned off * IE7 on Vista is more flaky than IE7 on XP FACT! * The registry hacks to get around the draconian limits on Vista are not easily applied for all users * It's a battle trying to edit what it thinks are system files, even if they're not * It doesn't really offer all that much over XP /tirade And I even have one for IE7 if you really want to hear it: tirade * They've moved all the buttons around to a non-standard layout (hmm, remind me of Office 2007) * They changed the rendering method *again* * Still no support for some really standard CSS * For a browser with half the components in memory, it still takes too long to start up * More security holes than any other browser /tirade I'd go on, but I don't want to write a university thesis... Ash www.ashleysheridan.co.uk ---BeginMessage--- On Sep 12, 2008, at 10:18 AM, Boyd, Todd M. wrote: -Original Message- From: Sancar Saran [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 6:15 PM To: php-general@lists.php.net Subject: Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2 Because, M$ earning money from Win GUI. No WinGUI no money. From the begining, M$ try to broke web compatibilty in every way... Sure M$ has bad records about software quality. But even ask yourself. WHY IE (especially 5 and 6) SO buggy even M$ standards. M$ isn't mr nice guy and they wont get a dime from web. They hate web and internet from begining. M$ is anti web IT company. They are too big they are to bold (or bald) to accept changing market and they got too much money on bank to do someting very very stupid. Like Windows VISTA. Don't expect anything good from M$... tirade Okay... here it goes. I'm sick and tired of people talking trash on Windows Vista. It came pre-installed on my laptop (Home Premium... not Business Pro, sadly) and I haven't had any issues with it whatsoever. Some of my WinXP programs don't show up in the start menu when they're installed... but it's not Microsoft's fault that software companies haven't taken the initiative to adapt to the new Vista framework (which, let's be honest, can't require all that much effort in most cases where base-level operating system stuff isn't involved in the actual program). Annoyed with the UAC that asks you to confirm every administrative decision you make on your computer? Quit being a weenie and just automate it with RegEdit (or, if you're using Business, there is an explicit option for it in the Control Panel). Annoyed with all the bells and whistles in the Aero theme that is installed by default? Don't use it! I remember the first time I installed a Linux distro that came pre-bundled with KDE... I took the time to remove all the fading, transparency, window animations, bouncing cursors, etc. (actually, I just switched to XFCE instead). I don't see the difference. If you want to get high and mighty with a retort about rolling your own Linux distribution--well, you've just sailed far beyond ANY pre-packaged OS (Mac, Windows, Linux, or otherwise) and the point is moot. Find a new scapegoat to complain about, PLEASE. Bitch about WebKit's lack of XMLDOM instantiation. Bitch about Google launching pay-for- play high resolution satellite imagery. Bitch about the Xandros EEE being squashed by Intel. Bitch about Facebook's API and their draconic limitations on markup language and Javascript... but this Vista sucks and I won't comment as to why broken record has run its course. /tirade Have a lovely day! Todd Boyd Web Programmer Three Votes Todd!! In total agreement. I've been meaning to make a similar post statement not just here (in PHP mailing list), but in an abundant number of places all across the Internet horizon. And My PC didn't come bundled with Vista, in fact, I actually Upgraded from XP personally manually. I have no stock options in Microsoft, and I have nothing personal with them - Just another commodity user/customer. And I couldn't have said it any better. Cheers! --- Rahul Sitaram Johari Founder, Internet Architects Group, Inc. [Email] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Web] http://www.rahulsjohari.com -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php ---End Message--- -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
RE: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
On Fri, 2008-09-12 at 09:18 -0500, Boyd, Todd M. wrote: tirade Okay... here it goes. I'm sick and tired of people talking trash on Windows Vista. It came pre-installed on my laptop (Home Premium... not Business Pro, sadly) and I haven't had any issues with it whatsoever. Some of my WinXP programs don't show up in the start menu when they're installed... but it's not Microsoft's fault that software companies haven't taken the initiative to adapt to the new Vista framework (which, let's be honest, can't require all that much effort in most cases where base-level operating system stuff isn't involved in the actual program). Annoyed with the UAC that asks you to confirm every administrative decision you make on your computer? Quit being a weenie and just automate it with RegEdit (or, if you're using Business, t. I must have written literally a million emails like this in the past week... :p Col -- Colin Guthrie gmane(at)colin.guthr.ie http://colin.guthr.ie/ Day Job: Tribalogic Limited [http://www.tribalogic.net/] Open Source: Mandriva Linux Contributor [http://www.mandriva.com/] PulseAudio Hacker [http://www.pulseaudio.org/] Trac Hacker [http://trac.edgewall.org/] Ooh, well played ;) Ash www.ashleysheridan.co.uk -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
Micah Gersten wrote: The problem is that if you're running on older hardware, IE7 might be too CPU intensive to run correctly. That's why MS won't set Sunset Dates for an old browser. They instead set the Sunset Dates for the OS and that's how they make things out of date. They say upgrade the OS. Matter of philosophy. The problem is that the new OS won't run on the old hardware and costs lots of money so people don't upgrade. Remember, MS is for profit. If you can just upgrade your browser, they don't make any money. If you upgrade your OS, they do. Fair point but if people are using old OSes and MS want them to upgrade to a newer versin, breaking their ability to surf the web isn't a carrot, but it makes a pretty good stick. Col -- Colin Guthrie gmane(at)colin.guthr.ie http://colin.guthr.ie/ Day Job: Tribalogic Limited [http://www.tribalogic.net/] Open Source: Mandriva Linux Contributor [http://www.mandriva.com/] PulseAudio Hacker [http://www.pulseaudio.org/] Trac Hacker [http://trac.edgewall.org/] -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why MS Won't Retire Browsers -- was: Interntet Explorer 8 beater 2
Because, M$ earning money from Win GUI. No WinGUI no money. From the begining, M$ try to broke web compatibilty in every way... Sure M$ has bad records about software quality. But even ask yourself. WHY IE (especially 5 and 6) SO buggy even M$ standards. M$ isn't mr nice guy and they wont get a dime from web. They hate web and internet from begining. M$ is anti web IT company. They are too big they are to bold (or bald) to accept changing market and they got too much money on bank to do someting very very stupid. Like Windows VISTA. Don't expect anything good from M$... Regards Sancar -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: why are passwords stored encrypted in databases even when the datathey protect is stored in the same database?
Dietrich Bollmann wrote: Hi, As far as I remember, in all books I read about PHP and SQL, the password was stored in an encrypted form, even when all the data which should be protected by the password was stored in the same database. Can anybody tell me what is the motivation behind this approach? If somebody hacks the database, he has the data anyway; if he doesn't, he can't retrieve the password, encrypted or not. I am asking because I would like to implement a simple file server. A user would upload his files and get them listed on his user page. If he wants to allow some other person to download the file, he pushes a button beside the file entry in the listing and a page opens where he can enter the email of the other person. An email is send with the link where the file can be found and a password included... The person who asked me to write this file server wants everybody who to receive the same link together with the same password for the same file. In order to implement this approach, the password has to be stored somewhere... I thought about storing the password as it is in the database - but somehow wonder why this never was done in any of the books I read... By the way: in most cases, when pushing the I forgot my password button, an email with a user name and a link to activate the password is generated. Anybody who gets into the possession of the email could access the data... Should I rather send two emails, one with the link, one with the new password? Thanks for your help :) Dietrich Assuming that noone will ever get direct access to your database or is able to access the password directly: there is no need for any type of encryption. However, people usually write code which may (and will most of the time) containt exploitable sections which might give a malicious user the ability to get a dump of the database. A password dump is always interesting, since it gives a LOT of information. People usually don't use 1 password per login, but rather have a standard password for most things. Now, if it were unprotected, the person getting the information can instantly log in as that user, or if he wants might even take over that person's identity in other places (rare, but it happens). If it were protected by encryption of some kind then it would first need to be decrypted to be usable (unless there is a designflaw which makes this unnecessery as has been the case in a few messageboards a few years ago). Now, you can either encrypt or hash your passwords. Hashes are one-way, encryption two-way. If the malicious user gets hold of a hash: he'll still not have anything useful in his hands. He might make a reverse lookup table and figure out the password from that (though there's an infinite number of possible inputs for each single [hash] output), but add a salt and don't put that in the database and the user has a low chance of ever finding out what it was. But, just as the malicious user can't figure out what the password was, neither can you: so goodby lost-password feature. Instead you'd have to regenerate a new password and send that over, or do some other fancy magic which doesn't involve sending the current password as-is, since you don't know it either. If you were to use encryption there, you could always decrypt it. If you have the key. Storing the key separately from the encrypted password would make this quite safe. enctpyed_string = (data + key), if you know neither the data nor the key, things get very tough. Because you know the key, you can figure out the password and make a forgot-password feature easily which sends out the actual password. But, because your key is publicly available (if your page has to use it, then it's automatically publicly available, maybe not easily, but a malicious user which managed to get hold of a full password table, could just aswell get hold of the key for the encryption)! Putting in neither, so just keeping the passwords in their plain form is safe. As long as noone _ever_ sees them. Guarantee that and you won't have to bother with hashing/encrypting. If you can't guarantee it, build in some extra safety in the form of hashing and/or encrypting. hope that explains it all a bit, - tul -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: why are passwords stored encrypted in databases even when the datathey protect is stored in the same database?
Hi tul, So this was a very long and informative answer :) Thank you very much! On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 12:02 +0200, M. Sokolewicz wrote: [...] However, people usually write code which may (and will most of the time) containt exploitable sections which might give a malicious user the ability to get a dump of the database. A password dump is always interesting, since it gives a LOT of information. People usually don't use 1 password per login, but rather have a standard password for most things. So if the user is allowed to change his password, it should be encrypted always as there are chances that the same password is used at some other place? That makes a lot of sense to me :) If all passwords are generated by the system on the other hand and the user is not allowed to change his password, if further all the protected data is in the same database as the password, there would be no need for encrypting the passwords following your argumentation? But if some information is stored outside the database - in my case (simple file server) for example, the database only contains the file meta-data while the files themselves are stored in some data directory on the server - some malicious user who would have broken into the database could get hold of the files if the passwords are stored unencrypted; if some encryption scheme would have been used on the other hand the data found in the database wouldn't be of any use at all? And if the password should be recoverable some encryption with a key stored somewhere else would force the hacker to break into two systems, the database itself and the system which is used to store the key. That makes sense also. I didn't think about the fact that database and a directory on the server are two different things which would have to be hacked separately. So I am happy about writing my mail and getting such a nice answer before implementing some stupid password logic myself :) Now, if it were unprotected, the person getting the information can instantly log in as that user, or if he wants might even take over that person's identity in other places (rare, but it happens). If it were protected by encryption of some kind then it would first need to be decrypted to be usable (unless there is a designflaw which makes this unnecessery as has been the case in a few messageboards a few years ago). Now, you can either encrypt or hash your passwords. Hashes are one-way, encryption two-way. If the malicious user gets hold of a hash: he'll still not have anything useful in his hands. He might make a reverse lookup table and figure out the password from that (though there's an infinite number of possible inputs for each single [hash] output), but add a salt and don't put that in the database and the user has a low chance of ever finding out what it was. But, just as the malicious user can't figure out what the password was, neither can you: so goodby lost-password feature. Instead you'd have to regenerate a new password and send that over, or do some other fancy magic which doesn't involve sending the current password as-is, since you don't know it either. If you were to use encryption there, you could always decrypt it. If you have the key. Storing the key separately from the encrypted password would make this quite safe. enctpyed_string = (data + key), if you know neither the data nor the key, things get very tough. Because you know the key, you can figure out the password and make a forgot-password feature easily which sends out the actual password. But, because your key is publicly available (if your page has to use it, then it's automatically publicly available, maybe not easily, but a malicious user which managed to get hold of a full password table, could just aswell get hold of the key for the encryption)! Putting in neither, so just keeping the passwords in their plain form is safe. As long as noone _ever_ sees them. Guarantee that and you won't have to bother with hashing/encrypting. If you can't guarantee it, build in some extra safety in the form of hashing and/or encrypting. hope that explains it all a bit, - tul Yes. A bit. I am actually impressed. But I better read some more redundant book about intelligent malicious users as I still feel like not understanding everything of what you said completely. ...any nice book recommendation for naive people like me :? So how about the following solution to my simple file-server problem: I generate a new url for every user who is allowed to download a file and a private password for every new url. Using this approach, the same file will be downloaded by different users via different urls and passwords. The password for an url is stored in the database encrypted and send over to the user unencrypted per email. Of course this makes some more logic and tables necessary - and a new row for every user also - but who cares :) What do you think?
