borfast

Netscape Navigator used to be the dominant browser (before MS took over the world by including their Internet "lame" Explorer in Windows ) but at a point, Netscape (the company, the browser is actually called "Navigator" ) stopped updating their browser. When they saw that MS was taking over the browser world, Netscape realized they had to do something. But they didn't simply want to make another browser, they wanted to make THE browser, they wanted to make a browser that was extensible, respected the standards, something that would last a long time. And so they started the Mozilla project, which was a remake from the ground up of their Navigator browser. And instead of making it closed, they decided to make it Open Source / Free Software, so that anyone could contribute with their ideas to the project and if anyone thought they could do something even better, they could get the source code and work from there in a different direction. That's what happened with Firefox. Firefox used to be "Phoenix", one of the many projects derived from the original Mozilla code. But this one standed out from the crowd and the Mozilla team liked it so much, they decided to make it the next step in the Mozilla family. By the way, in case you're wondering, the Mozilla team didn't simply throw away all their work and started over with Firefox. The Mozilla project actually had two parts: the Gecko HTML engine and the Mozilla user interface. What the derived projects did was use the Gecko HTML engine and create a user interface on top of it. What the Mozilla team decided was that they'd use Phoenix's user interface, which was much lighter and extensible than their own. They're still developing both the Gecko rendering engine and the user interface (you still see regular releases of the Mozilla Suite) but they're focusing more on Firefox and Thunderbird as their next generation products. I don't know when Firefox 1.0 will be released but I think they will only drop the Mozilla Suite when they have both Firefox and Thunderbird complete, so they can replace the older Mozilla Suite without losing functionalities. As for why Firefox is better than Mozilla, someone who doesn't want to use Mozilla's Mail, Composer or Chat modules doesn't have to install them and so it's lighter (demands less from your computer) and faster than Mozilla. It's user interface is also better than Mozilla's - I know that when Firefox was at version 0.6 (at the time it was still called Firebird) it wasn't that better but I've been using it since then and believe me, it has improved a lot. Also, as Arvind said, there are much more extensions and themes (skins) for Firefox than for Mozilla. I'm sure there are a lot more reasons but these are the ones that come to my mind now. Give Firefox another try. If you use Mozilla for e-mail, download Thunderbird too. Then go to update.mozilla.org and extensionroom.mozdev.org and look at the extensions you have there. I bet you will not be able to "build" a browser so powerfull and feature rich as Firefox after you install some extensions you find usefull

TCH does not limit the number of mailing lists, meaning you can set up as many as you want

Yes, I'm not saying it will not happen. It could even happen today, when Linux is not a dominant OS. But my point is that when it happens, those viruses won't be able to propagate as easily as the windows ones. But as you said, we'll just have to wait to test our theories

That's an interesting question, Thomas. I really don't know how that works. I mean, your site is "physically" located in the USA but you're the one who created it and you're a swedish citizen, so which one will apply? Does anyone know the answer to this one? I'm curious about it.

Amen, Rob! When I still used Windows, I didn't have any anti-virus or firewall installed for years, because I knew what I was doing! I just started using them when my dad and sister started using their computers to navigate the web through my machine. That's when things started to get complicated. And no, I never had any problems with virus, either. But about this whole Linux-being-more-secure-than-Windows thing, I think it's a bit because of Linux's Unix roots. As Jim said, the very nature of the system makes it much harder to write viruses to than Windows. What Rob said is also true: Linux users are usually people who know a lot about computers or at least more than the average user, and so they know they should keep their systems up to date. And as for the old question of if Linux would be the dominant OS instead of Windows, there would be more viruses for it, read the article Jim pointed. Its big but it sure is worth the time. Very good reading. Thanks, Jim. And to finish, I'll just point a little example that came to my mind: if we consider a company with 500 users where the majority of them use Linux, we can consider that in this confined environment, Linux is the dominant OS, right? OK, now take the examples you know of such companies (you can start with TCH, given that all our servers from 1 to 82 run Linux ) and tell me how many had problems with viruses. Then consider the companies you know of that use mostly Windows and tell how many had problems with viruses. Get my point?

