avatar image

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
  • Thursday June 20, 2024, 2:42 pm
  • Proudly celebrating 15+ years online.
  • Donate now to become a lifetime supporting member of the site and get a non-expiring license key for all of our programs.
  • donate

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - silekonn [ switch to compact view ]

Pages: [1]
skrommel posted,

So you want the extension available on the Microsoft Store, and running in both Internet Explorer and Edge?

after replying,

Any way to package that and add it to the Internet Explorer gallery?

skwire asked,

@silekonn: If this solution is working for you, do you mind if I moved it to the Finished section?

Why would adding items that did not relate to the request be a reason to mark it as finished?  There were now two individuals confusing the request and without an easily ascertained reason.  Hope was held things would steer back on course and someone could accomplish the task.  An idea of the correct direction was provided by skrommel, just before he decided to take an unrelated direction.

The two weeks without response and the misdirection of those who had was nearing an impediment to the goodwill this project's fruition would result in.  Trying to see the lighter side of things and remaining determined, another effort to structure things was created.

I do appreciate this and will throw Skrommel a $5 spot for his effort.  It is not exactly what is needed.  It has to be something that is a 'one click fix' for the luddites.  If it is beyond the scope of the website or available programmers please accept my apologies.  Edge is a bonus.  Thank you for your patience and the time you invested.

A short side note.  If unaware, Internet Explorer is a vastly different product than Edge.  Edge was made as Internet Explorer's replacement.  The two applications share a similar icon and little else.  They are different systems.

Edge, being an element of a newer ideal, is linked into the Windows Store.  Internet Explorer, for around two decades, is not directly linked to the Windows Store in much of any form.  If someone understands these concepts, they may too understand the Internet Explorer Add-Ons Gallery is a part of a website.  It exists solely to provide approved add-ons for Internet Explorer and is the destination of the link the Internet Explorer software offers in its add-ons section if one was to pursue attaining those add-ons.  It has existed for many years and the codebase is not the same as that for the newer Edge software.

If the confusion this thread follows is due in part to the above being unclear to individuals it might be understood.  For people who are coders, if they were to try to technically address a conversation about a request for an add-on (the term being different from extension, which is used by e. g. Edge or Chrome), it should already be knowledge.  If not immediate, minimally after a direct reference.

The post was quickly met with,

So basically at this point, you need someone to convert what Skrommel did into a windows store extension and post it on Windows store?

Nothing about having to attain skrommel's code is present.  The idea it should be converted was not conveyed.  Knowing a minimum about coding will make it apparent everyone has their own system for writing it and small projects as the perfect example, it is often more time-consuming to interpret exactly how someone has designed something than to just recreate it with one's own vision.

The statement "a windows store extension and post it on Windows store" is difficult to grasp.  Assuming "a Microsoft Edge extension posted in the Windows Store" was intended, that would not be supported by skrommel's own statements in response to the original request, when he confirmed about the goal,

That's a bit outside my field of expertise.


addons are made using MS Visual Studio.

and, when referring to his creation for Microsoft Edge,

it is unsigned, with all the hassels of warnings and manual installation, so publishing in the Windows Store is the way to go.

It is at these posts several earlier everyone should have no reason to be confused between the (goal) Internet Explorer Gallery and the Microsoft Store extensions for Edge because they are irrelevant to the underlying issue.  skrommel contributed other items that did not match the goal by his own statements and the one that could have otherwise confused those unfamiliar is again by skrommel's statements not published.  He cannot be faulted for creating more and at the same time the unrelated contributions may have served to add confusion to a request.

That which was not sought and instead added as an extra, that which was not added to the Windows Store "and that would be the way to go", why then would that finish the request?

"So" "basically," "at this point" would generally be said by someone lacking comprehension.  It would have been easily forgiven.  wraith808 further adds,

Or is there another impediment?

That would appear to be an insinuation for purposely impeding the request.  It may just be lack of command of the English language, or somehow he believes asking "will there be other impediments" (impede: delay or prevent (someone or something) by obstructing them; hinder) was not rude and he believes its meaning is "can you think of anything to add that might be helpful?"  That is difficult to imagine.

Equally difficult was at that point envisioning a completion of the request.  The response less than two hours before wraith808's was in entirity,

I do appreciate this and will throw Skrommel a $5 spot for his effort.  It is not exactly what is needed.  It has to be something that is a 'one click fix' for the luddites.  If it is beyond the scope of the website or available programmers please accept my apologies.  Edge is a bonus.  Thank you for your patience and the time you invested.

which was not converse.  It was beginning to feel derailed by a toxic elements.