[PHP] Re: why are passwords stored encrypted in databases even when thedatathey protect is stored in the same database?
Dietrich Bollmann wrote: Hi tul, So this was a very long and informative answer :) Thank you very much! On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 12:02 +0200, M. Sokolewicz wrote: [...] However, people usually write code which may (and will most of the time) containt exploitable sections which might give a malicious user the ability to get a dump of the database. A password dump is always interesting, since it gives a LOT of information. People usually don't use 1 password per login, but rather have a standard password for most things. So if the user is allowed to change his password, it should be encrypted always as there are chances that the same password is used at some other place? That makes a lot of sense to me :) If all passwords are generated by the system on the other hand and the user is not allowed to change his password, if further all the protected data is in the same database as the password, there would be no need for encrypting the passwords following your argumentation? But if some information is stored outside the database - in my case (simple file server) for example, the database only contains the file meta-data while the files themselves are stored in some data directory on the server - some malicious user who would have broken into the database could get hold of the files if the passwords are stored unencrypted; if some encryption scheme would have been used on the other hand the data found in the database wouldn't be of any use at all? And if the password should be recoverable some encryption with a key stored somewhere else would force the hacker to break into two systems, the database itself and the system which is used to store the key. That makes sense also. I didn't think about the fact that database and a directory on the server are two different things which would have to be hacked separately. So I am happy about writing my mail and getting such a nice answer before implementing some stupid password logic myself :) Now, if it were unprotected, the person getting the information can instantly log in as that user, or if he wants might even take over that person's identity in other places (rare, but it happens). If it were protected by encryption of some kind then it would first need to be decrypted to be usable (unless there is a designflaw which makes this unnecessery as has been the case in a few messageboards a few years ago). Now, you can either encrypt or hash your passwords. Hashes are one-way, encryption two-way. If the malicious user gets hold of a hash: he'll still not have anything useful in his hands. He might make a reverse lookup table and figure out the password from that (though there's an infinite number of possible inputs for each single [hash] output), but add a salt and don't put that in the database and the user has a low chance of ever finding out what it was. But, just as the malicious user can't figure out what the password was, neither can you: so goodby lost-password feature. Instead you'd have to regenerate a new password and send that over, or do some other fancy magic which doesn't involve sending the current password as-is, since you don't know it either. If you were to use encryption there, you could always decrypt it. If you have the key. Storing the key separately from the encrypted password would make this quite safe. enctpyed_string = (data + key), if you know neither the data nor the key, things get very tough. Because you know the key, you can figure out the password and make a forgot-password feature easily which sends out the actual password. But, because your key is publicly available (if your page has to use it, then it's automatically publicly available, maybe not easily, but a malicious user which managed to get hold of a full password table, could just aswell get hold of the key for the encryption)! Putting in neither, so just keeping the passwords in their plain form is safe. As long as noone _ever_ sees them. Guarantee that and you won't have to bother with hashing/encrypting. If you can't guarantee it, build in some extra safety in the form of hashing and/or encrypting. hope that explains it all a bit, - tul Yes. A bit. I am actually impressed. But I better read some more redundant book about intelligent malicious users as I still feel like not understanding everything of what you said completely. ...any nice book recommendation for naive people like me :? So how about the following solution to my simple file-server problem: I generate a new url for every user who is allowed to download a file and a private password for every new url. Using this approach, the same file will be downloaded by different users via different urls and passwords. The password for an url is stored in the database encrypted and send over to the user unencrypted per email. Of course this makes some more logic and tables necessary - and a new row for every user also - but who cares :) What do you think? Thanks for your
Re: [PHP] Re: why are passwords stored encrypted in databases even when thedatathey protect is stored in the same database?
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 8:20 AM, M. Sokolewicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dietrich Bollmann wrote: Hi tul, So this was a very long and informative answer :) Thank you very much! On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 12:02 +0200, M. Sokolewicz wrote: [...] However, people usually write code which may (and will most of the time) containt exploitable sections which might give a malicious user the ability to get a dump of the database. A password dump is always interesting, since it gives a LOT of information. People usually don't use 1 password per login, but rather have a standard password for most things. So if the user is allowed to change his password, it should be encrypted always as there are chances that the same password is used at some other place? That makes a lot of sense to me :) If all passwords are generated by the system on the other hand and the user is not allowed to change his password, if further all the protected data is in the same database as the password, there would be no need for encrypting the passwords following your argumentation? But if some information is stored outside the database - in my case (simple file server) for example, the database only contains the file meta-data while the files themselves are stored in some data directory on the server - some malicious user who would have broken into the database could get hold of the files if the passwords are stored unencrypted; if some encryption scheme would have been used on the other hand the data found in the database wouldn't be of any use at all? And if the password should be recoverable some encryption with a key stored somewhere else would force the hacker to break into two systems, the database itself and the system which is used to store the key. That makes sense also. I didn't think about the fact that database and a directory on the server are two different things which would have to be hacked separately. So I am happy about writing my mail and getting such a nice answer before implementing some stupid password logic myself :) Now, if it were unprotected, the person getting the information can instantly log in as that user, or if he wants might even take over that person's identity in other places (rare, but it happens). If it were protected by encryption of some kind then it would first need to be decrypted to be usable (unless there is a designflaw which makes this unnecessery as has been the case in a few messageboards a few years ago). Now, you can either encrypt or hash your passwords. Hashes are one-way, encryption two-way. If the malicious user gets hold of a hash: he'll still not have anything useful in his hands. He might make a reverse lookup table and figure out the password from that (though there's an infinite number of possible inputs for each single [hash] output), but add a salt and don't put that in the database and the user has a low chance of ever finding out what it was. But, just as the malicious user can't figure out what the password was, neither can you: so goodby lost-password feature. Instead you'd have to regenerate a new password and send that over, or do some other fancy magic which doesn't involve sending the current password as-is, since you don't know it either. If you were to use encryption there, you could always decrypt it. If you have the key. Storing the key separately from the encrypted password would make this quite safe. enctpyed_string = (data + key), if you know neither the data nor the key, things get very tough. Because you know the key, you can figure out the password and make a forgot-password feature easily which sends out the actual password. But, because your key is publicly available (if your page has to use it, then it's automatically publicly available, maybe not easily, but a malicious user which managed to get hold of a full password table, could just aswell get hold of the key for the encryption)! Putting in neither, so just keeping the passwords in their plain form is safe. As long as noone _ever_ sees them. Guarantee that and you won't have to bother with hashing/encrypting. If you can't guarantee it, build in some extra safety in the form of hashing and/or encrypting. hope that explains it all a bit, - tul Yes. A bit. I am actually impressed. But I better read some more redundant book about intelligent malicious users as I still feel like not understanding everything of what you said completely. ...any nice book recommendation for naive people like me :? So how about the following solution to my simple file-server problem: I generate a new url for every user who is allowed to download a file and a private password for every new url. Using this approach, the same file will be downloaded by different users via different urls and passwords. The password for an url is stored in the database encrypted and send over to the user unencrypted per email. Of course this makes some more
[PHP] Re: why are passwords stored encrypted in databases even when thedatathey protect is stored in the same database?
On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 14:20 +0200, M. Sokolewicz wrote: Considering you're already jailing access by linking a specific url to a specific password you're making the impact of a hacked password pretty small. Which is a good thing :) I would recommend, if you go this way, to add an expiry date to the url/password combo. So for example you can only use that url/password combo for 3 days before it expires, after that, you need a new combo. Doing it this way (with server-generated passwords) you make sure that _if_ it were ever to fall into hands-it-should-not-be-in, it won't be there for long. - Tul P.S. in other words, sounds fine to me :) Thank you again! ...so finally I can get to work :) Best wishes, Dietrich On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 14:20 +0200, M. Sokolewicz wrote: Dietrich Bollmann wrote: Hi tul, So this was a very long and informative answer :) Thank you very much! On Fri, 2008-06-13 at 12:02 +0200, M. Sokolewicz wrote: [...] However, people usually write code which may (and will most of the time) containt exploitable sections which might give a malicious user the ability to get a dump of the database. A password dump is always interesting, since it gives a LOT of information. People usually don't use 1 password per login, but rather have a standard password for most things. So if the user is allowed to change his password, it should be encrypted always as there are chances that the same password is used at some other place? That makes a lot of sense to me :) If all passwords are generated by the system on the other hand and the user is not allowed to change his password, if further all the protected data is in the same database as the password, there would be no need for encrypting the passwords following your argumentation? But if some information is stored outside the database - in my case (simple file server) for example, the database only contains the file meta-data while the files themselves are stored in some data directory on the server - some malicious user who would have broken into the database could get hold of the files if the passwords are stored unencrypted; if some encryption scheme would have been used on the other hand the data found in the database wouldn't be of any use at all? And if the password should be recoverable some encryption with a key stored somewhere else would force the hacker to break into two systems, the database itself and the system which is used to store the key. That makes sense also. I didn't think about the fact that database and a directory on the server are two different things which would have to be hacked separately. So I am happy about writing my mail and getting such a nice answer before implementing some stupid password logic myself :) Now, if it were unprotected, the person getting the information can instantly log in as that user, or if he wants might even take over that person's identity in other places (rare, but it happens). If it were protected by encryption of some kind then it would first need to be decrypted to be usable (unless there is a designflaw which makes this unnecessery as has been the case in a few messageboards a few years ago). Now, you can either encrypt or hash your passwords. Hashes are one-way, encryption two-way. If the malicious user gets hold of a hash: he'll still not have anything useful in his hands. He might make a reverse lookup table and figure out the password from that (though there's an infinite number of possible inputs for each single [hash] output), but add a salt and don't put that in the database and the user has a low chance of ever finding out what it was. But, just as the malicious user can't figure out what the password was, neither can you: so goodby lost-password feature. Instead you'd have to regenerate a new password and send that over, or do some other fancy magic which doesn't involve sending the current password as-is, since you don't know it either. If you were to use encryption there, you could always decrypt it. If you have the key. Storing the key separately from the encrypted password would make this quite safe. enctpyed_string = (data + key), if you know neither the data nor the key, things get very tough. Because you know the key, you can figure out the password and make a forgot-password feature easily which sends out the actual password. But, because your key is publicly available (if your page has to use it, then it's automatically publicly available, maybe not easily, but a malicious user which managed to get hold of a full password table, could just aswell get hold of the key for the encryption)! Putting in neither, so just keeping the passwords in their plain form is safe. As long as noone _ever_ sees them. Guarantee that and you won't have to bother with hashing/encrypting. If you
Re: [PHP] Re: why are passwords stored encrypted in databases even when thedatathey protect is stored in the same database?
Taking into mind that email addresses extracted out of hacked databases is one of the main spam industry seeders, I always wonder why web application developers don't consider encrypting emails the same way they consider encrypting password! Once a hacker has full access to a database, an encrypted password becomes like locking the door while keeping the window open! Say a user has an account in some discussion forum, that uses an open source, or visible-source software. She has about 5000 posts in which she has expressed her personal opinions on just about many things. Now what a hacker has to do is to dump the database into a local server running the same software, and begin analyzing the data, creating well-crafted lists of potential customers for which he's going to deliver very well-targeted mailing newsletters! Regards, Usamah -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why use session_register()?
Read the current php manual. Lamonte H wrote: Is it necessary to use session_register()? What exactly was the point of this function if you can set sessions using $_SESSION it self? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why use session_register()?
session_register is old school. RTFM. On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 4:26 PM, Al [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Read the current php manual. Lamonte H wrote: Is it necessary to use session_register()? What exactly was the point of this function if you can set sessions using $_SESSION it self? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why do some pages repeat a previous page's action(s) after redirect?
Do yo
Chris W. Parker wrote:
Quick question: Do you use frames and does the behavior of your code depend
on data stored from page to page? If so, what kind of session system do you
use?
Hello,
I have a form page and a processing page. After submitting the form the
processing page does whatever it needs to do (insert a record, send back
validation errors, etc.) After determing what to do it always redirects
somewhere with header('Location: URL');
But sometimes when I'm back at the form page (after the redirect) and I
refresh the page it does the previous page's actions again. And again
and again.
