Discussion in 'other software & services' started by Saraceno, Jan 17, 2010.
Sorry. I think I misunderstood you.
But I think you did say Chrome.
Wish I could help you.
@Hugger- Yes, I said Chrome because I felt most folks would not comment if I said Chrome+. This is THE first time I have encountered something that works for Chrome but not for Chrome+. Thanks for trying & I apologize for the misleading. That was not my intention.
Bill choose option 2, after wards following will appear in address bar (see pic)
Other extentions you might find usefull
- adsweep = fast adblock
- adblock = traditional adblock
- flashblock = see http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1643459&postcount=27
- easy reader = http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showpost.php?p=1639677&postcount=18
- new tab behaviour (go to google when pressing new tab)
- Site Advisor free for chrome
- WOT free for chrome
@bellgamin - I am using ChromePlus withOA++ set to 'Run Safer' and have no problems allowing or blocking JS at all. In the drop down menu that appears when you click on the spanner icon there is a 'ChromePlus Options Page' as well as the 'Options'. When you open that under 'Startup options' > misc there are two boxes to tick to block JS and Java. I found that if I had them checked I was having the problems you describe. Perhaps that could be the problem?
Thanks Kees-sensei, but it doesn't work for Chrome+.
Which of these two flashblock extensions would be recommended and why?
I just installed Chrome + and was able to block JS the way I explained in my previous post.
Could there be a problem with the version you installed?
My version is the latest - 184.108.40.206. I am able to block JS, but I do not get the on/off toggle icon in the address bar. Otherwise, Chrome+ functions just fine for me.
I installed Chrome+ in C:\Programs\Browsers\Chrome+. It is totally in that one folder. Could that make a difference I wonder?
Flashblock with the adobe 'f' symbol, seems to block flash after it has already loaded. A con would be, if you're living with others, and decide to 'allow' flash on a 'particular site', others may see later, 'oh, he's been watching flash on THAT site'.
The second one is easier to use, can be enabled and disabled, and to me, seems to block flash quicker than the first one. Also doesn't have a list of sites where you've allowed it.
Go the second one.
Yesssss!!! Now I get it. I visited a site where I had disallowed JS, and Poof! the icon appeared. As soon as I allowed JS, Poof! the icon disappeared.
Okay, it's better than nothing, but I would muchly prefer an ever-present toggle-icon, as I have in FF & Kmel.
Thanks to all who helped, & especially to Dark Star who solved the mystery & thereby relieved me of my suspicion that there might be something wrong with my computer's implementation of Chrome+.
As to the cookie toggle, I do not need it. I joyfully use Maxa Cookie Manager which works with ALL of my browsers, & also kills flash cookies, web bugs, etc. NOT free, however.
Found this one browsing around the net, gonna try it out and see what happens-
MaAfee Short URL Scanner (looks like it relies on SiteAdvisor)
Not sure if this one's been posted already or not- bitdefender quick scan
Is this extension any good? What do you think of it?
I thought it scanned url's and/or had context menu scanning. But apparently it just scans your system. For that reason Hitman Pro is much, much better.
OK, thanks for the reply.
Wow, LinkExtend for Chrome- (not sure how well it works but I'm trying it out today)
Tried it- uninstalled. No search result ratings appeared. I tried regular google then the https version. As soon as I went attempted a search on the https google site linkextend died. Not sure if this was related or not. All historical scanners, no real time. But this looks to be a worth while extension to keep an eye on.This has a long ways to go before becoming functional.
Th above one looks like it could be useful. Reminds me of a poor man's Optimize Google, except this is Youtube specific.
A couple other Youtube extensions-
Finally got it to work some. The ratings are slow compared to other raters like WOT. This is especially true of search engine results. Tried again in https search on google, nothing from LinkExtend- actually the extension becomes unresponsive. Also I noticed that every search result had BrowserDefender giving a rating as "unknown". I want to try the extension with just the Norton search rating enabled to see if it speeds up results.
EDIT- enabled just the Norton rater. Also had a separate WOT extension. In a search, ratings were much faster. And as soon as I wrote that the LinkExtend became unresponsive on the next search attempt in google. Now I see that with just Norton ratings enabled LinkExtend still calls all the rating sites in search results.
I've been experimenting with this. Has anyone else installed it?
This = IE Tab.
Requires a functional IE on the computer. I've used it. It's okay. But I'm not really sure it offers any significant advantage over running the original IE in Sandboxie.
Ostensibly it seems like a good idea & it is one of the most popular Google extensions (#3rd) but I will have to test it a bit more to really form an opinion. I hardly ever use IE 8 anyway. Although if it is safer than IE it could be a good idea, I was thinking more of the convenience of not having to open IE which is a bit sluggish sometimes on my laptop. Which is one of the main reasons I like Chrome/Iron anyway, as it is so light & fast!
I read that someone had uninstalled IE 8 on Win 7 & this extension still worked. That can't be right can it?
I tried this on Iron & got more or less the same results as you have, including the unknown results of BrowserDefender.
I've noticed that the Site Advisor 'more info' link takes you to the Site Advisor site similar to the Firefox/IE extension. I don't know why the developers couldn't have achieved that in SiteAdvisor for Chrome.
I think that you are right though, it may be one to watch in the future. I still find WOT to be faster & better.
The way I look at is:
IE is nowadays essential on rare occasions. To have IE tab in Chrome presumably consumes some resources whenever Chrome is running. I'd rather experience the slowness of IE once in a while than have the extension occupying any space and consuming even a little RAM all the time.
For those needing to visit IE-only sites frequently it may possibly be a boon.
AS far as IE Tab working in the absence of IE.... Let's get it confirmed by some trustworthy Braveheart here. (Who knows what the uninstallation really does?)
Hi, the impression I have is that whether an extension icon stays visible or not and its location (inside the omnibar or outside) has something to do with page actions and browser actions and whether the extension (if it is a page action extension) has any role to play on the page being viewed.
Yeah, that's a really good point. I was wondering just how really useful it could be as an extension. I will have to trial it a bit more, who knows? I may uninstall it eventually.
It appears to be remarkably popular.
Hmmm... *thinks* Microsoft wouldn't be telling *pork pies about the ability to uninstall IE completely from Win 7 would they?
*Pork Pies = Lies (British slang)
Separate names with a comma.