best browser

[BC_Programmer]

To B.C. I too have accessed this site previously with a multitude of different browsers and even different computers. I always can access the site regardless of the browser used and if i do have this particular issue arise it is always on Opera (including earlier versions and NEVER on any other browser)

And that was how it was when I discovered issues with my site on Opera. It looked perfectly fine in Chrome, Firefox, and IE8; only Opera had a few issues, which I was able to remedy. Not Opera's fault, but rather the fact that Firefox, IE, and Chrome are far too forgiving.

[soybean]

Soybean, With all due respect i do believe that is EXACTLY what i have done in post #10. I don't see how i can be any more specific than that (items are named/items are given by the numbers associated with them/items are described very accurately i believe). The fact that your URL and mine are the same may well be the case but i did NOT click on your URL i simply responded to your request for the precise URL that I had used to encounter the anomaly. I find it very intriguing that you access the same site using the same URL with the same browser version and display different results.

Oh, back to post #10.  OK, I took a look at the Sklar Peppler Book Case listing and do not see a cabinet sewing machine.  I saw a bookcase in both the thumbnail image on the main list and in the 4 photos that appear in the details for that item. 

Today it is only at the listing page NOT on the additional pictures access. They are appropriate for the item described.

So, you're saying the website has fixed it?

[truenorth]

soybean, "So, you're saying the website has fixed it?" No. Only that the error is now limited to the page where the items are displayed (the description plus the single picture --it is that picture that is in certain instances NOT appropriate to the description). However unlike previously the link to the additional pictures DOES display the correct pictorial references to the item described. Hope that clarifies. truenorth
P.S. Belatedly i just this instant went back to the auction site for the 1st time using your link and  i note that via that route the item included in this post clearly describes lamps BUT the picture is of a sofa. That anomaly is the one i have included the picture attachment of and was obtained on my own search NOT with your link.

[regaining space - attachment deleted by admin]

[soybean]

I feel like I need to borrow patio's pulling-teeth image. 

soybean, "So, you're saying the website has fixed it?" No. Only that the error is now limited to the page where the items are displayed (the description plus the single picture --it is that picture that is in certain instances NOT appropriate to the description). However unlike previously the link to the additional pictures DOES display the correct pictorial references to the item described. Hope that clarifies. truenorth

Please cite the URL to that item so that I can see on my computer using Opera.

[truenorth]

"I feel like I need to borrow patio's pulling-teeth image. " Boy do i EVER agree with that sentiment and to think we are speaking a common language! I just told you i used YOUR link in your post in this thread (above) to get the example of the the SPECIFIC description/picture that shows the anomaly. I also stated that i ALSO get the same result by accessing the site via an alternative route (IE linking to it via my e-mail account where i recieve my notifications of upcoming auctions from the aution service). How can i possibly be any MORE clear than that.truenorth

[soybean]

Of all the comments you've posted, I believe I have thoughtfully read them and I have yet to find a case where the picture does not match the description.  That's why I have asked for a link to the specific item you say fits your described problem. 

In my last post, I said, "Please cite the URL to that item so that I can see on my computer using Opera."  You have not done that.  I am baffled about why this seems to be so difficult. 

[truenorth]

soybean, I must say that i personally value your contributions to the CH forums and i look forward to viewing your posts as they are usually very insightful and demonstrate a high level of knowledge re computer issues. I would not want ANYTHING to jeopardize that relationship. What you seem to be failing to put enough relevance to is that in my opinion it matters not one iota which URL (yours/mine/some other link) WE use you seem to NEVER show the anomaly that i may get. That is why i included the JPEG image of the specific item that DOES show the discrepancy between description and the associated thumbnail picture. ONLY to show you that which i get and you don't. So i can send you URLs until the cows come home--i don't think YOU are EVER going to see the anomaly (other than if i show you what i can get). Make sense? truenorth
So once again YOUR link from YOUR post in THIS thread gives me the above pictured anomaly. 