Why would it do that? Shouldn't a refresh just resubmit whatever is in
the address bar and not go through a certain path?
The only way I've found to make it stop redoing the previous page's
actions is to put my cursor in the address bar and press enter.
I don't remember seeing this behavior in the past so I wonder if it has
something to do with Apache's or PHP's configuration.
Thanks,
Chris.
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: why would these few statements writes the array?
Man-wai Chang wrote: $array = array(1,2,3); foreach( $array as $item ); foreach( $array as $item ); print_r( $array ); foreach is a read, not a write, isn't it? I got it... -- .~. Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY. http://www.linux-sxs.org / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you! /( _ )\ (Ubuntu 6.10) Linux 2.6.20.4 ^ ^ 19:33:01 up 8 days 6:45 0 users load average: 1.00 1.02 1.00 news://news.3home.net news://news.hkpcug.org news://news.newsgroup.com.hk -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why won't this query go through?
Hello,
Did you control your user privileges? May be, your database user
don't have enough privileges for INSERT. If your database user have enough
database privileges for INSERT, you must control your SQL. Firstly you
should write your SQL to the screen with echo ($q) and then paste this in
the mysql command line. If you get an errors, there is a problem on your
SQL. :)
--
Haydar TUNA
Republic Of Turkey - Ministry of National Education
Education Technology Department Ankara / TURKEY
Web: http://www.haydartuna.net
Mike Shanley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
I am just not understanding what I could have possibly done wrong with
this query. All of the variables are good, without special characters in
any sense of the word... So why isn't it importing anything?
Thanks!
$q = INSERT INTO
`visitors`(`username`,`password`,`email`,`firstname`,`lastname`,`birthdate`,`verifythis`)
VALUES ('.$username.',
'.md5($password1).',
'.$email.',
'.$firstname.',
'.$lastname.',
'.$birthdate.',
'.$verifythis.');;
mysql_query($q);
--
Mike Shanley
~you are almost there~
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why small big?
[SNIP] As for PNG: As far as I know, the only issue with any realistic browser (other than very old ones like IE2 or something) is that the alpha channel is not supported. As there is no alpha channel in JPEG, so there is no difference. Though I do not profess to be absolutely sure that all browsers you might encounter manage PNG ok. I personally use PNG all the time for smaller images. Only for high color, larger images, I use JPEG. Besides the unsupported Alpha transparency that you've already mentioned, I've never had any form of problem (or heard anyone complain) about unsupported PNG images. And that's indexed and RGB PNGs. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why small big?
[SNIP] Considering in this thread where I left the quality at 100% and reduced the image to less 40 percent of the original, and the end result was that I actually made a larger file. So, I belive that at least this example shows that 100% is not a good quality value setting for reducing images -- thus we know the high end is less than 100. I know from experience that reducing the quality from 100% to 95% sometimes reduces the file size to 50%; without showing much noticeable change in quality... HTH -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why small big?
As I promised, here is the writeup with examples:
http://nerds-central.blogspot.com/2006/08/choosing-file-format-for-small-web.html
Cheers
AJ
tedd wrote:
Alex:
Excuse for top posting:
You said: Clear as mud?
Well actually, it's simperer than I thought. After your reply, I did
some reading on jpeg and found it's simply a transform, not unlike FFT
where two-dimensional temporal data is transformed from the time domain
to the frequency domain -- very interesting reading.
The reverse cosine matrix you mention is probably the discrete cosine
transform (DCT) matrix where the x, y pixels of an image file have a z
component representing color. From that you can translate the data into
the frequency domain, which actually generates more data than the original.
However, the quality setting is where you make it back up in compression
ratio's by trimming off higher frequencies which don't add much to the
data. Unlike the FFT, the algorithm does not address phasing, which I
found interesting.
However, the answer to my question deals with the quality statement. In
the statement:
imagejpeg($image_p, null, 100);
I should have used something less than 100.
I've change the figure to 25 and don't see any noticeable difference in
quality of the thumbnail.
It seems to me there should be a table (or algorithm) somewhere that
would recommend what quality to use when reducing the size of an image
via this method. In this case, I reduced an image 62 percent (38% of the
original) with a quality setting of 25 and see no difference. I think
this (the quality factor) is programmable.
As for png images, I would probably agree (if I saw comparisons), but
not all browsers accept them. I belive that at least one IE has problems
with png's, right?
tedd
At 4:45 PM +0100 8/23/06, Alex Turner wrote:
M Sokolewice got it nearly correct. However, the situation is a
little more complex than he has discussed.
The % compression figure for jpeg is translated into the amount of
information stored in the reverse cosine matrix. The size of the
compressed file is not proportional to the % you set in the
compressor. Thus 100% actually means store all the information in the
reverse cosine matrix. This is like storing the image in a 24 bit
png, but with the compressor turned off. So at 100% jpeg is quite
inefficient.
The other issue is the amount of high frequency information in your
images. If you have a 2000x2000 image with most of the image dynamics
at a 10 pixel frequency, and you reduce this to 200x200 then the JPEG
compression algorithm will 'see' approximately the same amount of
information in the image :-( The reality is not quite as simple as
this because of the way JPEG uses blocks etc, but it is an easy way of
thinking about it.
What all this means is that as you reduce the size of an image, if you
want it to retain some of the detail of the original but at a smaller
size, there will be a point at which 8 or 24 bit PNG will become a
better bet.
Clear as mud?
AJ
M. Sokolewicz wrote:
I'm not quite sure, but consider the following:
Considering the fact that most JPEG images are stored with some form
of compression usually ~75% that would mean the original image, in
actual size, is about 1.33x bigger than it appears in filesize. When
you make a thumbnail, you limit the amount of pixels, but you are
setting compression to 100% (besides that, you also use a truecolor
pallete which adds to its size). So, for images which are scaled down
less than 25% (actually this will prob. be more around 30-ish, due to
palette differences) you'll actually see the thumbnail being bigger
in *filesize* than the original (though smaller in memory-size)
- tul
P.S. isn't error_reporting( FATAL | ERROR | WARNING ); supposed to be
error_reporting( E_FATAL | E_ERROR | E_WARNING ); ??
tedd wrote:
Hi gang:
I have a thumbnail script, which does what it is supposed to do.
However, the thumbnail image generated is larger than the original
image, how can that be?
Here's the script working:
http://xn--ovg.com/thickbox
And, here's the script:
?php /* thumb from file */
/* some settings */
ignore_user_abort();
set_time_limit( 0 );
error_reporting( FATAL | ERROR | WARNING );
/* security check */
ini_set( 'register_globals', '0' );
/* start buffered output */
ob_start();
/* some checks */
if ( ! isset( $_GET['s'] ) ) die( 'Source image not specified' );
$filename = $_GET['s'];
// Set a maximum height and width
$width = 200;
$height = 200;
// Get new dimensions
list($width_orig, $height_orig) = getimagesize($filename);
if ($width ($width_orig $height_orig))
{
$width = ($height / $height_orig) * $width_orig;
}
else
{
$height = ($width / $width_orig) * $height_orig;
}
// Resample
$image_p = imagecreatetruecolor($width, $height);
$image = imagecreatefromjpeg($filename);
imagecopyresampled($image_p, $image, 0, 0, 0, 0, $width, $height,
$width_orig,
[PHP] Re: Why small big?
rather than in frequency space you don't get this problem (hence PNG permitting perfectly sharp lines). So - back on topic. If you take an image with sharp lines in it, then pass it through DCT twice (the process in symmetrical) but loose some of the high frequency data in the process (compression) then the result is that the very high frequency components that encode the edge are stripped off. Rather than (as one might like) this making the edge fussy, it produces what is called mosquito noise around the edges. Because mosquito noise is nothing like what you are 'expecting' to see, the brain is very sensitive to it. Thus, the amount you notice the compression of JPEG depends on the nature of the image you compress. Now it gets nasty. DCT scales as a power of n (where n is the size of image) - there is a fast DCT process like the F in FFT. But it is still non linear. This means that to make the encoding and decoding of JPEG reasonably quick the image is split into blocks and each block is separately passed through the DCT process. This is fine except that it produces errors from one block to the next as to where the edges are in HSV space. Thus, as the compression is turned up, the edges of the block can become visible due to discontinuities in the color, huge and saturation at the borders. This again is sensitive to the sort of image you are compressing. For example, if it has a very flat (say black or white) background, then you will not notice. Alternatively, if the image is tonally rich, like someone's face, you will notice it a lot. Again, this effect means that it is not really possible to automate the process of figuring out what compression setting is optimum. As for PNG: As far as I know, the only issue with any realistic browser (other than very old ones like IE2 or something) is that the alpha channel is not supported. As there is no alpha channel in JPEG, so there is no difference. Though I do not profess to be absolutely sure that all browsers you might encounter manage PNG ok. Side Issues: DCT is integer. This means that if you have zero compression in the DCT process, then you get out what you put in (except if you get overflow, which can be avoided as far as I know). This is not the case in FFT where floating point errors mean you always loose something. Thus JPEG/100% should be at or near perfect (lossless) but does not actually compress. Another area where FFT and DCT become very interesting is in moving picture processing. You can filter video using FFT or DCT in ways that are hard or impossible using spacing filters. This can be good for improving noisy or fussy 'avi' files etc. Best wishes AJ PS - I'll stick the above on my nerd block nerds-central.blogspot.com, if you have any good links to suggest to expand the subject, please let me know and I shall add them. Alexander J Turner Ph.D. www.project-network.com www.deployview.com www.funkifunctions.blogspot.com -Original Message- From: tedd [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 23 August 2006 20:17 To: Alex Turner; php-general@lists.php.net Subject: TPN POSSIBLE SPAM:[PHP] Re: Why small big? Alex: Excuse for top posting: You said: Clear as mud? Well actually, it's simperer than I thought. After your reply, I did some reading on jpeg and found it's simply a transform, not unlike FFT where two-dimensional temporal data is transformed from the time domain to the frequency domain -- very interesting reading. The reverse cosine matrix you mention is probably the discrete cosine transform (DCT) matrix where the x, y pixels of an image file have a z component representing color. From that you can translate the data into the frequency domain, which actually generates more data than the original. However, the quality setting is where you make it back up in compression ratio's by trimming off higher frequencies which don't add much to the data. Unlike the FFT, the algorithm does not address phasing, which I found interesting. However, the answer to my question deals with the quality statement. In the statement: imagejpeg($image_p, null, 100); I should have used something less than 100. I've change the figure to 25 and don't see any noticeable difference in quality of the thumbnail. It seems to me there should be a table (or algorithm) somewhere that would recommend what quality to use when reducing the size of an image via this method. In this case, I reduced an image 62 percent (38% of the original) with a quality setting of 25 and see no difference. I think this (the quality factor) is programmable. As for png images, I would probably agree (if I saw comparisons), but not all browsers accept them. I belive that at least one IE has problems with png's, right? tedd At 4:45 PM +0100 8/23/06, Alex Turner wrote: M Sokolewice got it nearly correct. However, the situation is a little more complex than he has discussed. The % compression figure for jpeg
[PHP] Re: Why small big?
I'm not quite sure, but consider the following:
Considering the fact that most JPEG images are stored with some form of
compression usually ~75% that would mean the original image, in actual
size, is about 1.33x bigger than it appears in filesize. When you make a
thumbnail, you limit the amount of pixels, but you are setting
compression to 100% (besides that, you also use a truecolor pallete
which adds to its size). So, for images which are scaled down less than
25% (actually this will prob. be more around 30-ish, due to palette
differences) you'll actually see the thumbnail being bigger in
*filesize* than the original (though smaller in memory-size)
- tul
P.S. isn't error_reporting( FATAL | ERROR | WARNING ); supposed to be
error_reporting( E_FATAL | E_ERROR | E_WARNING ); ??
tedd wrote:
Hi gang:
I have a thumbnail script, which does what it is supposed to do.
However, the thumbnail image generated is larger than the original
image, how can that be?
