Question on HOSTS file

[data64]

> Should have done that before I posted . I can see now that in fact
> Opera does exclude the Ads . The difference is that it fills in the
> space of the ad with a plain block ,no Icon or Action Cancelled
> message so it is not really noticed at first look.
> Thanks anyway for your interest.
> Graeme
>

Both Opera and Mozilla handle this quite intelligently. IE developers never
bothered to add this feature.

data64

[Graeme]

"data64" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:Xns9416D50611728Data64Bigfootcom@130.133.1.4. ..
> > Should have done that before I posted . I can see now that in fact
> > Opera does exclude the Ads . The difference is that it fills in the
> > space of the ad with a plain block ,no Icon or Action Cancelled
> > message so it is not really noticed at first look.
> > Thanks anyway for your interest.
> > Graeme
> >
>
> Both Opera and Mozilla handle this quite intelligently. IE developers
never
> bothered to add this feature.
>
> data64

Yes it certainly looks cleaner in Opera , the errors Icon in IE does get a
bit annoying .Worse than the actual ad in many cases . Not a major problem
though.
Graeme

[Jay T. Blocksom]

On 17 Oct 2003 00:59:46 GMT, in <alt.privacy.spyware>, data64
<me@privacy.net> wrote:

> > Should have done that before I posted . I can see now that in fact
> > Opera does exclude the Ads .
[snip]

Opera is NOT "excluding" the ads. In fact, Opera has nothing to do with it.
The HOSTS file works at a level significantly "below" that of the browser,
regardless of what browser you might tbe discussing. In effect, it acts
like a local DNS server (yes, that is an oversimplification; but it will
suffice for the current purpose). When a browser renders a web page
containing embeddied images, it has to send an HTTP GET request for each
such image file. So when the browser asks for the ad-image file from
<www.xyx.com/adbanner.gif>, but <www.xyx.com> is listed as 127.0.0.1 in your
HOSTS file, the browser never makes the HTTP connection to <www.xyx.com>,
and hence simply cannot display the image in question.

> Both Opera and Mozilla handle this quite intelligently. IE developers
> never bothered to add this feature.
>
[snip]

In light of the above, what "feature" are you referring to?

--

Jay T. Blocksom
--------------------------------
Appropriate Technology, Inc.
usenet01[at]appropriate-tech.net


"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
-- Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
NOTE: E-Mail address in "From:" line is INVALID! Remove +SPAMBLOCK to mail.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Unsolicited advertising sent to this E-Mail address is expressly prohibited
under USC Title 47, Section 227. Violators are subject to charge of up to
$1,500 per incident or treble actual costs, whichever is greater.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -