I have installed LR 11.5 in Windows XP Service Pack 3 machine.
I tried to record a web application but no events are being recorded and nothing can be seen in the script except the transactions given by us manually.
Then I tried by recording the usual search in "[google.com]" through IE 8, but here the events were not generated during recording and nothing was recorded in the script.
Where might the problem lie? Why can't we record a simple google.com through LR 11.5 in IE 8?
[connecting through a "VPN"]
does the registry have the following key?
[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Windows]
"AppInit_DLLs"="\bin\bbhook.dll"
Check for Protocols of your web application.
First, run your web application through Protocol Advisor and select those protocol while creating a New Script.
Before going to record a web application first you need to check whether the recording options are correct or not.
Note: After recording a business scenario, if events are not recorded then you can go to recording options then change port mapping capturing level to "Both like socket and wininet level".
Might as well regenerate events.
Related
With the Round-trip Editing Library for Domino WebDAV for IBM Domino on openntf which should enable me to open an attachment, such as Microsoft Word, edit, and save it back to the server.
I have configure my server with the necessary information but find it difficult to run the WebDocOpenSetup and the WebDocOpen.exe file on my 64bit window system, any idea how i could go about this?
I wrote this piece of code, so let me explain a few of the challenges you will face:
Windows will open anything that starts with http(s) using a webbrowser and not an app. It happily ignores file extension. Thus a different protocol was needed. I opted for webdav:// (like you have skype://, notes://, sap:// )
the helper application (on Windows - or the script for OS/X Linux) simply reacts on that protocol. The installer simply creates the needed registry entries. You could do that by hand
When you start any office application with an URL as parameter e.g. winword.exe https://.....doc the webDAV mechanism kicks in as desired.
The only thing WebDocOpenSetup does is to set some registry keys and register the WebDocOpen.exe as handler for the webdav(s):// protocol. The source code is included, you might need to recompile it for 64Bit
the helper checks the app needed based on the extension and launches it with the url (webdav replaced with http) as parameter
You can save yourself quite some trouble using https with a proper certificate. Self signed won't cut it
There is an article on my blog explaining more of the background
The registry entries are explained here
You might test with a Mac or Linux first to ensure all is working ;-)
Even without the little helper application you can connect using Explorer webfolders (not Internet Explorer, Explorer)
Good luck!
I've 4 monitors connected to a pc running CentOS 7. Each physical monitor/display should show a website in full screen and auto refresh it every x seconds.
I've tried:
opening from bash and moving with xdotool -> how can I distinguish between the 4 chrome or firefox windows? If I don't do it and apply to the last active this might become unreliable with other programs open.
researched devilspie, seems it has the same problem (can't distinguish between multiple chrome/firefox windows)
using DISPLAY variable -> does only find one display 0.0
https://addons.mozilla.org/de/firefox/addon/monitor-master/ -> does not work with extended workspace, contacted developer
I've only a xrandr bash script to rearrange the displays when they become connected (three of four may be switched off to save power).
I would use a firefox/chrome add on for the auto refresh functionality.
Maybe someone can give me a hint how to reliably do this?
In addition to the "easy auto refresh" chrome plugin. I have another idea for you, why not use a chrome extension for handling the positioning.
It is of course, only for chrome(maybe thats fine for you).
Background: We had related difficulties. Internal webapp that opens multiple documents in windows, and need to be placed in other monitors.
The javascript does not support this, for security reasons and only a native extension can properly work with the tabs/windows objects.
Therefore, we have created an open source chrome extension for doing exactly that: flexible windows position across multi-monitor setups.
In your case you can define for each monitor a website-rule that the window would appear there.
The chrome extension is called "MultiWindow Positioner" and its complete free. You can get it at the chrome store here
The actual source code you find in github in the project chrome-multiwindow-positioner
Disclaimer: I am the maintainer of the open source (MIT) github project. If there any interesting idea, or comments feel free to share them here.
