IE does not download all images
It happens if I use internet through my win2k pro SP3 PC that is set up with 2 NICs and ICS. If I plug my PC directly into the SDSL modem all pages are finished. See here how IE looks: At the last screenshot you see (28 items remaining) Downloading picture.
It happens if I use internet through my win2k pro SP3 PC that is set up with 2 NICs and ICS. If I plug my PC directly into the SDSL modem all pages are finished.
See here how IE looks:
http://217.8.136.112/root/pix/no_images.jpg
http://217.8.136.112/root/pix/no_images_itavisen.jpg
At the last screenshot you see "(28 items remaining) Downloading picture..." It stalls like that, but the window responds. It's like this on both my PC (winXP pro) and my brothers (winXP too).
I am sure it is the win2k pro PC with ICS, but I'd like to get to the bottom of the problem instead of doing a re-install...
See here how IE looks:
http://217.8.136.112/root/pix/no_images.jpg
http://217.8.136.112/root/pix/no_images_itavisen.jpg
At the last screenshot you see "(28 items remaining) Downloading picture..." It stalls like that, but the window responds. It's like this on both my PC (winXP pro) and my brothers (winXP too).
I am sure it is the win2k pro PC with ICS, but I'd like to get to the bottom of the problem instead of doing a re-install...
Participate on our website and join the conversation
This topic is archived. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Responses to this topic
Hi Gambler,
Let me start by saying that you won't be seeing any pictures while in HTTP mode. So the screenshot you provided:
http://217.8.136.112/root/pix/no_images.jpg
Shows a system doing exactly what it's supposed to. The view you're showing is like browsing an FTP site, in the name of performance pictures aren't auto-loaded. Can you imagine if you browsed a folder with 1000 pictures, how long would that take to load? How many thousands of times faster would it be able to load by just displaying the title?
In the HTTP protocol if you want your pictures to show up you need to create an index file to display them. HTTP requires an HTML (usually .htm) file that instructs the browser what to display and how.
Create a file named default.htm and give it the following contents:
<IMG SRC="7000.jpg"><BR>
and repeat that on a new line for each file you want to display.
Let me start by saying that you won't be seeing any pictures while in HTTP mode. So the screenshot you provided:
http://217.8.136.112/root/pix/no_images.jpg
Shows a system doing exactly what it's supposed to. The view you're showing is like browsing an FTP site, in the name of performance pictures aren't auto-loaded. Can you imagine if you browsed a folder with 1000 pictures, how long would that take to load? How many thousands of times faster would it be able to load by just displaying the title?
In the HTTP protocol if you want your pictures to show up you need to create an index file to display them. HTTP requires an HTML (usually .htm) file that instructs the browser what to display and how.
Create a file named default.htm and give it the following contents:
<IMG SRC="7000.jpg"><BR>
and repeat that on a new line for each file you want to display.
As for the second screenshot I would have to say that this is related to the degradation in peformance. Windows tends to fail often whilst downloading if the stream isn't steady and fast. So yes if you use ICS and dividing your connection (assuming the other PC is actively consuming bandwidth) you should observe that behavior. Windows ain't perfect by any means, believe me I know I used to work in the Windows Consumer Hardware Lab at Microsoft [Win2K and 98Se]. Have you considered getting a switch and seeing if that doesn't resolve your problem? YOu can get a nice LinkSys switch for about 25-35 dollars I believe (probably cheaper it's been a while). A really easy work around is to just press F5 in your browser and the page will reload.
Have you tried Opera or Mozilla?
Both are a fraction of the size of Idiot Exployer without the spyware!
Both are a fraction of the size of Idiot Exployer without the spyware!
Quote:Have you tried Opera or Mozilla?
Both are a fraction of the size of Idiot Exployer without the spyware!
What spyware? Internet Explorer asks you if you want to transmit user data when it crashes. To my knowledge none of your information is transferrred to Microsoft without your consent with IE. Do you have something to substantiate that MS is using spyware in IE? Don't get me wrong I hate MS, after all I worked there. They have done many underhanded things, but I don't believe they would risk what you're describing.
Thanks,
Christian
Both are a fraction of the size of Idiot Exployer without the spyware!
What spyware? Internet Explorer asks you if you want to transmit user data when it crashes. To my knowledge none of your information is transferrred to Microsoft without your consent with IE. Do you have something to substantiate that MS is using spyware in IE? Don't get me wrong I hate MS, after all I worked there. They have done many underhanded things, but I don't believe they would risk what you're describing.
Thanks,
Christian
CristianB, I hooked my PC directly up to the SDSL modem (1mbit/1mbit))and everything was peatchy again. After not getting any replies to the boards I posted at, I did a reinstall of win2k on the "server" and now everything is OK again, pages load up quick and nice.
I am sure there was some problem with the win2k PC that shared the connection (I am now again behind it in a NAT/ICS mode) that was the culprit. Why it acted like that I would like to know. It was never a matter of bandwidth/performance as none of the PCs hooked up to the ICS/NAT network was on, only my own PC and the server. The bandwidth monitor I used was also showing zero activity, and as I said it worked right when I connected my own PC directly to the SDSL modem.
I think win2k goofed, it had SP3 installed maybe that can be something? It was a pretty new install, as I know even win2k is a complete mess of system files, program files and settings everywhere and a big reigstry that gets more and more complex and slow as you install/configure more programs? Then we have the double-up of system files as a "workaround" for DLL HELL. Thank you microsoft
I am sure there was some problem with the win2k PC that shared the connection (I am now again behind it in a NAT/ICS mode) that was the culprit. Why it acted like that I would like to know. It was never a matter of bandwidth/performance as none of the PCs hooked up to the ICS/NAT network was on, only my own PC and the server. The bandwidth monitor I used was also showing zero activity, and as I said it worked right when I connected my own PC directly to the SDSL modem.
I think win2k goofed, it had SP3 installed maybe that can be something? It was a pretty new install, as I know even win2k is a complete mess of system files, program files and settings everywhere and a big reigstry that gets more and more complex and slow as you install/configure more programs? Then we have the double-up of system files as a "workaround" for DLL HELL. Thank you microsoft
