Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: "sandy58" <Aleckie59@aol.com>
Newsgroups: alt.new.cracks
Subject: sdlomi2 re; Active X Control
Date: 7 Apr 2006 23:22:53 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <1144477373.086225.169880@j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 172.200.151.122
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1144477378 11916 127.0.0.1 (8 Apr 2006 06:22:58 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 06:22:58 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.10) Gecko/20050716 Firefox/1.0.6,gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
Injection-Info: j33g2000cwa.googlegroups.com; posting-host=172.200.151.122;
posting-account=sTjeFAwAAACSNLaeqJUBR6gpcXcOgexI
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.new.cracks:2235
http://www.eto.org.uk/faq/faqactvx.htm
http://www.thennews.com/b/N12/Active%20X%20Good%20or%20Bad.php
http://help.lockergnome.com/index.php?showtopic=7541 (check "Rory's
answer to "Spooky" in this forum)
sdlomi, there are many "for" & "against" Active X Control. As a browser
I use Mozilla Firefox which cuts thro' the crap better than any other
(my opinion only) when searching in the "forbidden" areas. :-) I avoid
AXC on principle as it is used in some not-so-nice circumstances
although MS attempt to force one into using it. Have a wee look at the
links above and see what YOU think.
ATB
sandy58
|
|