I've written a non-published (personal) Chrome extension that performs page checking and then performs actions such as opening new tabs if certain conditions are met. I would like to be able to "remote control" it from my phone though, e.g. turn on or off or adjust settings when I'm away from my desk.
I considered if the extension can read/write to a file in Dropbox, which I could then edit from my phone too, or any other device. But I'm not sure if extensions are allowed to arbitrarily read/write in the filesystem, or only "apps". Any other suggestions?
Assuming you can't directly connect to your computer (otherwise wOxxOm's answer is valid)..
You could make a companion phone app and use GCM push messages; your phone would message your server via it (which can be hosted on a free App Engine tier easily if it's just for your private use) and the server will push out the message.
Though it'll probably be much easier to just have said App Engine server up and providing a WebSocket endpoint that your extension can connect to to receive commands in real-time, and some sort of API / control panel on the web (authenticated, of course).
Any free webserver-based solution would lag, as bad as 500ms, I think.
Try making a complementary native PC program: mobile apps for remote control usually have their PC part running as a background service or an application with just a shelltray icon. Such program opens a TCP/UDP port on PC and listens for commands from the mobile app, and can communicate with your extension via Chrome's native messaging API.
hi
i have a problem at my production site, client reported that he is not seeing data in lists of sharepoint, as well drop downs which have years in pages of site appear empty with one user A on machin X having with windows 7. but data and comes up and drop downs are now populated when accessed from machine Y with same user A.
i dont knw wht really the problem is. As to development site this issue is not produced,
plz help,
thnks in advance
From your question, I gather the data does exist and the same user can see the information from one computer but not another.
A couple things spring to mind. (I am presuming usage of Internet Explorer since SharePoint 2007 has some rather weird rendering issues with other browsers. Correct me if this is an incorrect assumption.)
First, Windows 7 has later versions of IE which can refuse to send network credentials to a server it doesn't think is part of the intranet (corporate network). What makes this especially frustrating is that IE will prompt for network credentials (a result of the challenge from the website) but will not transmit those credentials. Examine the IIS logs to see if this is the case. The requests will be void of credentials using IE but will be present using Firefox (and presumably any other web browser). The fix for this is usually as simple as adding the domain into the Local Intranet zone in Internet Options.
If this is not the case, can you confirm the user is using the same credentials? Is this integrated authentication using Active Directory or forms authentication?
Are there any differences between the two computers with regards to how they reach the SharePoint site? (Such as one is VPN, the other is directly connected)? Or are they essentially equal but with different browser/OS configurations?
Are the lists standard out-of-the-box lists or have they been customized with SharePoint Designer or any other means? Are you injecting JavaScript via a Content Editor Web Part which might not be executing correctly?
It would be very helpful to know browser versions used, OS versions used, differences in connectivity to the resource from each machine, type of authentication used, and any other thing you can think to list.
I wish you luck in tracking this down!
Windows 7 or xp has nothing to do over here probably it has to do with the browser which he is using to browse the site ask him to chk the internet explorer settings and verify that he has enabled execution of javascript and other related things
I know this might be a no-brainer, but please read on.
I also know it's generally not considered a good idea, maybe the worst, to let a browser run and interact with local apps, even in an intranet context.
We use Citrix for home-office, and people really like it. Now, they would like the same kind of environment at work, a nice page where every important application/document/folder is nicely arranged and classified in an orderly fashion. These folks are not particularly tech savvy; I don't even consider thinking that they could understand the difference between remote delivered applications and local ones.
So, I've been asked if it's possible. Of course, it is, with IE's good ol' ActiveX controls. And I even made a working prototype (that's where it hurts).
But now, I doubt. Isn't it madness to allow such 'dangerous' ActiveX controls, even in the 'local intranet' zone? People will use the same browser to surf the web, can I fully trust IE? Isn't there a risk that Microsoft would just disable those controls in future updates/versions? What if a website, or any kind of malware, just put another site on the trust list? With that extent of control, you could as well uninstall every protection and just run amok 'till you got hanged by the IT dept.
