Application Octet Stream

Report · Sep 25, 2009

Why, when I click on a Last Post link on a forum page, do I sometimes get a request to launch an Application Octet Stream from adobe?

Report · Sep 25, 2009

John Joslin wrote on 9/26/2009 11:44 AM:

Why, when I click on a Last Post link on a forum page, do I sometimes get a request to launch an Application Octet Stream from adobe?

Presumably because there is a problem decoding the compressed content.

It would help if you could extract the HTTP headers from your browser to

see whether it is a client side problem or a server side problem.

Report · Sep 26, 2009

For new Macintosh users and PC people that receive notices from friends, colleagues, others, that they received this notice when opening a file.

Its the Macintosh OSX way of saying: "I don't know what the heck this file is". There is no application utility, or process than can open or run the file. almost always it either a PC type (such as exe which a Mac is not allowed to run) file or the encoding has been screwed up on the server that sent it or , it was received from.

I'm sure there is an equally obtuse notice for files that PC don't handle, including Mactosh only file type.

Report · Sep 26, 2009

Phillip Jones wrote on 9/26/2009 8:20 PM:

Its The Macintosh OSX way of saying: "I don't know what the heck this file is".

No it isn't. See RFC 2616 section 19 for its exact meaning.

Report · Sep 26, 2009

jochemd wrote:
It would help if you could extract the HTTP headers from your browser to
see whether it is a client side problem or a server side problem.

I wouldn't know where to start!

Report · Sep 26, 2009

You don't get it - you have to be a real geek to use these forums. And preferably not human.

Report · Sep 26, 2009

I know how to exract the Michael – would that help?

Report · Sep 26, 2009

Kath-H wrote:
You don't get it - you have to be a real geek to use these forums. And preferably not human.

And that last bit applies to whom exactly? Users or... ?

Report · Sep 26, 2009

http://forums.adobe.com/thread/492974?start=0&tstart=0

#18 and #27

Report · Sep 26, 2009

Kath-H wrote:
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/492974?start=0&tstart=0
#18 and #27

Quite...

Report · Sep 27, 2009

John Joslin wrote on 9/26/2009 7:09 PM:

jochemd wrote :

>>

>> It would help if you could extract the HTTP headers from your browser to

>> see whether it is a client side problem or a server side problem.

I wouldn't know where to start!

By telling which browser you use?

Report · Sep 27, 2009

jochemd wrote:
By telling which browser you use?

FF 3.5.3

Report · Sep 27, 2009

John Joslin wrote on 9/27/2009 1:31 PM:

FF 3.5.3

I wouldn't know any plugin that would allow you to access the headers

after the fact. You would eed something like LiveHTTPHeaders and keep

that running constantly to get that data.

Report · Sep 27, 2009

Thanks.

I don't think I'll pursue the matter.

Report · Sep 27, 2009

John Joslin wrote:
Thanks.

I don't think I'll pursue the matter.

Well, it does seem somewhat peculiar to me that a user reporting a problem is asked to help in solving that problem by performing actions a knowledgeable moderator does not find easy to perform himself.

Report · Sep 27, 2009

Claudio González wrote on 9/27/2009 11:36 PM:

Well, it does seem somewhat peculiar to me that a user reporting a problem is asked to help in solving that problem by performing actions a knowledgeable moderator does not find easy to perform himself.

https://developer.mozilla.org/en/HTTP_Logging is not hard at all. But

unless you have some additional infrastructure, such as a recording

proxy server, you have to do it every time before you start your

browser. The response to http://forums.adobe.com/thread/481223 makes it

clear there is a low probability that people are unwilling to spend that

amount of effort, no matter how easy it is.

Report · Sep 27, 2009

I think you are missing the point. It is the responsibility of adobe to provide forum software that works.

It is bad enough that we have to suffer under under the faults of this poorly implemented (and unsuitable) software, without being asked to help sort out the bugs.

That is adding insult to injury.

Adobe has lost a lot of goodwill from the users by apparently ignoring nearly all the comments made during the trial period.

Report · Sep 27, 2009

John Joslin wrote on 9/28/2009 7:23 AM:

I think you are missing the point. It is the responsibility of adobe to provide forum software that works.

So show me that the forum software doesn't work and it is not a problem

on your end.

Report · Sep 27, 2009

OK – if you want to nit-pick, it does work but not in a fashion that provides the ease of use that is desirable for the smooth running of the forums.

I might have known that you would try to deflect the complaint with some pedantic counter-question.

It doesn't wash with me mister community expert!

Report · Sep 28, 2009

jochemd wrote:
John Joslin wrote on 9/28/2009 7:23 AM:
I think you are missing the point. It is the responsibility of adobe to provide forum software that works.
So show me that the forum software doesn't work and it is not a problem
on your end.

wow.

with all the complaints about this software, that you, JVD are very aware of, and then you have the gall to make a comment like that? John's right, there have been many constructive comments/help provided by the users since May, most of which have been largely, publically, ignored. Why should we do the investigating any more - nobody listens anyway.

Report · Sep 28, 2009

greenjumpyone wrote on 9/28/2009 12:05 PM:

jochemd wrote :

>> So show me that the forum software doesn't work and it is not a problem

>> on your end.

with all the complaints about this software, that you, JVD are very aware of, and then you have the gall to make a comment like that?

I see many complaints but I see little evidence. For those cases where

evidence (or even circumstantial evidence) is presented, acknowledgment

follows. I just happen to believe is fact based blaming of Jive instead

of faith based blaming of Jive.

The problem we all have is not that issues don't get acknowledged, the

problem is that issues don't get fixed. That is not somebody that is in

my hands. I would even go as far as saying I am experiencing that the

worst of everybody here, because even if I write the fix myself, hand it

over to Adobe / Jive and say "issue X is fixed by these 10 lines of

code", the fix does not get deployed on the system.

So far this is the first report of this issue so there is no reason to

presume that this is a server problem. As long as John Joshlin is the

only one reporting it, it is not even likely it is a server problem.

It is unfortunate there was never any followup to a report that may be

related: http://forums.adobe.com/message/2234851 Or maybe it isn't

related, I don't know. But I do know that without followup there is not

going to be any movement on this. With followup from users that prove it

is a server side problem movement is merely unlikely.

Report · Sep 28, 2009

jochemd wrote:
As long as John Joshlin is the only one reporting it, it is not even likely it is a server problem.

If you took the trouble to read my original post properly, you would see that I was not reporting anything.

I was asking a question. It is even marked as a question.

And the name is Joslin — John Joslin!

Report · Sep 28, 2009

John Joslin wrote on 9/28/2009 7:34 PM:

And the name is Joslin — John Joslin!

Sorry

Report · Sep 28, 2009

jochemd wrote:

So show me that the forum software doesn't work and it is not a problem
on your end.

BTW, do you like walking?

Report · Sep 29, 2009

John, I've had this "octet stream" issue too, although I don't recall whether it occurred specifically on the Forums or not, but it was certainly almost all other websites. Extremely irritating.

It started with FF 3.5.2 (I'm on XP), in early August. I'm now at 3.5.3. I hadn't changed mouse drivers or done anything that would impact the mouse; I changed batteries, etc, etc. Mouse clicks worked perfectly in every other application.

I finally figured out that it is related to the speed of mouse clicks when one clicks on a link -- if my finger action for the mouse click is too fast, it gets the octet stream. If I slow down how fast I do the click, the link works perfectly. I tried changing the "mouse click speed" in the mouse driver, but that didn't seem to make any difference. I guess my "finger-hits-mouse-click-speed" has learned to go slow enough now, as the problem stopped a month or so ago.

Sheila