Completion before clarity, working on something for real money with a description two sentences in length and not even attempting to gain a better understanding should in context be against better judgement.  It may be the request was complicated by the firm compensation offer, prompting someone to finish first to attain a decent reward for what could be construed as a simple request (for those that minimally know and use AutoIt).  It might have created a sense of urgency to complete it before the next individual was first to do so.

Confusing the issue followed, "So you want the extension available on the Microsoft Store, and running in both Internet Explorer and Edge" and was followed repeatedly.  It appears to stem from a lack of understanding of the basic system for which the reference was made.

When things are both "basically" and "at a point", something lacks clarity.  What isn't clear is why.  The mistake was terming the demeanor marked in the second half of that quote as hostility instead of sarcastic and rude.

The reasons for which wraith808 decided the requests were purposely confusing was a bit more than time allowed, the thread was now drawing individuals that had no understanding of the system and an incredible desire to insist some other individual receive their offered tip before the person in question had decided to comment, "that is fair, thank you," "the full $20 would be appreciated, thank you" or "no thank you."  skrommel had not made it clear it was anyone else's place to arrange what he receives and may well have already arranged for with others unaware.

It might be a turning point on the idea something created here to benefit charities would be achieved.  Knowing a combination of hasty decisions, injection of unrelated ideas and worse meant pursuing this was unlikely to yield anything beyond that which was is exhibited in a large part of the posts that follow (at its best, the site and its userbase receiving praise).

It should not be expected that the average internet user understands the reasonable expectation of completing a goal in a thread.  When it is ten posts deep in back and forth about first something not quite right and then progressively further from an idea, and adds in someone pointing fingers about false goals and promises unkept, it is equally clear people don't generally grab popcorn.

It is with greater difficulty anyone would want to compensate someone for a small effort, for example creating something without taking a few seconds to gain a modicum of clarity that might save the time.  Minimally coders that have familiarity with add-ons (vs. extensions) or anyone that has the knowledge to differentiate between the Internet Explorer add-on system and other browsers', knowing not having that knowledge is a lack of understanding for the request.

It would be difficult providing a compensation at such a distance from any understanding.  After the amount of energy expended to explain exactly why it that is, to say nothing for the reasoning it would be believed otherwise, the result might be unusable and that is complicated with a concern the next moderator may come along and mark the project as finished with a similar amount of time invested reviewing what occurred.  An even greater difficulty would be a small effort made by one individual and then three of his friends come along and insinuate a lack of character for someone who made a request for charity and offered extra funds, out of that person's own shallow pockets and out of good will, knowing that those same three people had completely derailed any chance of the project again seeing the light of day with baseless concepts for confusing the goal and insistence for a /tip/ that was intended and might have increased had they not supported the person and waited to see if skrommel returned and wanted to request /more/.

I did intend giving skrommel $5 because I said I would.  If the next thought is to pat yourselves on your backs, or to continue to insist payment occur immediately or that the character of the requestor and request be called to question, it is my sincere hope that you soon find benignity in your future.  For all the back-patting that has happened here, few can follow the course of logic in this thread.

If I have provided clarity please notify me.

I will try my best to clarify my position.  I responded to the first post within minutes.  Something was created and quickly, for which I again responded in the same day and with praise.

The software accomplished the task in a wider sense.  It doesn't much work in the context 'for charity' which .might. minimally have an implication "for more than one person," for which in some opinions any should.  It is a bit further away when 'extension/add-ons' is included.  That aside, it is an 800KB executable that begins to accomplish a task the referenced items do in between 7 and 37KB without requiring some sort of memory resident executable, its addition to startup items, difficulty with antivirus, the current issue with the repeatedly reloading page unless you go to only (a no-go for anyone whose bookmark doesn't say precisely or etc.

The first post was minimal in part because questions might have been expected.  It is safe to say the solution is a little less than the request, or rushed.  After responding it did not quite hit the mark, the programmer enthusiastically offered something for Edge, "So you want the extension available on the Microsoft Store, and running in both Internet Explorer and Edge?"  That was difficult to understand and creates a sense of caution and puzzlement.  Not having checked or ever truly used Edge, I am aware it has a different codebase and extension/add-on "store."  Why then was it assumed that was now sought?  It creates an underlying concern.

I was unsure how to respond.  When someone else finally stepped in, the effort for Edge was applauded.  It was not in the scope of the project.  It does serve a purpose.  It appears to be a) near a sensible size and b) open source, meaning not something huge, hidden, and too far off target to be used sensible for the original request, if not exact.  Observing it closer now, I will again congratulate skrommel.  Well done.  If you could include some type of self-signature, maybe akin to what "Fernando" does here, it could be a hit already.  If I am showing my ignorance to programming concepts, please disregard this.

