I've been trying to get to the bottom of this -- and was wondering if anyone can verify.
Does IE6 still only support 20 domain cookies at this time? I've found some MS articles online that indicate the domain cookie limit was increased in 2007 to 50 -- but, it's unclear if the article is discussing IE7.
Related
Searched the web and unable to find a solution. I have an umbraco site using IIS to host on a Windows server. Any ideas on approach to block users accessing site outside the UK? Htaccess approach would be too slow.... thank you in advance!
That's quite hard to do accurately, as you could have someone based in the UK using a European network provider, which means that they might appear to come from say Holland instead of the UK. It's also possible for people to spoof their location fairly easily if they really want to get at your site.
As Lex Li mentions there are plenty of commercial databases and tools for looking up a user's location, but the accuracy of these varies considerably, not to mention the fact that some of them only support IPv4. Any of these options are going to be slow though, as you'll have to check on every request. You also have to make sure you keep the databases up to date.
Another option would be to proxy your site through something like CloudFront or CloudFlare which both support blocking traffic by country.
I am currently reading Paul Graham's book "Hackers And Painters" and he mentioned in it that a good way to change the world would be to write a new Mosaic(web browser). He also mentioned in his 2004 online essay saying that current web browsers suck, quote : "If someone sat down and wrote a web browser that didn't suck (a fine idea, by the way), the world would be that much richer."
Here's the link to another online 2014 essay by Hamish McKenzie saying that current web browsers suck : http://pando.com/2013/12/24/why-do-mobile-browsers-suck-so-bad/
Wanted to get your thoughts on this issue and how to make a much better web browser that users would love ?
The issue is not the browser, but the way people manage it.
In the early days of Internet we were perfectly happy with text-only pages, but now people want glittering web pages "as-seen-on-TV".
My philosophy is to give more importance to the content rather than to the container, so I often use lynx to visit websites too much overcharged with banners and ads. Living in a rural area with a painfully slow connection, to download a couple of Mb to read less than 1 Kb of useful text doesn't seems to me a bright use of the Net.
I have this problem. I have web page with adult content and for several past months i had PPC advertisement on it. And I've noticed a big difference between Ad company statistics of my page, Google Analytics data and Awstats data on my server.
For example, Ad company tells me, that i have 10K pageviews per day, Google Analytics tells me, that i have 15K pageviews and on Awstats it's around 13K pageviews. Which system should I trust? Should i write my own (and reinvent a wheel again)? If so, how? :)
The joke is, that i have another web page, with "normal" content (MMORPG fan site) and those numbers are +- equal in all three systems (ad company, GA, Awstats). Do you think it's because it's not adult oriented page?
And final question, that is totally offtopic, do you know about Ad company that pays per impression and don't mind adult sites?
Thanks for the answers!
First, you should make sure not to mix up »hits«, »files«, »visits« and »unique visits«. They all have a different meaning and are sometimes called differently. I recommend you to look up some definitions if you are confused about the terms.
awstats has probably the most correct statistics, because it has access to the access.log from the web server. Unfortunately, a cached site (maybe cached by the browser, a proxy from an ISP or your own caching server) might not produce a hit on the web server. Especially if your site is served with good caching hints which don't enforce a revalidation and you are running your own web cache (e.g. Squid) in front of your site, the number will be considerable lower, because it only measures the work of the web server.
On the other hand, Google Analytics is only able to count requests from users which haven't blocked Google Analytics and have JavaScript enabled (but they will count pages served by a web cache). So, this count can be influenced by the user, but isn't affected by web caches.
The ad-company is probably simply counting the number of requests which they get from your site (probably based on their access.log). So, to get counted there, the add must not be cached and must not be blocked by the user.
So, as you can see, it's not that easy to get a single correct value. But as long as you use the measured values in comparison to those from the previous months, you should get at least a (nearly) correct rate of growth.
And your porn site probably serves a high amount of static content (e.g. images from the disk) and most of the web servers are really good at serving caching hints automatically for static files. Your MMORPG on the other hand, might mostly consist of some dynamic scripts (PHP?) which don't send any caching hints at all and web servers aren't able to determine those caching headers for dynamic content automatically. That's at least my explanation, without knowing your application and server configuration :)
I want to be able to discover the 10 most popular routes through our web site that lead a visitor to register with us.
I have already logged all of this info, but don't seem to be able to find the best solution to query it.
The site is quite high traffic, > 3 million page views per month, so the solution needs to scale.
What suggestions do people have for how I could implement this?
Thanks
This is a very difficult problem. I finally solved it using neo4j.
I'm getting ready to start work on a new web project for a fairly large corporation.
For all their users, something like 17,000 people, they are all stuck with IE6. They plan to have everyone transitioned to IE7 by the end of the year, however the IT department is starting to push this promise back.
What I've been asked to do is to give the project sponsor some more ammo push back on this. However, my charismatic politician button seems to be broken. I've only been unable to come up with simple phrases, such as "IE6 is teh suck" or "it will take me a million more hours to make it work in IE6 too" and all of this may be true but it doesn't really feel like a very mature statement to be making.