I'm about to confront my superiors with the fact that, even if they saw it is doable, it would be a very bad thing. So I'm desperately in need of good and strong arguments, because "let's don't" won't do it.
Of course, if there is nothing to be scared of, that'll be nice too. But I strongly doubt that.
We use Citrix for home-office, and people really like it. Now, they would like the same kind of environment at work, a nice page where every important application/document/folder is nicely arranged and classified in an orderly fashion
I haven't used Citrix very many times, but what's it got to do with executing local applications? I don't see how "People like Citrix" and "browser executing local applications" relate at all?
If the people are accessing your Citrix server from home, and want the same experience in the office, then buy a cheap PC, and run the exact same Citrix software they run on their home computers. Put this computer in the corner and tell them to go use it. They'll be overjoyed.
Isn't it madness to allow such 'dangerous' ActiveX controls, even in the 'local intranet' zone ? People will use the same browser to surf the web, can I fully trust IE ?
Put it this way. IE has built-in support for AX controls. It uses it's security mechanisms to prevent them from running unless in a trusted site. By default, no sites are trusted at all.
If you use IE at all then you're putting yourself at the mercy of these security mechanisms. Whether or not you tell it to trust the local intranet is beside the point, and isn't going to affect the operation of any other zones.
The good old security holes that require you to reboot your computer every few weeks when MS issues a patch will continue to exist and cause problems, regardless of whether you allow ActiveX in your local intranet.
Isn't there a risk that Microsoft would just disable those controls in future updates / versions ?
Since XP-SP2, Microsoft has been making it increasingly difficult to use ActiveX controls. I don't know how many scary looking warning messages and "This might destroy your computer" dialogs you have to click through these days to get them to run, but it's quite a few. This will only get worse over time.
Microsoft is walking a fine line. On one hand, they regularly send ActiveX killbits with Windows Update to remove/disable applications that have been misbehaving. On the other hand, the latest version of Sharepoint 2007 (can't speak for earlier versions) allows for Office documents to be opened by clicking a link in the browser, and edited in the local application. When the edit is finished, the changes are transmitted back to the server and the webpage (generally) is refreshed. This is only an IE thing, as Firefox will throw up an error message.
I can see the logic behind it, though. Until Microsoft gets all of their apps 'in the cloud', there are cases that need to bridge the gap between the old client-side apps and a more web-centric business environment. While there is likely a non-web workaround, more and more information workers have come to expect that a large portion of their work will be done in a browser. Anything that makes the integration with the desktop easier is not going to be opposed by anyone except the sysadmins.
The standard citrix homepage (or how we use it) is a simple web page with program icons. Click on it, and the application get's delivered to you. People want the same thing, at work, with their applications/folders/documents. And because I'm a web developer, and they asked me, I do it with a web page... Perhaps I should pass the whole thing over to the VB guy..
Ahh... I know of 2 ways to accomplish this:
You can embed internet explorer into an application, and hook into it and intercept certain kinds of URL's and so on
I saw this done a few years ago - a telephony application embedded internet explorer in itself, and loaded some specially formatted webpages.
In the webpage there was this:
Call John Smith
Normally this would be a broken URL, but when the user clicked on this link, the application containing the embedded IE got notified, and proceeded to execute it's own custom code to dial the number from the URL.
You could get your VB guy to write an application which basically just wraps IE, and has handlers for executing applications. You could then code normal webpages with links to just open applications, and the VB app would launch them. This allows you to write your own security stuff (like, only launch applications in a preset list, or so on) into the VB app, and because VB is launching them, not IE, none of the IE security issues will be involved.
The second way is with browser plug-ins.
For example, skype comes with a Firefox plug-in, which looks for phone-numbers in web-pages, and attaches special links to them. When you click on these links it invokes skype - you could conceivably do something similar for launching your citrix apps.
You'd then be tied to firefox though. Writing plugins for IE is much harder than for FF, I wouldn't go down that path unless forced to.