Here's the script working:
http://xn--ovg.com/thickbox
And, here's the script:
?php /* thumb from file */
/* some settings */
ignore_user_abort();
set_time_limit( 0 );
error_reporting( FATAL | ERROR | WARNING );
/* security check */
ini_set( 'register_globals', '0' );
/* start buffered output */
ob_start();
/* some checks */
if ( ! isset( $_GET['s'] ) ) die( 'Source image not specified' );
$filename = $_GET['s'];
// Set a maximum height and width
$width = 200;
$height = 200;
// Get new dimensions
list($width_orig, $height_orig) = getimagesize($filename);
if ($width ($width_orig $height_orig))
{
$width = ($height / $height_orig) * $width_orig;
}
else
{
$height = ($width / $width_orig) * $height_orig;
}
// Resample
$image_p = imagecreatetruecolor($width, $height);
$image = imagecreatefromjpeg($filename);
imagecopyresampled($image_p, $image, 0, 0, 0, 0, $width, $height,
$width_orig, $height_orig);
// Output Content type
header('Content-type: image/jpeg');
imagejpeg($image_p, null, 100);
/* end buffered output */
ob_end_flush();
?
---
Thanks in advance for any comments, suggestions or answers.
tedd
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why small big?
M Sokolewice got it nearly correct. However, the situation is a little
more complex than he has discussed.
The % compression figure for jpeg is translated into the amount of
information stored in the reverse cosine matrix. The size of the
compressed file is not proportional to the % you set in the compressor.
Thus 100% actually means store all the information in the reverse
cosine matrix. This is like storing the image in a 24 bit png, but with
the compressor turned off. So at 100% jpeg is quite inefficient.
The other issue is the amount of high frequency information in your
images. If you have a 2000x2000 image with most of the image dynamics
at a 10 pixel frequency, and you reduce this to 200x200 then the JPEG
compression algorithm will 'see' approximately the same amount of
information in the image :-( The reality is not quite as simple as this
because of the way JPEG uses blocks etc, but it is an easy way of
thinking about it.
What all this means is that as you reduce the size of an image, if you
want it to retain some of the detail of the original but at a smaller
size, there will be a point at which 8 or 24 bit PNG will become a
better bet.
Clear as mud?
AJ
M. Sokolewicz wrote:
I'm not quite sure, but consider the following:
Considering the fact that most JPEG images are stored with some form of
compression usually ~75% that would mean the original image, in actual
size, is about 1.33x bigger than it appears in filesize. When you make a
thumbnail, you limit the amount of pixels, but you are setting
compression to 100% (besides that, you also use a truecolor pallete
which adds to its size). So, for images which are scaled down less than
25% (actually this will prob. be more around 30-ish, due to palette
differences) you'll actually see the thumbnail being bigger in
*filesize* than the original (though smaller in memory-size)
- tul
P.S. isn't error_reporting( FATAL | ERROR | WARNING ); supposed to be
error_reporting( E_FATAL | E_ERROR | E_WARNING ); ??
tedd wrote:
Hi gang:
I have a thumbnail script, which does what it is supposed to do.
However, the thumbnail image generated is larger than the original
image, how can that be?
Here's the script working:
http://xn--ovg.com/thickbox
And, here's the script:
?php /* thumb from file */
/* some settings */
ignore_user_abort();
set_time_limit( 0 );
error_reporting( FATAL | ERROR | WARNING );
/* security check */
ini_set( 'register_globals', '0' );
/* start buffered output */
ob_start();
/* some checks */
if ( ! isset( $_GET['s'] ) ) die( 'Source image not specified' );
$filename = $_GET['s'];
// Set a maximum height and width
$width = 200;
$height = 200;
// Get new dimensions
list($width_orig, $height_orig) = getimagesize($filename);
if ($width ($width_orig $height_orig))
{
$width = ($height / $height_orig) * $width_orig;
}
else
{
$height = ($width / $width_orig) * $height_orig;
}
// Resample
$image_p = imagecreatetruecolor($width, $height);
$image = imagecreatefromjpeg($filename);
imagecopyresampled($image_p, $image, 0, 0, 0, 0, $width, $height,
$width_orig, $height_orig);
// Output Content type
header('Content-type: image/jpeg');
imagejpeg($image_p, null, 100);
/* end buffered output */
ob_end_flush();
?
---
Thanks in advance for any comments, suggestions or answers.
tedd
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why small big?
Alex:
Excuse for top posting:
You said: Clear as mud?
Well actually, it's simperer than I thought. After your reply, I did
some reading on jpeg and found it's simply a transform, not unlike
FFT where two-dimensional temporal data is transformed from the time
domain to the frequency domain -- very interesting reading.
The reverse cosine matrix you mention is probably the discrete cosine
transform (DCT) matrix where the x, y pixels of an image file have a
z component representing color. From that you can translate the data
into the frequency domain, which actually generates more data than
the original.
However, the quality setting is where you make it back up in
compression ratio's by trimming off higher frequencies which don't
add much to the data. Unlike the FFT, the algorithm does not address
phasing, which I found interesting.
However, the answer to my question deals with the quality statement.
In the statement:
imagejpeg($image_p, null, 100);
I should have used something less than 100.
I've change the figure to 25 and don't see any noticeable difference
in quality of the thumbnail.
It seems to me there should be a table (or algorithm) somewhere that
would recommend what quality to use when reducing the size of an
image via this method. In this case, I reduced an image 62 percent
(38% of the original) with a quality setting of 25 and see no
difference. I think this (the quality factor) is programmable.
As for png images, I would probably agree (if I saw comparisons), but
not all browsers accept them. I belive that at least one IE has
problems with png's, right?
tedd
At 4:45 PM +0100 8/23/06, Alex Turner wrote:
M Sokolewice got it nearly correct. However, the situation is a
little more complex than he has discussed.
The % compression figure for jpeg is translated into the amount of
information stored in the reverse cosine matrix. The size of the
compressed file is not proportional to the % you set in the
compressor. Thus 100% actually means store all the information in
the reverse cosine matrix. This is like storing the image in a 24
bit png, but with the compressor turned off. So at 100% jpeg is
quite inefficient.
The other issue is the amount of high frequency information in your
images. If you have a 2000x2000 image with most of the image
dynamics at a 10 pixel frequency, and you reduce this to 200x200
then the JPEG compression algorithm will 'see' approximately the
same amount of information in the image :-( The reality is not
quite as simple as this because of the way JPEG uses blocks etc, but
it is an easy way of thinking about it.
What all this means is that as you reduce the size of an image, if
you want it to retain some of the detail of the original but at a
smaller size, there will be a point at which 8 or 24 bit PNG will
become a better bet.
Clear as mud?
AJ
M. Sokolewicz wrote:
I'm not quite sure, but consider the following:
Considering the fact that most JPEG images are stored with some
form of compression usually ~75% that would mean the original
image, in actual size, is about 1.33x bigger than it appears in
filesize. When you make a thumbnail, you limit the amount of
pixels, but you are setting compression to 100% (besides that, you
also use a truecolor pallete which adds to its size). So, for
images which are scaled down less than 25% (actually this will
prob. be more around 30-ish, due to palette differences) you'll
actually see the thumbnail being bigger in *filesize* than the
original (though smaller in memory-size)
- tul
P.S. isn't error_reporting( FATAL | ERROR | WARNING ); supposed to
be error_reporting( E_FATAL | E_ERROR | E_WARNING ); ??
tedd wrote:
Hi gang:
I have a thumbnail script, which does what it is supposed to do.
However, the thumbnail image generated is larger than the original
image, how can that be?
Here's the script working:
http://xn--ovg.com/thickbox
And, here's the script:
?php /* thumb from file */
/* some settings */
ignore_user_abort();
set_time_limit( 0 );
error_reporting( FATAL | ERROR | WARNING );
/* security check */
ini_set( 'register_globals', '0' );
/* start buffered output */
ob_start();
/* some checks */
if ( ! isset( $_GET['s'] ) ) die( 'Source image not specified' );
$filename = $_GET['s'];
// Set a maximum height and width
$width = 200;
$height = 200;
// Get new dimensions
list($width_orig, $height_orig) = getimagesize($filename);
if ($width ($width_orig $height_orig))
{
$width = ($height / $height_orig) * $width_orig;
}
else
{
$height = ($width / $width_orig) * $height_orig;
}
// Resample
$image_p = imagecreatetruecolor($width, $height);
$image = imagecreatefromjpeg($filename);
imagecopyresampled($image_p, $image, 0, 0, 0, 0, $width, $height,
$width_orig, $height_orig);
// Output Content type
header('Content-type: image/jpeg');
imagejpeg($image_p, null, 100);
/* end buffered output */
ob_end_flush();
?
---
Re: [PHP] Re: Why small big?
Tedd, Sorry for the floppy language. You are quite correct, the name is discrete cosine. I get too relaxed sometimes! As to the visual impact of a degree of compression, I don't think that you can automate this. The issue surrounds the way the brain processes information. When you see something, you brain processes the visual field and looks for patters that it recognizes and then your conscious mind becomes aware of the patterns, not actually the thing you are looking at. Optical illusions can illustrate this point. For example where you see a bunch of blobs on a white background and then someone tells you it is a dog and you see the dog. Once you see the dog you can no longer 'not see it'. This is because of the way the brain processes patterns. The trick to DCT is that in most 'organic' images - people, trees etc - the patterns for which your brain is looking actually occupy low frequencies. However, the majority of the information which is encoded into the image is in high frequencies. Consequently, by selectively removing the high frequencies, the image appears to the conscious mind to be the same whilst in reality it is degraded. The snag come when the pattern your brain is looking to match to requires high frequencies. The classic is a edge. If one has an infinitely large white background with a single infinitely sharp line on it, you require infinite frequencies to encode it correctly (ten years ago I knew the proof for this, time and good wine has put a stop to that). This is much like the side band problem in radio transmission. If you encode an image in dimensional space rather than in frequency space you don't get this problem (hence PNG permitting perfectly sharp lines). So - back on topic. If you take an image with sharp lines in it, then pass it through DCT twice (the process in symmetrical) but loose some of the high frequency data in the process (compression) then the result is that the very high frequency components that encode the edge are stripped off. Rather than (as one might like) this making the edge fussy, it produces what is called mosquito noise around the edges. Because mosquito noise is nothing like what you are 'expecting' to see, the brain is very sensitive to it. Thus, the amount you notice the compression of JPEG depends on the nature of the image you compress. Now it gets nasty. DCT scales as a power of n (where n is the size of image) - there is a fast DCT process like the F in FFT. But it is still non linear. This means that to make the encoding and decoding of JPEG reasonably quick the image is split into blocks and each block is separately passed through the DCT process. This is fine except that it produces errors from one block to the next as to where the edges are in HSV space. Thus, as the compression is turned up, the edges of the block can become visible due to discontinuities in the color, huge and saturation at the borders. This again is sensitive to the sort of image you are compressing. For example, if it has a very flat (say black or white) background, then you will not notice. Alternatively, if the image is tonally rich, like someone's face, you will notice it a lot. Again, this effect means that it is not really possible to automate the process of figuring out what compression setting is optimum. As for PNG: As far as I know, the only issue with any realistic browser (other than very old ones like IE2 or something) is that the alpha channel is not supported. As there is no alpha channel in JPEG, so there is no difference. Though I do not profess to be absolutely sure that all browsers you might encounter manage PNG ok. Side Issues: DCT is integer. This means that if you have zero compression in the DCT process, then you get out what you put in (except if you get overflow, which can be avoided as far as I know). This is not the case in FFT where floating point errors mean you always loose something. Thus JPEG/100% should be at or near perfect (lossless) but does not actually compress. Another area where FFT and DCT become very interesting is in moving picture processing. You can filter video using FFT or DCT in ways that are hard or impossible using spacing filters. This can be good for improving noisy or fussy 'avi' files etc. Best wishes AJ PS - I'll stick the above on my nerd blog nerds-central.blogspot.com, if you have any good links to suggest to expand the subject, please let me know and I shall add them. tedd wrote: Alex: Excuse for top posting: You said: Clear as mud? Well actually, it's simperer than I thought. After your reply, I did some reading on jpeg and found it's simply a transform, not unlike FFT where two-dimensional temporal data is transformed from the time domain to the frequency domain -- very interesting reading. The reverse cosine matrix you mention is probably the discrete cosine transform (DCT) matrix where
[PHP] Re: Why does this preg_replace function not work?
