Why isn't the Framework included with XP SP2 ?

lars wrote:

Shining Arcanine wrote: They are talking about the ability of a website to hijack your monitor and create an interface that looks similiar or exactly the same as Windows's GUI.

That is an incorrect interpretation. 

/Lars.

That is what it can be used for and what it is primarily used for.

http://www.deanliou.com/WinRG/

If clicking a button could have that take over you screen, what keeps it from taking over your screen without your consent?

Absolutely nothing. If this was designed to hijack the screen and had a different interface, chances are malicious websites could get private information out of most Windows users, then Microsoft would be sued for allowing this to happen.

lars wrote:

AndyC wrote: However, if you launch it with iexplore -k the old full-screen, no toolbar arrangement is still there. Since any legitimate use of it is almost certainly going to start it in this way I don't think it's an issue.

If that is the case then it's a solution to the whole problem. Those that really want to be able to run full screen may do so. Those that don't know about it or don't make a decision will have it disabled. No options removed.

/Lars.

The only thing that Microsoft is pulling is the ability of websites to hijack/take control of/<whatever you want to call it> the screen through a nonstandard method (that Microsoft shouldn't have made in the first place) without user consent. Everything else (ActiveX, manual ability to full screen IE, etc) stays the same.

Shining Arcanine wrote:

lars wrote: Shining Arcanine wrote: They are talking about the ability of a website to hijack your monitor and create an interface that looks similiar or exactly the same as Windows's GUI. That is an incorrect interpretation.  /Lars.

That is what it can be used for and what it is primarily used for.

What I am talking about is the ability for the user to choose to enable fullscreen. What you call "manual ability". I think it is very rude to try and put words in my mouth, and I think you should stick to explaining your own point of view instead trying to tell me what mine is.

/Lars.

http://www.deanliou.com/WinRG/

i love that site.. cool full screen interface

of course ..in XP SP2 the effect was DESTROYED by the 2 new toolbars - one useless - both UGLY

even Mozilla only has ONE stupid toolbar

If you have decided you want your screen taken over like that by starting iexplore with an extra command line switch - you should be able to do it. 

Just as you can activley choose to turn off your firewall. Or disable passwords.
 
Jamie; does it work with -k?

/Lars.

"Jamie; does it work with -k?"

..?  you mean 2k?

not sure


basically everything ive ever made - bogus or not - evil or not - fun or not - cool or not - has worked with every version on IE since version 4 - EXCEPT now ( sp2)

* ive gotten use to "agreeing" to everything to working locally - and i wont even complain when the page has nothing but JPGs and times new roman text on it - "I AGREE!" open the stupid page -"YES IM SURE YOU STUPID MORONIC PROMPT!"  

i just cant belive they are a) removing the feature and b) whats left of it has 2 toolbars - instead of one - and both look bad.. ie; whats so wrong about a windows xp flag logo - on monitor black - with a red X top right?

seems so simple.. work /look fine with any design..

i just dont see why - like you say - MS cant figure how to do this better than they have chosen too..


*********PLEASE MS**********

loose the status bar on full screen - it offers no value

Keep the top bar - IF YOU MUST - but loose the address bar - just put a clearly marked "X"

* actually - if i had to solve this "problem" - id leave fullscreen how it is - but add a "floating red X top right.. thats IT

no free windows branding at MY EXPENCE or my clients

apart from that
keep up the good work haha

lars wrote:

Shining Arcanine wrote: lars wrote: Shining Arcanine wrote: They are talking about the ability of a website to hijack your monitor and create an interface that looks similiar or exactly the same as Windows's GUI. That is an incorrect interpretation.  /Lars. That is what it can be used for and what it is primarily used for.

What I am talking about is the ability for the user to choose to enable fullscreen. What you call "manual ability". I think it is very rude to try and put words in my mouth, and I think you should stick to explaining your own point of view instead trying to tell me what mine is.

/Lars.

I apoligize. I thought you were supporting Jamie's nonstandard DHTML which at the present is a huge security risk. It never was supposed to exist so I support Microsoft's decision to pull that single method.

jamie wrote:

http://www.deanliou.com/WinRG/

i love that site.. cool full screen interface

of course ..in XP SP2 the effect was DESTROYED by the 2 new toolbars - one useless - both UGLY

even Mozilla only has ONE stupid toolbar

That fullscreen method via javascript IS THE PROBLEM. It is nonstandard and should have never existed. It has caused information theft and other issues. It has made the world less of a pleasant place to live. I fail to see how you can possibly like it!

lars wrote:

If you have decided you want your screen taken over like that by starting iexplore with an extra command line switch - you should be able to do it. 

Just as you can activley choose to turn off your firewall. Or disable passwords.
 
Jamie; does it work with -k?

/Lars.

If a site is designed to mimic windows, it should do so within the IE window and give the user instructions as to how to hide the IE window.