Kasey, installing Apache will turn your computer into a web server, yes. Actually, the server is the software, not the machine. We're just used to calling the machine-software pair a web server, but the "real" server is the software, not the machine As for your security concerns, this is my opinion: if your computer was connected directly to the internet, then yes, your computer would be open to anyone who would know it's IP address. In such a case, I'd strongly recommend installing a good firewall (ZoneAlarm, for example) to protect your computer from strangers. And I'd suggest this even if you weren't going to install Apache But being behind a router, you can probably trust the router to filter unwanted incoming connections. Unless your router suffers from a major security flaw, no one will even be able to tell you're running a web server on your machine - or any other machine in the network. The only thing you have to be sure is that you keep your router constantly up to date with firmware upgrades and make sure the security settings are correct.

No, sorry, TCH does not provide server side Java

win

How did I miss this? Welcome to the forums, funk! Thumbs Up I'm sure you'll enjoy it here!

As you know, I don't use Windows much, either but my dad does and he's fanatic about photography He does not have difficulties with computers but I don't think the program he uses is a difficult one to use, either. Nikon Editor It's a program that comes with any newer Nikon digital camera. They have a few programs, like Nikon View, Nikon Capture and Nikon Editor. I'm not sure if Nikon Editor is part of Nikon View, my dad says it is but I think you can get it separately.

It should work with the second option James suggested ("www.yoursite.com/mp3download.php?file=mymp3.mp3")

With just that information it's hard to diagnose the problem but maybe it has something to do with the database - have you deleted the database from the old board? Moving for better organization.

Thanks for the links, Rob. And yes, of course there are sites that I think are impossible to make accessible - or even pointless, as the movie clipe site example you mentioned. In the end, it's just a matter of trying our best to make our websites as accessible as possible for people with disabilities. We all gain something with it

That's strange. Perhaps you should submit a help desk ticket so the support staff can take a look at the problem.

Guitar

I also agree that making a site accessible voluntarily will result in a better site than if the accessibility is forced but, as you said, Carol, many companies still don't get the whole point behind accessible web content. Hopefully someday there won't be any need for "investigation fees" or other sanctions because of inaccessible web content but until then, we'll keep seing all-flash websites and other nasty things

I feel really stupid... Those are functions, so of course you can't duplicate them Try this: Just before the line $xml_parser = xml_parser_create(); Put the new RSS feed URL. Something like $file = "http://newsiteorg/feed.rss"; After that, duplicate all the code, starting from the line I mentioned before (including that line) to the end of the code.

Are you sure, Rob? I know I've read somewhere that just to be on the safe side, you should follow section 508 rules, because if someone with a disability was not able to visit your site, he/she could sue you. But perhaps that only applies to certain types of websites, like public services, and stuff. Or even just federal companies, as you say. I don't know

What errors did it return? And how did you duplicate the code? It should be as easy as copying the whole block, pasting it below the one already there and changing the URL.

I think you'd have to duplicate the code, Thomas.

If they value their money and visitors, they won't do that. I'm not sure about the details but I know that there are (or they're waiting to be approved) some laws that force the owner of a website to make sure it is accessible to everyone (the famous Section 508). On top of that, there's the fact that there are people who simply are not able to see Flash animations. Either because they chose so or because the browser they use does not provide that capability (like text browsers for the blind). So making all-Flash websites is still a bad idea Oh, and besides these, there's the fact that Flash sites are simply a PITA I hate it when I see a section of a website that I want to bookmark but then I can only bookmark the entire site, because it's all made in Flash instead of separate HTML files

Yes, one of the best extensions I have in my firefox instalation

I'm not sure either, since I never used amember but isn't FTP a completely separate issue of amember? What I mean is that the permissions for FTP access are completely separate from the permissions amember sets for the same directory.

jam