Dave M G wrote:
PHP List,
In the code below, I want to take the text within $content, and change
every instance of [h3] into h3, and every instance of [/h3] into
/h3. And then do the same for [em], [/em], [strong], and so on.
However, this code does absolutely nothing to the text stored in content:
$tags = array (h3, em, strong, hr);
$content = preg_replace([ . $tags . ], . $tags . , $content);
$content = preg_replace([/ . $tags . ], / . $tags . , $content);
Clearly I've either misunderstood the use of preg_replace(), or regular
expressions, or arrays, despite having looked them up in the PHP online
manual.
I also tried str_replace(), but predictably that did not help. As far as
I understand it, it does not accept arrays.
What am I doing wrong in the above code?
And can the two preg_replace() commands be achieved in one line?
Thank you for any advice.
--
Dave M G
First of all, why the hell are you using preg_* functions for this?
You're feeding static content to it, no modifiers *at all* (not even
case-insensitivity). I recommend you go back to str_replace() as that is
what you need. You'd also be wise to read up on arrays and regular
expressions (a lot).
preg_replace() uses regular-expressions. Regular expressions require (in
php) 2 delimiters, one at the start of the expression and one at the
end, followed by optional modifiers/flags. Eg:
/regexpGoesHere/i
this would match regexpGoesHere and be case-insensitive.
You don't use delimiters (first problem).
Second problem with your code is that you're assuming that [, ], and
are not meta-characters. Unfortunately, [ and ] ARE meta-characters.
This means that when you would pass it [h3] it would see that as any
character which is an 'h' or '3' is a valid candidate for this
expression. You would either need to escape it so it becomes \[h3\]
which would mean any string looking like '[h3]' is a valid candidate.
Right, well, first let's go and fix the mess you've made of your arrays.
Here's a lesson for you:
Say you have
$array = array('a','b','c');
print($array);
print($array);
What do you expect to see?
a
b
?
Because looking at your code it seems like you're expecting something
very strange. The thing you'll see is:
Array
Array
Your correct version would be to either loop over it using a construct
such as foreach(), while() or the like, OR use the special case of
preg_replace and str_replace functions, which may also take 2 arrays as
their parameters. Remember though, you CAN NOT MIX ARRAYS WITH STRINGS
just like that.
So, a more correct version for you would be (using str_replace because
i's faster and easier and more appropriate):
$tagsOld = array ([h3], [em], [strong], [hr],[/h3], [/em],
[/strong], [/hr]);
$tagsNew = array (h3, em, strong, hr,/h3, /em,
/strong, /hr);
$content = str_replace($tagsOld, $tagsNew, $content);
What I've done here is made an array with what is to be replaced and a
second one with what it is to be replaced with. Internally, str_replace
goes over the whole list of $tagsOld and replaces each value with the
corresponding value from $tagsNew (based on position in the array,
meansing the 2nd value from $tagsOld will be replaced with the 2nd value
from $tagsNew).
hope you understand what you did (wrong) now,
- tul
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: why is this newsroup server so slow?
Merlin wrote: Hi there, I used to be more often on news.php.net in former times. But now the server is so incredibly slow?! I do get very often time outs and it takes ages to load the threads. Is there a possible misconfiguration of my newsreader, or is the server that slow? Thank you for your help, Merlin More people probably? Well my Thunderbird works fine so far. Just a few times a day i get timeouts. -- Smileys rule (cX.x)C --o(^_^o) Dance for me! ^(^_^)o (o^_^)o o(^_^)^ o(^_^o) -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why do Sessions use Cookies?
On Fri, 2 Dec 2005 20:43:48 -0500, in php.general [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael B Allen) wrote: Why do sessions use cookies? Isn't a session just a container associated with the user's socket? No. Even though mechanisms such as keepalive exists they are not reliable for tracking a user. A client can still open multiple HTTP connections to the same host even when using keepalive. Furthermore we would like the session to survive the smallest hickups (e.g. disconnects, TCP RSTs, ...). -- - Peter Brodersen -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why this doesn't work ?
hi mario,
first of all, make sure that your query works from the mysql console or
phpmyadmin or some other tool (copy-paste the query from the code and
replace $loging with something reasonable).
then try the following:
$query = SELECT COUNT (login) FROM formacao WHERE login = '$login';
// check to see if the $login variable has been filled in -
// maybe $login is empty?
echo $query;
$result = mysql_query($query);
if (!$result) {
// mysql will tell you what's wrong
echo mysql_error();
}
mysql_fetch_row($result);
and btw. mysql_fetch_row() doesn't require a connection resource, it
will default to the last opened when none is given.
so you only need to give the 2nd parameter if you have more than one
mysql-db connection open.
regards,
phillip
---
Mário Gamito schrieb:
Hi,
Why this doesn't work ?
---
$query = SELECT COUNT (login) FROM WHERE login = '$login';
$result = mysql_query($query);
mysql_fetch_row($result);
---
It gives me
Warning: mysql_fetch_row(): supplied argument is not a valid MySQL
result resource in /var/www/html/registar_action.php on line 22
Any help would be apreciated.
Warm Regards,
Mário Gamito
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why does this not work?
script
if (screen.width1064)
{
document.write(link src=\style1.css\ type=\text/css\
rel=\stylesheet\);
}
else
{
document.write(link src=\style2.css\ type=\text/css\
rel=\stylesheet\);
}
/script
or use cookie, js write screen.width to cookie,then php read
screen.width from cookie.
2005/9/28, Oliver Grätz [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Ross schrieb:
$width = script document.write(screen.width); /script;
//$ross= intval($width);
Yes, this is and will always be zero, because you are evaluating a
string to an integer value.
echo $width;
if ($width 1064) {
echo lower;
$style= style1.css;
}
else {
$style= style2.css;
}
OK, no I could insert the stuff about server side and client side.
What you want to do is learn about the user's screen width. First of
all, this is a bad idea if I you want to use it for design purposes like
in this case where you include different CSS files. If I have a
1600x1200 screen, I can easily open a browser window at 640x480. And
now? And even if you don't evaluate the screen width but the browser
window's width: What about me resizing the already rendered page? Think
about better designing the page so you don't need to switch the CSS...
OK, enough of evangelism. If you really want to do what you told there:
Evaluate the JavaScript on your entry page. Then do a redirect to that
same page and insert the value into the URL (e.g.
index.php?scrwidth=1280). You can then access this from PHP via $_GET.
It is a good idea to store this value in the session once received so
you don't have to send it around on each link.
AllOLLi
63,000 bugs in the code, 63,000 bugs,
ya get 1 whacked with a service pack,
now there's 63,005 bugs in the code!!
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--
Lendy Chen
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: why does this not work?
Ross schrieb:
$width = script document.write(screen.width); /script;
//$ross= intval($width);
Yes, this is and will always be zero, because you are evaluating a
string to an integer value.
echo $width;
if ($width 1064) {
echo lower;
$style= style1.css;
}
else {
$style= style2.css;
}
OK, no I could insert the stuff about server side and client side.
What you want to do is learn about the user's screen width. First of
all, this is a bad idea if I you want to use it for design purposes like
in this case where you include different CSS files. If I have a
1600x1200 screen, I can easily open a browser window at 640x480. And
now? And even if you don't evaluate the screen width but the browser
window's width: What about me resizing the already rendered page? Think
about better designing the page so you don't need to switch the CSS...
OK, enough of evangelism. If you really want to do what you told there:
Evaluate the JavaScript on your entry page. Then do a redirect to that
same page and insert the value into the URL (e.g.
index.php?scrwidth=1280). You can then access this from PHP via $_GET.
It is a good idea to store this value in the session once received so
you don't have to send it around on each link.
AllOLLi
63,000 bugs in the code, 63,000 bugs,
ya get 1 whacked with a service pack,
now there's 63,005 bugs in the code!!
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why does this not work?
bit off the point but... Oliver Grätz wrote: Ross schrieb: $width = script document.write(screen.width); /script; //$ross= intval($width); Yes, this is and will always be zero, because you are evaluating a for his paricular $width string, yes. string to an integer value. $butThereIsAlwaysAtLeast = 1 exception to every rule; var_dump(intval($butThereIsAlwaysAtLeast)); good points about CSS/design btw :-) ...and solving the OPs problem. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
On Mon, 2005-05-16 at 22:10, Richard Lynch wrote: Let him fight with phpIniDir some other day. Something interesting maybe: http://gfx.gfx-design.com/session_test.php Hit your browsers refresh button. I would think SID is NOT supposed to change with every page refresh..?? ?php session_start(); header(Cache-control: private); $_SESSION['test'] = testing; echo 'pre'; print_r($_SESSION); echo \nSession Id: . session_id(); echo \n . strip_tags(SID); echo '/pre'; ? -- s/:-[(/]/:-)/g BrianGnuPG - KeyID: 0x04A4F0DC | Key Server: pgp.mit.edu == gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 04A4F0DC Key Info: http://gfx-design.com/keys Linux Registered User #339825 at http://counter.li.org -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
Brian V Bonini wrote: On Mon, 2005-05-16 at 22:10, Richard Lynch wrote: Let him fight with phpIniDir some other day. Something interesting maybe: http://gfx.gfx-design.com/session_test.php Hit your browsers refresh button. I would think SID is NOT supposed to change with every page refresh..?? Except that the SID is NOT in any POST / GET parameter. So since PHP doesn't recieve a SID on any refresh, it assumes that it is starting a new session each time. This is expected behavior. Try creating a POST form instead and see what happens when you submit that form. Refreshing the page without a SID anywhere won't do anything. -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
Please keep questions regarding PHP problems on the list instead of in my inbox. Thanks. Brian V Bonini wrote: On Wed, 2005-05-18 at 12:58, Jason Barnett wrote: Brian V Bonini wrote: On Mon, 2005-05-16 at 22:10, Richard Lynch wrote: Let him fight with phpIniDir some other day. Something interesting maybe: http://gfx.gfx-design.com/session_test.php Hit your browsers refresh button. I would think SID is NOT supposed to change with every page refresh..?? Except that the SID is NOT in any POST / GET parameter. So since PHP doesn't recieve a SID on any refresh, it assumes that it is starting a new session each time. This is expected behavior. Thanks for clarifying... Does not really have any bearing on my original problem, but... At least I know THAT is nothing to look at further... -B But it *does* have bearing on your original problem! If you *don't* use *cookies* then the only way to continue a session is by passing the SID through *POST* or *GET* parameters! That has been the whole point of the discussion about trans_sid! Simple as that! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
On Mon, 2005-05-16 at 22:10, Richard Lynch wrote: Does ?php phpinfo();? show the same /path/to/php.ini as the one you edit? Yup To be 100% certain, use 'stop' to stop Apache and then do: ps aux | grep httpd You should see only the grep httpd output, or no output at all. Did that... Then start Apache, and triple check ?php phpinfo();? shows the php.ini file being read from the same directory you edited php.ini Yup Still no go... Other changes in php.ini DO take effect, just not this I'm at a loss -- s/:-[(/]/:-)/g BrianGnuPG - KeyID: 0x04A4F0DC | Key Server: pgp.mit.edu == gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 04A4F0DC Key Info: http://gfx-design.com/keys Linux Registered User #339825 at http://counter.li.org -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
Brian V Bonini wrote: ... Still no go... Other changes in php.ini DO take effect, just not this I'm at a loss By any chance are you changing PHP values through Apache's conf file? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 09:53, Jason Barnett wrote: Brian V Bonini wrote: ... Still no go... Other changes in php.ini DO take effect, just not this I'm at a loss By any chance are you changing PHP values through Apache's conf file? I am, in ANOTHER virtual hosts container block but not any values related to sessions. What are you getting at? -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
On Tuesday 17 May 2005 21:01, Brian V Bonini wrote: Still no go... Other changes in php.ini DO take effect, just not this I'm at a loss What version of PHP are you using? In older versions (have a look at the changelog) you had to configure with --enable-trans-sid, in newer versions this is the default. Summary: you have to compile PHP with --enable-trans-sid, AND enable it in php.ini. -- Jason Wong - Gremlins Associates - www.gremlins.biz Open Source Software Systems Integrators * Web Design Hosting * Internet Intranet Applications Development * -- Search the list archives before you post http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=php-general -- New Year Resolution: Ignore top posted posts -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
On Tuesday 17 May 2005 21:01, Brian V Bonini wrote: Still no go... Other changes in php.ini DO take effect, just not this I'm at a loss Does phpinfo() show trans_sid as on or off? -- Like Music? http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
On Tue, 2005-05-17 at 15:58, Richard Lynch wrote: On Tuesday 17 May 2005 21:01, Brian V Bonini wrote: Still no go... Other changes in php.ini DO take effect, just not this I'm at a loss Does phpinfo() show trans_sid as on or off? Shows it as 0 or 1 depending on how I set it at that moment... http://gfx.gfx-design.com/php_info.php -- s/:-[(/]/:-)/g BrianGnuPG - KeyID: 0x04A4F0DC | Key Server: pgp.mit.edu == gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 04A4F0DC Key Info: http://gfx-design.com/keys Linux Registered User #339825 at http://counter.li.org -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
On Sat, 2005-05-14 at 22:44, Richard Lynch wrote:
Using Cookies, or using URL, the session DATA will be stored on the server
in /tmp files -- Unless you change php.ini to store them somewhere else,
in which case, again, the Cookie and URL only holds the ID and all the
data goes wherever you store it: database, shared memory, or an army of
elves for all PHP cares.
