Free Woodworking Report Available

[Sev]

Check this out - good info if you're thinking of starting a business:

[stoutman]

JUNK

[dzine]

And revels in the spelling mistakes.

[Rob Hall]

[Jeff P.]

You've got that right. His spelling and grammar are amazing. You'd think someone that plans on writing a book would at least have a command of the English language.

[Australopithecus scobis]

You'd think so. I recently got a book from the library about all sorts of fasteners. Couldn't stand to read it because the prose was so choppy. The fellow knew his stuff, though. (Still does. He's a regular here.) The lesson is to get a good editor.

[Robert Bonomi]

The beware *IS*JUSTIFIED*. on several counts.

First, the "free" (a $29.95 value) report is just a come-on for a $497 "one year subscription" that supposedly has a "value" in excess of $2,400.

Second, The page for the 'full outline' is all ENCRYPTED JavaScript. I can't think of any _legitimate_ reason for that. But I can come up with lots of illegitimate ones. It doesn't appear to be "heavily" encrypted, but I havn't gone through and decrypted it, to see what it is _really_ doing.

*IF* you feel compelled to visit the site. I would *STRONGLY*RECOMMEND* using a browser where you can (and _have_) disabled JavasSript.

Note: I don't believe it is possible to turn off javascript in anything approaching a recent version of Internet Explorer.

[Swingman]

According to the security settings for IE 6.x, you can. Why do you believe that you can't?

[Will]

[Robert Bonomi]

Why do I believe that? Because that's what reliable sources told me, some time ago. :) This _was_ at least a couple of versions back, but MS had decided that javascript was _not_ optional anymore, although _Java_ remained optional.

If they've reversed that policy decision, *GREAT*. I'm stunned, shocked, and amazed, that MS would _allow_ users to turn off a 'feature' that provides lots of 'flash and sizzle', along with a bunch of security risks.

Historically anything that fit that description they've forced down your throat.

I don't use MSIE _at_all_; I don't have direct experience, and do have to rely on what I hear from my professional peers that do "know what they're talking about" in that regard.

[Swingman]

Well, I figured that you knew something I didn't - not that you don't know plenty that I don't :) - but if I am not mistaken, you have always been able to disable the Java VM, at least since it was included in the recent versions of IE.

Can't argue with that ...

Morale: I've learned to be careful about what someone who "knew what they're talking about" told be if I didn't know the answer first myself, particularly from my "networking peers" who "don't do MSFT". ;>)

That said ... MSFT "says" that you can disable JavaScript, and I believe that you actually can in the latest version ... but, like you I don't believe a damn thing they say and always want to test/verify each iteration to make sure they aren't just blowing smoke.

swingman ... who is plenty sick and tired of applying seemingly endless MSFT security patches to upwards of 30 boxes a month, and dreads seeing the latest "Microsoft Security Bulletin" arrive ... the one last week had SEVEN "critical" patches that needed to be applied!!

[Robert Bonomi]

No argument, you could always disable the Java VM. "Javascript" is something

*completely* different. Paraphrasing Jack Webb, "only the names are similar, to confuse the innocent."

Does current MSIE provide *two* options -- one for disabling Java, and a second one for disabling JavaScript?

Nit: I _think_ you mean "moral", not "morale".

I get my info on such matters from peers who *do* do MSFT.

And there is a reason I stated things exactly the way I did. I know what I "don't know". Thus I identified it as my 'belief', not as 'fact'. :)

Again, I have to ask, are we talking about the Java VM, or the -unrelated- thing called JavaScript? One disable option, or two?

My sympathies.

Some time back, I came across this definition of "Windows": a 32-bit graphical interface for a 16-bit extension to an 8-bit operating system for a 4-bit processor, written by a 2-bit company, without 1 bit of common sense.

[Swingman]

Yes ... Security tab/Scripting.

Yep ... seen that, can't disagree for the most part ... except that, thanks to MSFT, I no longer have to pay $18,000 to IBM for a word processor like I did in 1979.

[George]

CPM forever!

[Abe]

-------- To disable Javascript in IE6:

1. Click Tools.
2. Select Internet options
3. Click the Security tab.
4. Click the Internet icon.
5. Click the Custom level button.
6. Scroll down to Scripting of Java applets, and select the Disable option.
7. Click OK twice.

[patrick conroy]

You'd could'a gone with WANG... :)

[Robert Bonomi]

BZZZZT! _That_ disables _JAVA_. *Not* Javascript. The two are *entirely* different things, linked =only= by an 'apparent' (*misleadingly* so) common root name.

[Abe]

---------- BZZZZZT! right back. If you look at:

read the section: Internet Explorer 5.0, 5.01, 5.5, 6: you'll see the note that says: NOTE: In Internet Explorer, the term "Active scripting" or "ActiveX scripting" refers to both Microsoft JScript scripting and Microsoft Visual Basic Scripting Edition. When you complete this procedure, you disable both types of scripts.

[Edwin Pawlowski]

It may be correct, but did the author have a better OS? I love it when programmers complain about MS but have never taken the time to make a better OS or program.

[Robert Bonomi]

Sorry, Charlie, but you need to learn to read (or write) better. At the place you cite, the 'b' step says: "... click Disable under ACTIVE SCRIPTING AND Scripting of Java applets." ====================

*YOUR* directions mention *ONLY* the 'java applets' checkbox.

Following your directions _as_posted_ (disabling java applets *only),

*DOES*NOT* disable Javascript.

The BZZZT! _was_ accurate.

Note: The web-page you cite also _lies_ with regard to (at least some) older versions of MSIE -- _even_though_ the "disable active scripting" box was checked, IE *would* run both Javascript and ActiveX scripts under proper provocation. Known to be fixed as of 5.5, Definite problem with some installations of 4.x (all revisions), depending on the patches applied. (both shops I just checked with went directly from 4.x to 5.5, so no hard data on 5.0 or 5.0.1 available to me.)