Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 8/18/2004(UTC)
Posts: 41
|
It is very clear that lots of people are using FireFox these days and IE is losing its popularity mainly due to ActiveX Controls and security breaches. I myself find Firefox very crisp and clean. It also blocks pop-ups reasonably well.
Unfortunately, that forces us to ask about when we can get Java version. There are many Java upload utilities but none as good as ImageUploader for images. So we would like to get a good time line on this. Please let us know about this with both regards to beta and the final completely tested and "complete" version so we can prepare appropriately. We ask for completly tested version since ImageUploader 3.0 took a bit too long and is still buggy (Example: Signature Filter does not work for many formats especially *.mpg. This allows for viruses and is a very serious security breach.)
Where and when Java ImageUploader?!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member, Administration, Moderator
Joined: 7/28/2003(UTC)
Posts: 1,660
Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 76 time(s) in 74 post(s)
|
It is very clear that lots of people are using FireFox these days and IE is losing its popularity mainly due to ActiveX Controls and security breaches. I myself find Firefox very crisp and clean. It also blocks pop-ups reasonably well.More then 75% of users still use Internet Explorer, and Windows XP SP 2 with solving most of security problems breathed new life into it. Also don't forget that for using Java uploader on Firefox user should have and modern Java 1.4 envirionment to be installed. Unfortunately not all Firefox users have it. One of the most noticeable disadvantages of Java uploader is that applet should be downloaded and approved by user each time when user navigates page, at that time as ActiveX control should be approved only once during installation. We are working over this problem and hope to make it convinient via alternative installation models. Unfortunately, that forces us to ask about when we can get Java version. There are many Java upload utilities but none as good as ImageUploader for images. So we would like to get a good time line on this. Please let us know about this with both regards to beta and the final completely tested and "complete" version so we can prepare appropriately. We are working over Java version and are going to release it the end of October. First version of Java uploader willn't have all features of ActiveX control in order to be available on market sooner. In next releases we will implement the rest of features which are available in our ActiveX control. We ask for completly tested version since ImageUploader 3.0 took a bit too long and is still buggy (Example: Signature Filter does not work for many formats especially *.mpg. This allows for viruses and is a very serious security breach.)I don't agree with you that it secuirty breach at all. In Restricting Files by Extensions and Types we mentioned: Note: It is strongly recommended to make file type checks on server side. Potentially malicious user can emulate Image Uploader with multiple <input type="file"> and upload dangerous files using them, so above-mentioned properties do not give 100% guarantee that only proper files are uploaded. That's why these limitations are intended more to prompt what files you expect rather than protection.I want to draw a parallel between form validation with JavaScript, as in this case you always should duplicate client-side JavaScript validation with server-side one. And sure we keep Image Uploader up to date so it doesn't have critical unclosed bugs. Edited by user Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:10:12 PM(UTC)
| Reason: Not specified |
Best regards,
Fedor Skvortsov
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 9/27/2004(UTC)
Posts: 11
|
>More then 75% of users still use Internet Explorer,
I think the number is still around 95% according to a CNET article today:
"Microsoft's browser software remains the industry standard, with 95 percent of the market, even though small competitors like the Mozilla Foundation's Firefox, Apple Computer's Safari and Opera Software's browser have apparently made inroads"
The Java will be a nice addition for certain segments of users (we'll definitely use it) but don't think it's causing huge profit losses yet for most companies.
One nice aspect would be for Mac - Would the Java version allow Aurigma on Mac and Safari?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member, Administration, Moderator
Joined: 7/28/2003(UTC)
Posts: 1,660
Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 76 time(s) in 74 post(s)
|
One nice aspect would be for Mac - Would the Java version allow Aurigma on Mac and Safari?
Sure it will work on Mac with Safari. On other side Mac OS X platform has one of the best Java support. It has preinstalled modern Java Runtime Envirionment, as well as Java on Mac OS X allows to create native look and feel applications instead of usual ugly Swing one. |
Best regards,
Fedor Skvortsov
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 8/18/2004(UTC)
Posts: 41
|
Fedor, I did not intend to criticize but rather get your attention to the urgency and need to get the Java product and also with regards to the Signature Filter issue. My apologies if I have overlooked something. Your disclaimer is right on the target with regards to Signature Filter. However, it does help to get this fix. Even the documentation you provided the link too suggests that Signature Filter is the final filter and not just the File mask. Secondly, Signature Filter checks some of the header of the file and hence I feel it is a bit smarter than the typical file extension checks and so on. It would help to get this working as well and have this additional level of check or security. I am sure you would agree with me on that. I do understand that we need server side checks also in place. Please do suggest some methods we can research to implement server side checks for the file content. Again Image Uploader is a fine product and I should commend you people for working so hard on making such a nice product. I JUST WANT MORE OF IT! The Java version from the professionals - Aurigma! Go Aurigma!!! For people who want to read about FireFox's rapid growth then please click on the following links for some good reading: http://www.forbes.com/te...tentech.html?partner=rsshttp://www.flexbeta.net/...es.php?action=show&id=32http://slate.msn.com/id/2103152
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member, Administration, Moderator
Joined: 7/28/2003(UTC)
Posts: 1,660
Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 76 time(s) in 74 post(s)
|
bizzy, You can see screenshot of Image Uploader Java Edition here: View post |
Best regards,
Fedor Skvortsov
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Member
Groups: Member
Joined: 8/18/2004(UTC)
Posts: 41
|
Great! Thanks for the update and the follow through. How do I sign up for the beta program? I am available to help. Also, if you use the feature list of 3.0 ActiveX client and compare with the Java version, what are the items we will not get in this first Java version?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Member, Administration, Moderator
Joined: 7/28/2003(UTC)
Posts: 1,660
Thanks: 5 times
Was thanked: 76 time(s) in 74 post(s)
|
How do I sign up for the beta program? I am available to help.You can sign up for beta testing here. Also, if you use the feature list of 3.0 ActiveX client and compare with the Java version, what are the items we will not get in this first Java version?Following features will not be implemented in first release of Java version: # Automatically tracks changes in file system (folder content). # Preview thumbnails are taken from EXIF if possible (extremely fast). # Ability to display quality meter that allows user to estimate a maximum acceptable print format. # Possibility to specify filters for file types. |
Best regards,
Fedor Skvortsov
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.