Question on HOSTS file

[BoB]

>Graeme wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 21:37:46 +1000, "Graeme" <graeme23@go.[remove this and
>> invalid]com
>> invalid> wrote:
>>
>> >I recently decided to try out the use of a HOSTS file after reading about
>> >possible advantages so I downloaded the file at
>> >http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm.
>> >This has worked fine and I have been able to see various ads blocked out in
>> >Int Exp to confirm that it is working .However I thought I would give
>> "Opera
>> >" a try out as an alternate browser , I first tried it out in its infancy
>> >when I was still using Netscape but did not persist .
>> >My question now is that when I use Opera I do not see any evidence of Ads
>> >being cut out . Does this mean that downloads of websites with Opera do not
>> >access the Hosts file or perhaps they are just covered up better. By the
>> >way I do not have the POP UP blocker enabled in Opera.
>> >Interested to know if anyone can throw any light on this.
>> >
>> >Graeme

I prefer Firebird for browsing but I've heard that when Opera
blocks ads, it becomes a blank area without even a box around
it, so it's hard to tell an ad is missing.

BoB

[Graeme]

"BoB" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:9hf8pvoajdssb8er89g88197g09u41gu8o@4ax.com...
> >Graeme wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, 16 Oct 2003 21:37:46 +1000, "Graeme" <graeme23@go.[remove this
and
> >> invalid]com
> >> invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> >I recently decided to try out the use of a HOSTS file after reading
about
> >> >possible advantages so I downloaded the file at
> >> >http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/hosts.htm.
> >> >This has worked fine and I have been able to see various ads blocked
out in
> >> >Int Exp to confirm that it is working .However I thought I would give
> >> "Opera
> >> >" a try out as an alternate browser , I first tried it out in its
infancy
> >> >when I was still using Netscape but did not persist .
> >> >My question now is that when I use Opera I do not see any evidence of
Ads
> >> >being cut out . Does this mean that downloads of websites with Opera
do not
> >> >access the Hosts file or perhaps they are just covered up better. By
the
> >> >way I do not have the POP UP blocker enabled in Opera.
> >> >Interested to know if anyone can throw any light on this.
> >> >
> >> >Graeme
>
> I prefer Firebird for browsing but I've heard that when Opera
> blocks ads, it becomes a blank area without even a box around
> it, so it's hard to tell an ad is missing.
>
> BoB
>
Yes as I have now discovered that is what is happening .It is quite subtle.
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.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -