EZ Supporter Icons

[deeswan]

This has been going on for a while, but nobody's EZ Supporter icon shows up on my screen. It says EZ Supporter under anybody who is, but the icon doesn't show. Not a huge deal, but it's bugging me because I can't figure out why. Any suggestions?

[Brian the Automator]

Do you have some kind of image blocking functionality in your browser?

[deeswan]

Not that I know of, and, generally, all other images show up fine. This goes for emoticons, posted images, personal icons, etc. Just no EZ Supporter icon. A total mystery.

[1992casey]

Does this happen in just one browser or several?

[deeswan]

It is like that in IE and in AOL's browser, I haven't tried any others. Any suggestions?

[1992casey]

Assuming you're using a version of Windows, I'd look at either Firefox or SeaMonkey.

[deeswan]

Thanks Casey, I'll give those a try if I can muster up the courage to change. http://forum.brewerfan.net/images/smilies/wink.gif

[1992casey]

Although I'd recommend a browser change for other reasons (security and rendering issues), in the narrow scope of your question, I'm recommending another browser simply as part of the process of elimination.

 

If this phenomenon occurs in every browser, you'd likely be able to assume that this issue is caused by something that's working system-wide. If it doesn't, someone more knowledgeable than I could likely help you with IE/AOL settings.

[deeswan]

Although I'd recommend a browser change for other reasons (security and rendering issues),

 

Casey, I get your message. But what exactly do you mean by "security and rendering issues"? Really, I've heard from a ton of people, mostly on this board, that I should change browsers. I haven't because I am change-averse when it comes to technology. I am not confident in being able to fix problems that arise. IE works for what I want to do and I am intimidated about changing to something else. As I've never looked at any others, I don't really know if I'm missing anything, so it's not a big deal.

[RightFieldCoder]

I use firefox. Spyware isn't a problem for firefox, the software never reaches my computer. Also, most viruses target IE programing to get themselves into your computer, so firefox is safer in that reguard. There are some viruses targeted at firefox, and it is possible to get them otherways. Firefox isn't virus proof, but it's safer than IE.

 

IE also tends to crash sometimes for no apparent reason. Firefox has rarely crashed on me. Switching is pretty easy. Just download from their website, and run the download. When it first starts up it will even ask if you want to transfer all of your bookmarks. It will take a little time to get used to the new browser, but it's like driving a new car. All the buttons are in the same area, you just have to get yourself used to the exact locations.

[1992casey]

Robin19's comments about Firefox are right on. To an extent, they can actually be applied to just about any browser outside of Internet Explorer.

 

The main issue that Internet Explorer users should be concerned about is security. It's literally a spyware and virus magnet. In its infinite wisdom, Microsoft decided to 'integrate' IE into the Windows operating system. That makes it possible for the user to download, install, and run software?without knowing it?simply by visiting a website.

 

No other browser has this kind of operating system access, so by default a lot of security issues go away. Firefox, for instance, will make a user click on a button and confirm before a download occurs. It won't run an .exe file. That file will just sit on your desktop until you double-click on it. You can still get spyware that way, but at least you have several opportunities to either say 'no' or change your mind. If you find you do have spyware on your system, at least you have half a clue as to what might have caused it to get there.

 

Another really cool thing about Firefox is that its developers are extremely conscientious about dealing with security issues. Microsoft has been known to leave severe or critical security bugs open for a year or more without fixing them. If a bug is significant enough, the Mozilla people will likely take care of business within a few days.

 

Even better, I don't believe a Firefox security bug has ever actually been exploited. Mozilla offers $500 rewards to people who find and identify these bugs. Essentially, these issues are identified and fixed before anyone gets around to putting them into action.

 

The rendering stuff is quite a bit less tangible to the average end user. But it's a big deal to webmasters.

 

Web pages are written with various types of code, including HTML, CSS, and javascript. Web developers should be following World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) standards. The intent of these standards is to provide a degree of assurance that web sites will render about the same way in all browsers.

 

The problem is that IE has a history of mangling HTML, CSS, and javascript. Because its Trident rendering engine is severely outdated, there's a lot of code IE doesn't 'know about'. Worse, there's code that IE simply gets wrong; it sees the code and does the wrong thing with it. Worse yet, Microsoft 'invented' a ton of code that isn't part of any standard and only works in IE. The irony is that Microsoft is a member of the W3C and has a say in the standards, yet hasn't made much effort to implement them.

 

In short, the philosophical issue here revolves around getting a lot of the less competent webmasters to design their pages properly. If they're looking at their server logs and notice an increase in the percentage of 'alternative' browsers visiting their site, they'll be forced to 'expand their horizons' beyond that of IE and Windows.

[Brian the Automator]

[ Worse yet, Microsoft 'invented' a ton of code that isn't part of any standard and only works in IE. ]

 

Worse yet, for us developers, IE is very forgiving of badly formed HTML. So a developer has no clue that they're creating HTML that can't be browsed by other browsers unless they test in each every step of the way.

[1992casey]

I should add for deeswan's sake that if you choose to install another browser, IE is still available. As a matter of fact, although people claim to do it, it's fair to say that it can't be uninstalled.

 

One thing you have the option of doing is choosing a 'default' browser. That simply means that if you click links in other applications, you'll see the page in your preferred browser.

 

Multiple browsers are handy for testing purposes. Plus, they're fun to play around in from time to time.

[1992casey]

---

Worse yet, for us developers, IE is very forgiving of badly formed HTML.

---

And even worse yet, from what I understand, you can only have one version of IE installed per operating system. There are a kajillion 'flavors' of IE 5 and IE 6 floating around. That has to make thorough testing anywhere from cumbersome to impossible.

 

I get the feeling that the fun is just beginning. Microsoft has acknowledged that web compliance issues have to be addressed. Apparently IE 7 will be forced to 'break' some pages that used to work in IE 6.

 

I also get the impression that Microsoft will be moving away from ActiveX, probably the leading culprit contributing to its security issues. Many websites currently depend on that technology, even though ActiveX capability is generally only available to IE users.