After a third party as-yet-unheard from party jumped to its defense it would be safe to say things are not comfortable throwing money at this without some reassurement.  Maybe the original message was so far from what others believe is acceptable the mistake is mine.  The minute description with a concrete reward leaves the belief someone would generally expect a question or two before something is produced.

skrommel had nothing to say.  That may be due to his agreement with the above.  The first code is a great thing for one technically literate person (that feels secure running unknown code 24/7) expecting it might be polished a bit.  It is not a complete solution in the minute context of the original request and the second, while applauded, was difficult to understand the reason behind.  It could be another person busy with life and willing to let a slip-up on both our parts go.

It is not clear and would not feel right without the person who invested actual time minimally explaining if it is my error.  I felt that was relayed in the previous post.  Someone I have no prior knowledge of telling me I should be compensating him does not sit well and now a second party wants me to believe I have erred.

I was seeking software useful to assist a charity and do not believe that goal has been accomplished.I offered a partial reward after I had already said as much.  skrommel, if you feel what was presented was an adequate and complete solution that should be accepted please notify me.

My apologies again if I crossed a line with the community.  I hope clarity exists for why I have not thrown my wallet into this what would be a lions' den.  I would like your opinion skrommel.  Or is there another impediment?

So basically at this point, you need someone to convert what Skrommel did into a windows store extension and post it on Windows store?  Or is there another impediment?

Something is needed that is set up for a casual or in some views novice user.  Its mention was neglected because a result that does not utilize the official add-ons for the software was not expected.  It was stated, "this is for charity" which might have been viewed minimally as multiple parties, some of which are not comfortable or able to use unsigned or less than easy to install software.  If using the other language is magnitudes of effort beyond that expended it only needed saying.

Both of the examples were in some capacity "official" and I believe it is reasonable to say I did not have malicious intent.  I went so far as to offer money for something that, if completed, would garner its creator the same number of donations and good will the other two examples already do.

The hostility is not called for.  It helps if things are communicated in advance of starting into anything difficult or time-consuming and I am sure skrommel knows that as well as tomos and others here.  If he had high expectations for the outcome he might have attempted to ascertain a clearer picture of what was sought.  Non-programmers will not always immediately grasp the concepts behind a software request.  My initial $20 stands as does the $5 for skrommel if he feels it is warranted.  I do appreciate what was done and will pass it along to those who have the interest and knowledge/skill to utilize it.

I do appreciate this and will throw Skrommel a $5 spot for his effort.  It is not exactly what is needed.  It has to be something that is a 'one click fix' for the luddites.  If it is beyond the scope of the website or available programmers please accept my apologies.  Edge is a bonus.  Thank you for your patience and the time you invested.

That is cool.  It is a great start.  I should have qualified my request slightly.  I would like to distribute it to the members of a charity.  They will not be technically literate and need an option that is not e. g. intercepted by antivirus.  Any way to package that and add it to the Internet Explorer gallery?

Looking for the Internet Explorer version of these extension/add-ons:

This is for charity.  I will throw you $20 if you can get something working.  Your effort is appreciated.

Wizmo is a good idea.  However I have been speaking with Robert on GRC's Newsgroups and it seems he is unwilling.  Here is his initial response:

Maybe Autoit?



when i asked you to look at what i posted i meant the app. :)

Here is another possibly useful link I have:


i do not intend to be rude: look at what i posted before you give me 3 paragraphs, please.

thank you.

if anyone has the ability to create this program without the use of the provided s/w, i would favor that.  the current software was written in 5m, and is apparent by the resulting functionality on my system.  I did not consider the lcd panel turning off, because that is not a part of the hardware-coded options on my system or any systems i know of.

if it helps, my system requires the Fn button to be pressed while you use the down arrow to lower the brightness, or up to increase.


p.s.  thank you for the msdn information.  that is what i am searching for.  i want to save electric by using the lcd laptop monitor's built-in (hardware level) brightness adjustment.  [<- notes how unimpressive this will be]

i want a program to use lcd panel's Fn+arrow to dim the screen.  someone made a program in a short time, though my model of computer is old and unsupported.
This has been coded: http://cid-fea8a8445...x/Public/ .  requires .net 2 .  i have an dell inspiron 8200 with the sharp 16x12 lcd.  if someone can make it work for me i will spend.

Pages: [1]