If trans_sid is not working for you, let's narrow this down:
If you do this:
?php
session_start();
echo a href=\yourdomainnamehere.com\click me/abr /\n;
?
Do you see something like ?PHPSESSID=a847hjfu3734hgfjgurur tacked on to
the end of the URL?
If not, trans_sid is NOT enabled.
I don't see the session id string, BUT, I do have session.use_trans_sid
= 1 set in php.ini and I did restart Apache after setting it.. I can see
the session file being created in /tmp but the values are not being
incremented as they should per script below.
Did you restart Apache?
Yes.
Did you turn *OFF* Cookies? If PHP *can* use Cookies, I think it's gonna
use Cookies, and not bother with the trans_sid stuff, though maybe it
always puts it there. I never really dived into that. To be certain,
though, turn off Cookies in php.ini and/or in your browser.
I did turn them off in the browser. And tried in php.ini at some point.
Re-start Apache for your php.ini changes to kick in.
Did that...
Is it something with my script?
$xsl = new DOMDocument;
$xsl-load('quotes.xsl');
// Configure the transformer
$proc = new XSLTProcessor;
$proc-importStyleSheet($xsl); // attach the xsl rules
// get elements to operate on
$quotes = $xml-getElementsByTagName('quote_text');
$authors = $xml-getElementsByTagName('quote_author');
// store element values into array
foreach ($authors as $author) {
$author_result[] = $author-nodeValue;
}
foreach ($quotes as $quote) {
$quote_result[] = $quote-nodeValue;
}
session_start();
header(Cache-control: private); // IE 6 Fix
if (!isset($_SESSION['user_quotes']) || $_SESSION['user_quotes'] =
count($quote
_result) - 1) {
$_SESSION['user_quotes'] = 0;
} else {
$_SESSION['user_quotes']++;
}
// convert to simple var
$user_quotes = $_SESSION['user_quotes'];
// session debug stuff
/*
echo pre;
echo $_SESSION['user_quotes'] . \n;
print_r($_SESSION);
echo Session Id: . session_id();
echo /pre;
*/
if(isset($user_quotes)) {
$quote = htmlentities($quote_result[$user_quotes]);
$name = $author_result[$user_quotes];
}
$proc-setParameter('', 'quote', $quote);
$proc-setParameter('', 'name', $name);
$output = $proc-transformToXML($xml);
?
--
s/:-[(/]/:-)/g
BrianGnuPG - KeyID: 0x04A4F0DC | Key Server: pgp.mit.edu
==
gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 04A4F0DC
Key Info: http://gfx-design.com/keys
Linux Registered User #339825 at http://counter.li.org
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
Brian V Bonini wrote: On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 23:31, Jason Wong wrote: On Saturday 14 May 2005 09:42, Brian V Bonini wrote: Yeah, I know session support is there and I DO NOT have it set to use ONLY cookies. But if I disable cookies in the browser stuff relying on sessions stops working. I'm using 5.0.3 session.use_trans_sid 0 0 Set that to 1. Sessions *are* cookies, they're cookies that have been set to expire when the browsing session finishes (ie when the browser is closed). I thought the idea was; cookies if available otherwise the session data gets serialized and propagated in the URL? The later of which appears to not work, for me, if applicable While it is possible that you might save some data in a cookie (yes, I've seen it done) that's not usually the way that it works. Usually it's just as Richard has already described; the cookie just stores a name / value pair that identifies which session is yours and then PHP goes and retrieves that record. If you don't want to rely on cookies then using trans_sid is seriously the next best way to go. So go turn it on if you don't want to require cookies, it really should be that simple! Then the name / value pair is attached to the URLs instead of stored in a cookie. wondersDo people actually try the code that I post to the list?/wonders -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
On Mon, May 16, 2005 6:24 am, Brian V Bonini said: On Sat, 2005-05-14 at 22:44, Richard Lynch wrote: Using Cookies, or using URL, the session DATA will be stored on the server in /tmp files -- Unless you change php.ini to store them somewhere else, in which case, again, the Cookie and URL only holds the ID and all the data goes wherever you store it: database, shared memory, or an army of elves for all PHP cares. If trans_sid is not working for you, let's narrow this down: If you do this: ?php session_start(); echo a href=\yourdomainnamehere.com\click me/abr /\n; ? Do you see something like ?PHPSESSID=a847hjfu3734hgfjgurur tacked on to the end of the URL? If not, trans_sid is NOT enabled. I don't see the session id string, BUT, I do have session.use_trans_sid = 1 set in php.ini and I did restart Apache after setting it.. I can see the session file being created in /tmp but the values are not being incremented as they should per script below. I'm going to stop reading here. :-) We know that somehow, some way, PHP is not using trans_sid, because your URL isn't showing the session ID. I dunno why, or what's in the php.ini that's not working, but don't try to go beyond this step with XML, or anything else that complicates life. The question now is why your php.ini changes are not taking effect. The usual reason is you edited *A* php.ini file, but not the one Apache is reading. Does ?php phpinfo();? show the same /path/to/php.ini as the one you edit? Whatever path it shows, that is where your php.ini has to be. [*] Edit the one that is there, or if there isn't one there, move the one you edited to *BE* there, or copy php.ini.dist from your PHP source (or Google for it) and use that. It's also remotely possible that apachectl incorrectly reported successful stop/start when, in fact, the old httpd is still running. This is rare, but I've had it happen to me. To be 100% certain, use 'stop' to stop Apache and then do: ps aux | grep httpd You should see only the grep httpd output, or no output at all. If you see a bunch of httpd process running, you didn't stop Apache. Find a way to stop Apache. Either use some other script to stop it (like whatever is in your /etc/rc.d/* files) or some other version of apachectl that works better with your httpd or... Hell, kill -9 it, I guess... Then start Apache, and triple check ?php phpinfo();? shows the php.ini file being read from the same directory you edited php.ini [*] I'm told that in Apache 2, there is a phpIniDir directive you can set in httpd.conf to tell PHP where to find php.ini instead of being forced to re-compile or (easier) move your php.ini where your PHP Module binary expects it. While that may be true, I'm sticking with an answer that fits all situations. Let him fight with phpIniDir some other day. -- Like Music? http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 23:31, Jason Wong wrote: On Saturday 14 May 2005 09:42, Brian V Bonini wrote: Yeah, I know session support is there and I DO NOT have it set to use ONLY cookies. But if I disable cookies in the browser stuff relying on sessions stops working. I'm using 5.0.3 session.use_trans_sid 0 0 Set that to 1. Sessions *are* cookies, they're cookies that have been set to expire when the browsing session finishes (ie when the browser is closed). I thought the idea was; cookies if available otherwise the session data gets serialized and propagated in the URL? The later of which appears to not work, for me, if applicable -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
On Sat, May 14, 2005 7:49 am, Brian V Bonini said: On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 23:31, Jason Wong wrote: On Saturday 14 May 2005 09:42, Brian V Bonini wrote: Yeah, I know session support is there and I DO NOT have it set to use ONLY cookies. But if I disable cookies in the browser stuff relying on sessions stops working. I'm using 5.0.3 session.use_trans_sid 0 0 Set that to 1. Sessions *are* cookies, they're cookies that have been set to expire when the browsing session finishes (ie when the browser is closed). I thought the idea was; cookies if available otherwise the session data gets serialized and propagated in the URL? The later of which appears to not work, for me, if applicable Sessions are *NOT* cookies. PHP sessions use *A* Cookie to maintain state -- specifically to indentify a singe user/browser on repeat HTTP connections. The session *data* is not going to be transmitted in the URL -- Only the Cookie name/value pair will go in the URL. Using Cookies, or using URL, the session DATA will be stored on the server in /tmp files -- Unless you change php.ini to store them somewhere else, in which case, again, the Cookie and URL only holds the ID and all the data goes wherever you store it: database, shared memory, or an army of elves for all PHP cares. If trans_sid is not working for you, let's narrow this down: If you do this: ?php session_start(); echo a href=\yourdomainnamehere.com\click me/abr /\n; ? Do you see something like ?PHPSESSID=a847hjfu3734hgfjgurur tacked on to the end of the URL? If not, trans_sid is NOT enabled. Did you restart Apache? Did you turn *OFF* Cookies? If PHP *can* use Cookies, I think it's gonna use Cookies, and not bother with the trans_sid stuff, though maybe it always puts it there. I never really dived into that. To be certain, though, turn off Cookies in php.ini and/or in your browser. Re-start Apache for your php.ini changes to kick in. -- Like Music? http://l-i-e.com/artists.htm -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
Brian V Bonini wrote:
Everything in php.ini seems to be correct. Is there soem thign I'm
supposed to pass to 'configure' at compile time?
Session support is now built-in by default, so unless you specifically
compile without it then you should have support for sessions in your
build. Although yes, there are several php.ini settings that can modify
cookie behavior:
?php
/**
http://php.net/manual/en/ref.session.php#ini.session.use-only-cookies
Don't force PHP to only use cookie propagation for session
*/
ini_set('session.use_only_cookies', 0);
/**
http://php.net/manual/en/ref.session.php#ini.session.use-trans-sid
Optional, may not even work for your version of PHP
*/
ini_set('session.use_trans_sid', 1);
?
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
On Fri, 2005-05-13 at 17:51, Jason Barnett wrote: Brian V Bonini wrote: Everything in php.ini seems to be correct. Is there soem thign I'm supposed to pass to 'configure' at compile time? Session support is now built-in by default, so unless you specifically compile without it then you should have support for sessions in your build. Although yes, there are several php.ini settings that can modify cookie behavior: Yeah, I know session support is there and I DO NOT have it set to use ONLY cookies. But if I disable cookies in the browser stuff relying on sessions stops working. I'm using 5.0.3 phpinfo() session data: Session Support enabled Registered save handlers files user sqlite Registered serializer handlers php php_binary session.auto_start Off Off session.bug_compat_42 On On session.bug_compat_warn On On session.cache_expire 180 180 session.cache_limiter nocache nocache session.cookie_domain no value no value session.cookie_lifetime 0 0 session.cookie_path / / session.cookie_secure Off Off session.entropy_file no value no value session.entropy_length 0 0 session.gc_divisor 100 100 session.gc_maxlifetime 1440 1440 session.gc_probability 1 1 session.hash_bits_per_character 4 4 session.hash_function 0 0 session.name PHPSESSID PHPSESSID session.referer_check no value no value session.save_handler files files session.save_path /tmp /tmp session.serialize_handler php php session.use_cookies On On session.use_only_cookies Off Off session.use_trans_sid 0 0 -- s/:-[(/]/:-)/g BrianGnuPG - KeyID: 0x04A4F0DC | Key Server: pgp.mit.edu == gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 04A4F0DC Key Info: http://gfx-design.com/keys Linux Registered User #339825 at http://counter.li.org -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: why are session only working with cookies?
On Saturday 14 May 2005 09:42, Brian V Bonini wrote: Yeah, I know session support is there and I DO NOT have it set to use ONLY cookies. But if I disable cookies in the browser stuff relying on sessions stops working. I'm using 5.0.3 session.use_trans_sid 0 0 Set that to 1. Sessions *are* cookies, they're cookies that have been set to expire when the browsing session finishes (ie when the browser is closed). -- Jason Wong - Gremlins Associates - www.gremlins.biz Open Source Software Systems Integrators * Web Design Hosting * Internet Intranet Applications Development * -- Search the list archives before you post http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=php-general -- New Year Resolution: Ignore top posted posts -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why is it possible to assign data to _not_declared_ vars in a class (PHP 5.0.3)?