I guess what I'm looking for, is some kind of laymen's way of explaining that yes we can support IE6 but I'm going to need some hazard pay, and support that fact with some kind of hard evidence it does indeed take many more hours to make something look right and work in both IE6 and IE7.
We often have the need to persuade non technical users that IE6 is a very bad idea for any company to be still running and so have a document we are working on to educate home and corporate users here is a summary if it helps:
Why is IE 6 a problem?
Much less secure than other browsers
The internet has changed a lot since IE 6 was released and there are more threats to data security than ever before including phishing scams, script injection attacks, key logging viruses, identity theft and bot-nets (machines which have been taken over for criminal activity).
It is well documented that IE6 is less secure than modern browsers when surfing the internet:
“..the most compelling reason to upgrade is the improved security. The Internet of today is not the Internet of five years ago. There are dangers that simply didn't exist back in 2001, when Internet Explorer 6 was released to the world.”
Sandi Hardmeier, Microsoft MVP
“Older browsers are a swiss-cheese of security holes, allowing black-hats out there to take over computers, construct bot-nets, and even steal their victim’s identity, most of the time without their knowledge.”
www.joelevi.com
IE 6 poses a security risk to any computer that it is used on for web browsing.
Any responsible IT team will upgrade to IE7 or later on all machines within a corporate network. Many now install the Firefox browser in order to increase security further.
It is not standards compliant
IE 6 does not render web pages in the same way that most browsers do as it uses a proprietary engine which ignores many of the standards set by the W3C (the World Wide Web Consortium). This leads some web pages to be displayed incorrectly in IE 6 and some not to display at all.
This also means that while web developers have to support IE 6 much of their work is taken up by fixing pages rather than developing better content and features. In short IE 6 is holding back the web’s development for all users.
Slower
During the last 8 years of browser development as well as improved security browsers have been tuned for better performance on all fronts including download speed, rendering speed and JavaScript/AJAX performance which is a technology used on most major sites to give a better end user experience (sometimes know as Web 2.0 technology).
Memory Usage
Internet Explorer 7 actually uses less memory than IE6 and uses less overall resources on a machine. So upgrading can improve the performance of older computers.
Upgrading to Firefox or Chrome
Firefox
http://en-us.www.mozilla.com/en-US/firefox/firefox.html
Chrome
http://www.google.co.uk/chrome
Upgrading to IE 7 / 8
Home users
Internet Explorer 7 http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?displaylang=en&FamilyID=9ae91ebe-3385-447c-8a30-081805b2f90b
Internet Explorer 8
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?familyid=341C2AD5-8C3D-4347-8C03-08CDECD8852B&displaylang=en
Corporate Users
Internet Explorer 7 Resource Page
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-gb/ie/bb381619.aspx
Internet Explorer 7 Deployment Guide
http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=e41d8800-d134-4356-a2e7-c01bee790908&DisplayLang=en
Internet Explorer 8 Resource Page
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/ie/bb219517.aspx
Internet Explorer 8 Deployment Guide
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc985339.aspx
Quite a difficult task to do, as there might be other reasons why they are using IE6 until this date (other, conflicting software which relies on IE6).
The first thing to do would be to identfy the problem that stops IT from doing the migration - if it's not lazyness.
Maybe it is easier to ask them whether they would consider an "alternative browser" to be installed (which wouldn't affect the IE6 installs). But most administrators don't like that idea, because Firefox doesn't share data/configs with Windows Servers, but trade-offs might be made in favor of money.
Should there be no real obstacle, you might show them a real-life example how an average day for an IE6 developer would look like.
Choose an UI-feature (combine all merits of IE6 to create one) that will work to cause the required issues for the next few steps.
Show them how everything looks fine in ALL Browsers.
Show them how it doesn't look fine at all in IE6.
Make it IE6 compatible.
Show them how every other browser now produces a different/unwanted result.
Fix it (with heavy workarounds) so that it now looks "ok" in most of the browsers.
Tell them that you will have to put this effort into ALL of your components/features and that they will have much higer production costs.
Make sure to point out, that this would even happen if you would just compare IE6 to IE7. They may not ever switch to Safari.
What I have gone with an been successful with is the following.
IE 6 is an application that is almost 8 years old, and as part of this doesn't support current technologies as easily as most others. Creating AJAX enabled rich UI's with IE6 is a very tedious task, and typically requires substantial, browser specific work to accomplish as it carries its own level of "Standards".
In addition to all of this there are security and performance implications.
On the whole topic of IE6, whenever you get to that point of moving IT out of the past, you could use this:
http://code.google.com/p/ie6-upgrade-warning/
http://www.stopie6.org/
make them read it
All the IE6 experts are out of work and enjoying their pension.
It's 8 years old and two versions behind the times. What are people afraid of?
I do work for an unnamed company with 160000 employees where IE6 is the only company approved browser. For me, to suggest they "just switch browsers" is futile, since I realize they have millions of dollars worth of applications now working with IE6, and that to port these apps would cost tens of thousands of dollars and many thousands more in fixing the ported versions. I typically add 5-10% to web development just to address IE6 issues, depending on the interface.