[soybean]

What I see at http://youbidlocal.auctionflex.com/showlots.ap?co=13041&weid=20171&weiid=7353015&archive=n&lso=bidcountdesc&pagenum=1&lang=En for the item shown in your image for the lamps is attached.  As you can see, my web page shows a correct item picture.  And again, I'm using the same version of Opera as you.  So, at this point, we can only say that, for some unknown reason, we have this difference in what our browser displays.   

[regaining space - attachment deleted by admin]

[truenorth]

Whew! Precisely.truenorth

[soybean]

Whew! Precisely.truenorth

That's all you have to say?  When you view that page again, you still get the discrepancy between image and description, right?  If so, you realize that this discussion proves something isn't working right with your Opera?  I've proven that Opera does display it correctly.

[Salmon Trout]

About Opera
Version information
Version
11.51

Build
1087

Platform
Win32

System
Windows 7

[soybean]

Salmon, my Opera is displaying those two items correctly.  Any ideas on what could be the cause of this inconsistency between different users?

[Salmon Trout]

Salmon, my Opera is displaying those two items correctly.  Any ideas on what could be the cause of this inconsistency between different users?

I can't think, although my curiosity is aroused. Java? [Edit: cache corruption? see below]

The thumbnails appear to match the descriptions in Firefox 7.0.1, IE 9.0.8112.16421, SeaMonkey 2.0.9, Google Chrome 6.0.472.63, and Chromium 7.0.537.0 (60797).

When I right click the thumbnail for "66 Panasonic Cassette Player" in FF 7.0.1 and Opera 11.51, I see this url for the thumbnail jpg:

http://youbidlocal.auctionflex.com/ai2/13041/20171/7353046_3CI0NPGO0tn.jpg

Which links to this image in Firefox



BUT when I type that url in Opera's address bar it loads the thumbnail for "21 Wool Coat Made by Inuit". And the image url is the same one that shows the cassette player in FF.

I'll try to use wget to download the image...

It is the (correct) cassette player.

The Inuit coat link from FF is

http://youbidlocal.auctionflex.com/ai2/13041/20171/7352998_3CN1FF2YTtn.jpg

[EDIT]

If I look in Opera's image cache (Tools - Advanced - Cache) the thumbnail for the cassette player is listed with the right url, and clicking on its preview button produces the correct image.

[ANOTHER EDIT]

I cleared Opera's cache and now the right thumbnails are displayed.

A quick Google shows Opera cache corruption gets quite a few hits .

A random selection from a help forum

So guys and girls, don't go thinking you're nuts, just blame it on Opera because quite frankly even in release 10.6 it's got a nasty cache bug. Other browsers seem to avoid a corrupt cache but not Opera.

[Salmon Trout]

[Update]

I looked in Opera's preferences (Tools - Advanced - History) and found that the settings for "Check if cached page is updated on the server" were:

Check documents - every 5 minutes
Check images - every 5 hours (I changed this to 5 minutes)

I presume these are the Opera default settings since I have never been there before. This is not an area of expertise for me, but possibly this is a fruitful place to look for reasons for the difference between soybean's results and my initial experience before I cleared the cache and refreshed the page? And maybe 5 hours is a long time between checks if a site such as an auction one has frequently updated content? Just thinking off the top of my head here. You would think that a simple shift + F5 refresh would have cleared the anomalies but it didn't.

[soybean]

[Update]

I looked in Opera's preferences (Tools - Advanced - History) and found that the settings for "Check if cached page is updated on the server" were:

Check documents - every 5 minutes
Check images - every 5 hours (I changed this to 5 minutes)

Can you tell whether changing that setting made difference? 

Up to now, my references to Opera were based on my Windows 7 system.  I just installed Opera 11.52 on my Windows XP system and viewed that auction page and saw no discrepancies.  Default settings appear to be:
Check documents - every 5 minutes
Check images - every 5 hours

I still have those settings in my Win 7 computer.  So, the mystery continues.  If I discover possible clues after further observation, I'll reply here again.  Thanks for your input.