On Friday 08 April 2005 20:22, Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote: * Johannes Findeisen [EMAIL PROTECTED]: If i understand right, all variables should be declared in PHP5. So why is it possible to add a membervariable called c to the object without making a declaration? I got no error with this. I thought E_STRICT should show me things like that. Could someone explain me that? You don't understand correctly. Class properties/attributes do not need to be explicitly declared in PHP. This did *not* change in PHP5. What changed in PHP5 is visibility. By default, unless declared otherwise, a class attribute is publicly visible -- the same behaviour seen in PHP4. Okay, allright. I missunderstood that. But wouldn't it be nice to see things like this in the error log when E_STRICT is activated. I know some programming languages and i ever have dreamed about some features like this in PHP5 and the main thing i was dreaming about was strict declaration. Now since PHP5 i have thought about programming PHP again because of features which would help me debugging my code. And this is not implemented perfectly. I have some days ago allready posted a PHP5 issue which i thought that it should be catched from the internal error handling with E_STRICT on. You can see it here: http://www.spinics.net/lists/php/msg117368.html Thanks, have a nice day. Johannes Findeisen -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why is it possible to assign data to _not_declared_ vars in a class (PHP 5.0.3)?
* Hanez [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Friday 08 April 2005 20:22, Matthew Weier O'Phinney wrote: * Johannes Findeisen [EMAIL PROTECTED]: If i understand right, all variables should be declared in PHP5. So why is it possible to add a membervariable called c to the object without making a declaration? I got no error with this. I thought E_STRICT should show me things like that. Could someone explain me that? You don't understand correctly. Class properties/attributes do not need to be explicitly declared in PHP. This did *not* change in PHP5. What changed in PHP5 is visibility. By default, unless declared otherwise, a class attribute is publicly visible -- the same behaviour seen in PHP4. Okay, allright. I missunderstood that. But wouldn't it be nice to see things like this in the error log when E_STRICT is activated. I know some programming languages and i ever have dreamed about some features like this in PHP5 and the main thing i was dreaming about was strict declaration. Now since PHP5 i have thought about programming PHP again because of features which would help me debugging my code. And this is not implemented perfectly. E_STRICT doesn't catch it because it's not considered bad behaviour; this is perfectly legal behaviour according to the PHP parser. PHP doesn't have the same scoping issues as, say, Perl. Variables in PHP do *not* need to be pre-declared (though testing for a value on an undeclared variable, be it in a class or otherwise, *will* generate an E_NOTICE). This is a *difference* in PHP from other languages, and likely exists for a reason. If you want to know why it exists that way, or feel it should be changed, you should probably go over to the php-dev list. -- Matthew Weier O'Phinney | WEBSITES: Webmaster and IT Specialist | http://www.garden.org National Gardening Association| http://www.kidsgardening.com 802-863-5251 x156 | http://nationalgardenmonth.org mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://vermontbotanical.org -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why is it possible to assign data to _not_declared_ vars in a class (PHP 5.0.3)?
* Johannes Findeisen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hello All,
Why is this working?
?php
class foobar {
public
$a,
$b;
public function __construct() {
$this-a = Hello ;
$this-b = world! ;
$this-c = Good bye... ;
}
public function foo() {
echo $this-a.br;
echo $this-b.br;
echo $this-c.br;
}
}
?
CALL:
$test = new foobar();
$test-foo();
OUTPUT:
Hello
world
Good bye...
If i understand right, all variables should be declared in PHP5. So
why is it possible to add a membervariable called c to the object
without making a declaration? I got no error with this. I thought
E_STRICT should show me things like that. Could someone explain me
that?
You don't understand correctly. Class properties/attributes do not need
to be explicitly declared in PHP. This did *not* change in PHP5. What
changed in PHP5 is visibility. By default, unless declared otherwise, a
class attribute is publicly visible -- the same behaviour seen in PHP4.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney | WEBSITES:
Webmaster and IT Specialist | http://www.garden.org
National Gardening Association| http://www.kidsgardening.com
802-863-5251 x156 | http://nationalgardenmonth.org
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://vermontbotanical.org
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why is my class throwing this error?
NathanielGuy#21 wrote: Error thrown -- Parse error: parse error, unexpected T_STRING in /home/blacknut/public_html/picserv/includes/gallery.class on line 52 -- For what it's worth, I'm able to execute the code without parse errors (v5.0.3). A long shot, but could there be another file called gallery.class that you've mistaken for this one? (I've done that a couple times.) HTH, -Dan -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why is my class throwing this error?
On Wed, 2005-02-16 at 23:11, Dan Phiffer wrote: NathanielGuy#21 wrote: Error thrown -- Parse error: parse error, unexpected T_STRING in /home/blacknut/public_html/picserv/includes/gallery.class on line 52 -- For what it's worth, I'm able to execute the code without parse errors (v5.0.3). A long shot, but could there be another file called gallery.class that you've mistaken for this one? (I've done that a couple times.) what about stray no native linefeeds or other non printable chars? delete the line and retype it. Bret -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why is access and visibility mixed up in PHP?
From: Matthew Weier O'Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Terje Slettebø [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
(I've posted this to the PHP newsgroups, as well, but as many here might
not
read them, I post here, as well. I hope that's not considered
overboard,
and if so, please let me know)
The newsgroups are simply an NNTP interface to the mailing lists -- use
one or the other; either way, it gets to the same place.
Ah, thanks. Sorry for the double-posts, then.
snip -- class with private method, subclass with private method
The above won't work, or at least not work as intended: The function
null_action() will only be visible in the class it's defined, and
therefore
the derived class version won't override the base class version. In
order to
get it to work, the access specifiers have to be changed to protected.
This
means that derived classes may also _call_ the function, something that
is
not desired. This means I can't enforce this design constraint of having
this function private.
Why is it done like this?
I'm not sure why the behaviour is as it is, but I do know that PHP
developers were heavily influenced by Java when writing the new PHP5
object model; I suspect your answers may lie there.
Yes, I think so, too, and I thought of that, as well. I think it does
something similar. I checked now: yep, it does the same there.
One question I have to ask of you: why would you want the derived class
to be able to know a method exists if it will not be able to call it?
This seems to me to be... well, silly. Either the method is available to
the class or it isn't and/or the method is available to an instantiated
object or it isn't; visibility as being orthagonal to access just
doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Perhaps you could make a case as to
when this would be beneficial?
I realise that it may seem counter-intuitive or strange, but in this case it
actually makes sense: To take a practical example: A stopwatch FSM (example
from boost::fsm
(http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/*checkout*/boost-sandbox/boost-sandbo
x/libs/fsm/doc/index.html?content-type=text%2Fplainrev=1.31)). Here's a
complete, working example (except for the fsm class):
--- Start code ---
include_once(fsm.php);
// States (nested classes are not supported, so these must be at global
scope)
class active {}
class running extends active {}
class stopped extends active {}
class stopwatch_fsm extends fsm
{
public function stopwatch_fsm()
{
$this-fsm(stopped); // Initial state
$this-add_transitions($this-transitions);
}
protected function start($from_state,$to_state)
{
echo Start stopwatchbr;
}
protected function stop($from_state,$to_state)
{
echo Stop stopwatchbr;
}
protected function reset($from_state,$to_state)
{
echo Reset stopwatchbr;
}
private $transitions=array(
//signal, state, new state, action
array(Start/stop button, stopped, running,start),
array(Start/stop button, running, stopped,stop),
array(Reset button, active, stopped,reset));
}
--- End code ---
To explain the above: The FSM stopwatch_fsm contains a state active, with
two nested states running and stopped. These are modelled as classes.
The transitions between the states are defined in the above array, each line
gives a signal/initial state/final state/action for a transition. For
example, if it's in the stopped state, and receives a Start/stop button
signal, it transitions to the running state, and calls the start() member
function. Same for the other two defined transitions.
Test program:
include_once(stopwatch_fsm.php);
$test=new stopwatch_fsm();
$test-process(Start/stop button);
$test-process(Start/stop button);
$test-process(Start/stop button);
$test-process(Reset button);
This will print:
Start stopwatch
Stop stopwatch
Start stopwatch
Reset stopwatch
The idea is that fsm will, upon doing state transitions, call the
appropriate action functions, as member functions (here, start/stop/reset),
so these have to be defined in the derived class. Interestingly, this
actually works even if start/stop/reset are _not_ defined in the base class,
fsm (!)
I seem to have talked myself into a corner. :) As these functions are not
defined in the base class, they are _not_ overridden in the derived class;
they are merely defined there. The example I had in the original posting was
a member function that _was_ defined in the base class, and overridden in
the derived class (null_action). This is the member function that gets
called, if no specific action function is provided in the transition table.
In _that_ example, the derived class would need to be able to override it,
but need not be able to call it (as it's called by the base class).
I hope this makes some kind of sense... :)
(By the way, besides pear::fsm, this is also inspired by the mentioned
boost::fsm, which also uses classes to model states)
You might also want to take some of your questions to the php-dev list
-- they
Re: [PHP] Re: Why no type hints for built-in types?
From: Matthew Weier O'Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED]
* Terje Slettebø [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
In PHP5, you can provide type hints for functions, like this:
class Person {...}
function f(Person $p)
{
...
}
Since this is optional static typing for objects, why not make the same
capability available for all types, built-in types included?
I come from a background with generally static and strong typing (C++,
Java), and having worked with PHP a couple of years, I've quite a few
times
got bitten by stupid bugs that could have been caught by static typing,
such
as passing an empty string - which gets converted to 0 in an arithmetic
context, when the function was supposed to receive a number, or some
such,
and no error is reported. These bugs can be hard to find.
This is where the === and !== comparison operators can come in handy, as
they compare not only the values but the types. I often need to do this
when checking for zeroes.
Hm, good point. However, this essentially means you have to do manually
what the compiler could have done. For example:
function f($a,$b,$c)
{
assert(is_int(\$a));
assert(is_string(\$b));
assert(is_array(\$c));
// Actual function content here
}
At one time, I actually started to do this, but in the end, I found it
cluttered more than it helped; all those extra lines for each parameter:
clearly, the language worked against me on this. On the other hand, had I
been able to do this:
function f(int $a,string $b,array $c)
{
// Actual function content here
}
then it would have been just fine. It also works as documentation,
specifying what the function expects (and might also specify what it
returns).
This has been suggested in a few Q A's at Zend, such as this one:
http://www.zend.com/expert_qa/qas.php?id=104single=1
snip
I don't find this answer satisfactory. Yes, PHP has loose/weak typing,
but
at any one time, a value or a variable has a distinct type. In the
example
in the quote above, you'd have to ensure that the value you pass is of
the
right type.
I can recognize that this answer would not be satisfactory for someone
with a background in traditional application architecture. However, PHP
has been developed from the beginning as a programming language for the
web. Since the nature of web requests is to transfer all values as
strings, PHP needs to be able to compare items of different types -- '0'
needs to evaluate to the same thing as 0. This may not be optimal for
many applications, but for most web applications to which PHP is
applied, it is considered a *feature*.
Yes, and I'm not against the dynamic/loose typing of PHP. However, as
mentioned in the other reply to Rasmus Lerdorf, there may be areas in your
application where the types are well-defined (not from GET/POST), and where
this might help. Even with GET/POST requests, it's often recommended to
sanitize/check these before using the values, and in this process, you
might fix the types (you can't very well check a a value you don't know the
expected type for).
This would also open the door to overloading, although it seems from the
replies from Andi and Zeev in the Zend forums that neither optional
static
typing, nor overloading is considered at this time, and likely not in
the
future, either. :/
PHP already supports overloading as you're accustomed to it -- the
syntax is different, and PHP refers to the practice as variable-lentgh
argument lists. You use func_num_args(), func_get_args(), and
func_get_arg() to accomplish it:
function someOverloadedFun()
{
$numargs = func_num_args();
$args= func_get_args();
if (0 == $numargs) {
return ERROR!;
}
if (1 == $numargs) {
if (is_string($args[0])) {
return Received string: $args[0];
} elseif (is_object($args[0])) {
return Received object!;
}
} elseif ((2 == $numargs)) {
return Received arg0 == $args[0] and arg1 == $args[1];
}
// etc.