[quote user="jamie]

basically everything ive ever made - bogus or not - evil or not - fun or not - cool or not - has worked with every version on IE since version 4 - EXCEPT now ( sp2)[/quote]

Every version since IE4 was insecure by design.

Shining arcanine:

ok - pause

i think it would be safe to assume that you dislike this feature - as much as i like it.

assuming above to be true - where can we meet in the middle?

ive given up on complaining outright on the change - so i am asking for logical revisions ( to me anyway)

- why 2 toolbars?

do you think that 2 toolbars are nessesary to prevent risk?

assuming again - that it can be acomplished with one toolbar - is it that bad that it may be either - black - to match backing screen ( hey it is suppose to be full screen right? - or baring that - at least let us developes choose the colours - like we can with scrollbars

nothing here you can agree with at ALL?


added new:

Re-reading this - i am still disappointed this is the way its got to be. Simple html fullscreen.  to show clients ads - to run html style ppts..  to make fun tuners..  its just a drag

i dont want to have to learn to program ( ..for real) just for a feature i know inside and out already  (  that is true.. i probably know more fullscreen stuff better than most programmers actually..)

pretend they took out something in VB or C or whatever you like that limited YOUR functionality..

what you do .. not me ..you
something you consider important
* and i know you have many open S issues you post - most all of which i agree with

other possible work arounds:

- if browser launches fullscreen - and user has "autohide" turned on for full screen - display a text message that fades in and out:  " Slide your mouse to the top of your screen to exit" ( like Adaware fade-in when it opens)

- floating small "X"icon - as said above

- Have a branding program box come up - so the user knows they are launching a web application: example:  Like when you open acrobat or shockwave - you know its a new environment - but you dont need to be scarred out of your pants to say "ok"

Launching - Microsoft®Full Screen Mode for Internet ExplorerTM -  To Exit - move your mouse to the top of the sreen

jamie wrote:

Shining arcanine:

ok - pause

i think it would be safe to assume that you dislike this feature - as much as i like it.

After reading you complain about the removal of an insecure non-standard feature that Microsoft should have been sued for implementing, at the very least, it is definitely safe to say that I dislike it.

jamie wrote:

assuming above to be true - where can we meet in the middle?

If you can think of a standards compliant and secure way of doing this, chances are I would support I would not denounce it.

jamie wrote:

ive given up on complaining outright on the change - so i am asking for logical revisions ( to me anyway)

- why 2 toolbars?

do you think that 2 toolbars are nessesary to prevent risk?

jamie wrote:

nothing here you can agree with at ALL?

Maybe I could give you a suggestion. Why not just push for the ability to detect whether or not the toolbar is hidden via javascript? With that if it is not, you could display text stating that the site is optimized so that it looks best if you do not have the IE Window with instructions stating how to turn it off (F11, right click, auto-hide), instructions on how to turn it back on (move cursor to top of screen, right click, auto-hide, F11), and instructions on how to terminate the window (Alt+F4) and the option to just use the IE window.

That would be secure while complying with W3 standards. Then again, that might prompt a lawsuit from Sun Microsystems so you might want to think of a method to replace the detection mechanism I suggested.

jamie wrote:

Re-reading this - i am still disappointed this is the way its got to be. Simple html fullscreen.  to show clients ads - to run html style ppts..  to make fun tuners..  its just a drag

This is why it should never have existed in the first place.

jamie wrote:

i dont want to have to learn to program ( ..for real) just for a feature i know inside and out already  (  that is true.. i probably know more fullscreen stuff better than most programmers actually..)

Programming was supposed to be the only way to do this and remains the only secure and standards compliant way to do this.

jamie wrote:

pretend they took out something in VB or C or whatever you like that limited YOUR functionality..

what you do .. not me ..you
something you consider important
* and i know you have many open S issues you post - most all of which i agree with

If it was either insecure or incompliant with the standards, I wouldn't be complaining.

Shining Arcanine wrote:

that might prompt a lawsuit from Sun Microsystems

And they would sue him for what?

/Lars.

lars wrote:

Shining Arcanine wrote: that might prompt a lawsuit from Sun Microsystems

And they would sue him for what?

/Lars.

Actually, I was stating that if Microsoft was to make a propeitory extension, they might be sued.

jamie wrote:

"Jamie; does it work with -k?"

..?  you mean 2k?

not sure


basically everything ive ever made - bogus or not - evil or not - fun or not - cool or not - has worked with every version on IE since version 4 - EXCEPT now ( sp2)

What he meant, I think, is that if you launch Internet Explorer in Kiosk Mode you don't get all the toolbar/status bar etc. This still works in SP2, as I posted earlier.

You can do that by typing iexplore -k in the Run box.

jamie wrote:

loose the status bar on full screen - it offers no value

The status bar provides a method for clearly identifying a secure site - if you allow it to be removed programmatically then it can be spoofed.

Yes. "iexplore -k" like AndyC writes.

/Lars.