}
Yes, this is more cumbersome than providing hints
Indeed, and it means all the selection have to be done in _one_ function.
Sure, varargs can give you some kind of overloading, but as with using
assert and is_* above, to check for incoming types, you essentially have to
manually provide the overloading (by checking argument number and types,
and dispatching appropriately), and then the alternative of using
differently named functions really look more appealing...
Besides, this makes the switch function a dependency hog: Every
overloaded function you add means you have to change it. If it's in a
third-party library, this may not be useful option.
There's a rather lively discussion about adding optional static typing
in
Python (http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=85551), and
unless
it has already been, maybe it's time for us to consider it for PHP, as
well.
The current static type checking in PHP5 is something rather
Re: [PHP] Re: Why is access and visibility mixed up in PHP?
Terje Slettebø wrote: From: Matthew Weier O'Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ah, I didn't know about that one. I didn't find it here: http://www.php.net/mailing-lists.php How can I subscribe to it? its alternatively call 'php internals', I have read a lot of your questions/arguments regarding access/visibility/typehints - some of them seem more a case of you needing to adjust to PHP's way of thinking that that PHP necessarily does it wrong (its just very different to C/Java :-), then again other points you make are valid - either way I'm not the one to judge --- I just thought I'd mention that such things have been discussed/argued over on the php internals mailing list in some depth over the last year, i.e. you may get very short answers :-) Regards, Terje P.S. Why does replies to list posting go to the sender, rather than the list, by default? Shouldn't reply-to be set to the list, as usual? I had to manually edit the address, to make the reply go to the list. don't even start about these mailing list setups! - be glad they work at all :-) - btw, it seems, that on php mailing lists reply-all is the norm and that bottom-post are generally preferred to top-posts. PS - I enjoyed your posts! -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why no type hints for built-in types?
Terje Slettebø wrote:
...
I certainly know that a number of bugs I've encountered could have been
found with type hints for built-in types, so I think it would be useful. The
question, of course, is whether most PHP developers don't think so. Also, we
don't have any experience with it in PHP.
Personally I like PHP(5) the way it is now - rather than keep adding new
functionality I would rather welcome bew/better documentation (not a dig
at the dev or the docteam - I know that there are difficult issues AND
that writing docs is a, hard and b, often is thankless task!) on SPL etc
and I do wish they had left the 'bug' in that allowed syntax like:
function (MyClass $var = null)
{
...
}
but they didn't so I changed my code - basically I don't always agree
with what the dev decide to do with the tool I use most to earn money BUT:
1. these guys are all better 'hackers' than me.
2. they hand out their work from free.
3. life is a box of choloclates... and God doesn't give a as to
whether I like the cherry fillings or not :-)
rgds,
Jochem.
Thanks for your replies.
Regards,
Terje
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
Re: [PHP] Re: Why is access and visibility mixed up in PHP?
From: Jochem Maas [EMAIL PROTECTED] Terje Slettebø wrote: From: Matthew Weier O'Phinney [EMAIL PROTECTED] Ah, I didn't know about that one. I didn't find it here: http://www.php.net/mailing-lists.php How can I subscribe to it? its alternatively call 'php internals' Ah. I thought that was something else. , I have read a lot of your questions/arguments regarding access/visibility/typehints - some of them seem more a case of you needing to adjust to PHP's way of thinking that that PHP necessarily does it wrong (its just very different to C/Java :-), That may well be. :) As mentioned, I've worked with PHP a couple of years, but have been doing C++/Java much longer (and C before that). I have started to adjust to the dynamic nature of PHP, and as mentioned in another post, about variable variable functions and variables, there are some useful things that this enables, as well. Nonetheless, the discussion of explicit/implicit typing is a valid one, and my posts were not at least meant to see what other people think, and if there are other approaches that kind of compensate for the risk of bugs with implicit/dynamic typing. Guido van Rossum (Python's creator) and some others have argued that unit tests may make up for it. Well, unit tests are nice, but with type checking by the compiler/runtime, you may concentrate on the non-trivial tests instead, rather than testing something the compiler/runtime is perfectly able to do by itself. then again other points you make are valid - either way I'm not the one to judge --- I just thought I'd mention that such things have been discussed/argued over on the php internals mailing list in some depth over the last year, i.e. you may get very short answers :-) Well, but this is great news. :) I.e. then I have a place to look. As I said at the start, I hadn't found discussion about this, but then, I haven't really known which archive(s) to search, either. Of course, people won't have to go into a discussion that has happened before; just point to a previous one, as you did. :) P.S. Why does replies to list posting go to the sender, rather than the list, by default? Shouldn't reply-to be set to the list, as usual? I had to manually edit the address, to make the reply go to the list. don't even start about these mailing list setups! LOL. :) Apparently a recurring theme. :) - be glad they work at all :-) - btw, it seems, that on php mailing lists reply-all is the norm I use reply-all, but that also includes the sender as recipient, which I usually edit out: No need to give them two copies of a posting. and that bottom-post are generally preferred to top-posts. Aren't they everywhere. ;) PS - I enjoyed your posts! Thanks. :) I haven't received any flames, yet, at least. :) I didn't really know how they would be received, given that I don't know the community. (I've usually been hanging around the ACCU lists, as well as Boost, and comp.lang.c++.moderated, comp.std.c++, so I mostly know the C++ community.) Regards, Terje -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why is access and visibility mixed up in PHP?
* Terje Slettebø [EMAIL PROTECTED]: (I've posted this to the PHP newsgroups, as well, but as many here might not read them, I post here, as well. I hope that's not considered overboard, and if so, please let me know) The newsgroups are simply an NNTP interface to the mailing lists -- use one or the other; either way, it gets to the same place. Today, I worked on an implementation of a finite state machine. snip The base class defines some (virtual) functions that may be overridden in a derived class, but they are only called from the base class. My original code was as follows snip: snip -- class with private method, subclass with private method In C++ this would work just fine: As null_action() is called from fsm, and it's private in fsm, this works fine. It gets overridden in my_fsm, but being private in fsm, it can only be called there (not in my_fsm), which is as intended. This is because access and visibility are orthogonal concepts in C++: The access specifiers only specify who are allowed to access (as in calling, taking the address of, etc.) a function, but it doesn't affect overriding. The reason for this is as follows (from The Design and Evolution of C++): By not letting the access specifiers affect visibility (including overriding), changing the access specifiers of functions won't affect the program semantics. However, this is not so for PHP... The above won't work, or at least not work as intended: The function null_action() will only be visible in the class it's defined, and therefore the derived class version won't override the base class version. In order to get it to work, the access specifiers have to be changed to protected. This means that derived classes may also _call_ the function, something that is not desired. This means I can't enforce this design constraint of having this function private. Why is it done like this? I'm not sure why the behaviour is as it is, but I do know that PHP developers were heavily influenced by Java when writing the new PHP5 object model; I suspect your answers may lie there. One question I have to ask of you: why would you want the derived class to be able to know a method exists if it will not be able to call it? This seems to me to be... well, silly. Either the method is available to the class or it isn't and/or the method is available to an instantiated object or it isn't; visibility as being orthagonal to access just doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Perhaps you could make a case as to when this would be beneficial? You might also want to take some of your questions to the php-dev list -- they seem to be more related to the internals of PHP than PHP usage. -- Matthew Weier O'Phinney | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Webmaster and IT Specialist | http://www.garden.org National Gardening Association| http://www.kidsgardening.com 802-863-5251 x156 | http://nationalgardenmonth.org -- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why no type hints for built-in types?
* Terje Slettebø [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
In PHP5, you can provide type hints for functions, like this:
class Person {...}
function f(Person $p)
{
...
}
Since this is optional static typing for objects, why not make the same
capability available for all types, built-in types included?
I come from a background with generally static and strong typing (C++,
Java), and having worked with PHP a couple of years, I've quite a few times
got bitten by stupid bugs that could have been caught by static typing, such
as passing an empty string - which gets converted to 0 in an arithmetic
context, when the function was supposed to receive a number, or some such,
and no error is reported. These bugs can be hard to find.
This is where the === and !== comparison operators can come in handy, as
they compare not only the values but the types. I often need to do this
when checking for zeroes.
This has been suggested in a few Q A's at Zend, such as this one:
http://www.zend.com/expert_qa/qas.php?id=104single=1
--- Start quote ---
Will be a support for type hints of simple types, like
class Foo{
public function bar(int $var) {}
}
No, type hints of simple types will not be supported. The reason is
PHP's dynamic nature. A number posted to a script will arrive as a string
even though it's a number. In this case, PHP assumes that 10 and 10 are
the same thing. Having such type hints would not fit into this
auto-conversion of PHP.
--- End quote ---
I don't find this answer satisfactory. Yes, PHP has loose/weak typing, but
at any one time, a value or a variable has a distinct type. In the example
in the quote above, you'd have to ensure that the value you pass is of the
right type.
I can recognize that this answer would not be satisfactory for someone
with a background in traditional application architecture. However, PHP
has been developed from the beginning as a programming language for the
web. Since the nature of web requests is to transfer all values as
strings, PHP needs to be able to compare items of different types -- '0'
needs to evaluate to the same thing as 0. This may not be optimal for
many applications, but for most web applications to which PHP is
applied, it is considered a *feature*.
This would also open the door to overloading, although it seems from the
replies from Andi and Zeev in the Zend forums that neither optional static
typing, nor overloading is considered at this time, and likely not in the
future, either. :/ What I have seen of arguments against it, I haven't found
sufficiently convincing, so therefore I'd like to hear about the pros and
cons of optional static typing, and possibly overloading (however, that
should really be a separate thread). What the PHP manual calls overloading
has really nothing to do with the concept of overloading in other OO
languages, such as C++/Java.
PHP already supports overloading as you're accustomed to it -- the
syntax is different, and PHP refers to the practice as variable-lentgh
argument lists. You use func_num_args(), func_get_args(), and
func_get_arg() to accomplish it:
function someOverloadedFun()
{
$numargs = func_num_args();
$args= func_get_args();
if (0 == $numargs) {
return ERROR!;
}
if (1 == $numargs) {
if (is_string($args[0])) {
return Received string: $args[0];
} elseif (is_object($args[0])) {
return Received object!;
}
} elseif ((2 == $numargs)) {
return Received arg0 == $args[0] and arg1 == $args[1];
}
// etc.
}
Yes, this is more cumbersome than providing hints -- but typically, if I
design properly, I'm checking types within already, and I've already
determined a way to limit what is passed to the function/method. One
technique I use is to pass a single associate array to a function or
method, and grab my arguments from that.
There's a rather lively discussion about adding optional static typing in
Python (http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=85551), and unless
it has already been, maybe it's time for us to consider it for PHP, as well.
The current static type checking in PHP5 is something rather half-baked,
only covering user-defined types.
I can definitely see a use for this -- but, again, PHP has been designed
with loose typing as a *feature*. While type hinting may be a nice
additional feature, I have my doubts as to the necessity or overhead it
would incur.
--
Matthew Weier O'Phinney | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Webmaster and IT Specialist | http://www.garden.org
National Gardening Association| http://www.kidsgardening.com
802-863-5251 x156 | http://nationalgardenmonth.org
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
[PHP] Re: Why it doesnt work
register_globals? :)
Aalee wrote:
Hi ive tried this script and it doesnt seem to work for me. I have typed
exactly the same username and password in the script..it keeps on asking for
the username and password..pls help...cud this be due to a setting in the
php or apache server...am using php 4.3 and apache 1.3.33...the code is
?php
if (!isset($PHP_AUTH_USER)) {
header('WWW-Authenticate: Basic realm=My Private Stuff');
header('HTTP/1.0 401 Unauthorized');
echo 'Authorization Required.';
exit;
} else if (isset($PHP_AUTH_USER)) {
if (($PHP_AUTH_USER != admin) || ($PHP_AUTH_PW != abc123)) {
header('WWW-Authenticate: Basic realm=My Private
Stuff');
header('HTTP/1.0 401 Unauthorized');
echo 'Authorization Required.';
exit;
} else {
echo
PYou're authorized!/p
;
}
}
?
cheers...
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
