Missing Web Page Graphics

[Dave Davis]

On some websites all graphic images are missing from the
pages. They are replaced with the red X placeholder. The
text and clickable links are still there, just no
graphics. For example I go to www.msn.com and the page
displays fine. I go to www.ibm.com and all of the graphics
are missing. System is IE 6 SP1, Windows 98 SE. All latest
updates installed. To correct the problem I have:
1. Deleted all cookies and temp internet files.
2. Rolled back latest IE update.
3. Set Internet and local intranet to lowest default
security.
4. Run repair on IE6 install.
My next plan is to back up to IE5 and start over but I
would rather not. Anybody seen this, or know of a fix?

Thanks
Dave

 

[Frank Saunders, MS-MVP]

On some websites all graphic images are missing from the
pages. They are replaced with the red X placeholder. The
text and clickable links are still there, just no
graphics. For example I go to www.msn.com and the page
displays fine. I go to www.ibm.com and all of the graphics
are missing. System is IE 6 SP1, Windows 98 SE. All latest
updates installed. To correct the problem I have:
1. Deleted all cookies and temp internet files.
2. Rolled back latest IE update.
3. Set Internet and local intranet to lowest default
security.
4. Run repair on IE6 install.
My next plan is to back up to IE5 and start over but I
would rather not. Anybody seen this, or know of a fix?

Thanks
Dave

If you are running any popup stopper try turning it off.

 

[Charlie Tame]

Frank, I had a quick look at those sites but was stuck for an answer,
however almost all images on MSN are .jpg while those on IBM are all .gif.
Figured since I didn't have a clue or much time to play I'd leave it in case
it's a well known one.

Charlie

 

[Frank Saunders, MS-MVP]

On some websites all graphic images are missing from the
pages. They are replaced with the red X placeholder. The
text and clickable links are still there, just no
graphics. For example I go to www.msn.com and the page
displays fine. I go to www.ibm.com and all of the graphics
are missing. System is IE 6 SP1, Windows 98 SE. All latest
updates installed. To correct the problem I have:
1. Deleted all cookies and temp internet files.
2. Rolled back latest IE update.
3. Set Internet and local intranet to lowest default
security.
4. Run repair on IE6 install.
My next plan is to back up to IE5 and start over but I
would rather not. Anybody seen this, or know of a fix?

Thanks
Dave

See
http://www.oehelp.com/noimg.aspx
and
http://insideoe.tomsterdam.com/problems/bugs.htm#nopreview

 

[Frank Saunders, MS-MVP]

On some websites all graphic images are missing from the
pages. They are replaced with the red X placeholder. The
text and clickable links are still there, just no
graphics. For example I go to www.msn.com and the page
displays fine. I go to www.ibm.com and all of the graphics
are missing. System is IE 6 SP1, Windows 98 SE. All latest
updates installed. To correct the problem I have:
1. Deleted all cookies and temp internet files.
2. Rolled back latest IE update.
3. Set Internet and local intranet to lowest default
security.
4. Run repair on IE6 install.
My next plan is to back up to IE5 and start over but I
would rather not. Anybody seen this, or know of a fix?

Thanks
Dave

Ok, I looked at the source and I don't think they are called by scripts.
(I'm really not that good at HTML yet.) So I don't think my first
suggestion will help. I made another one.

 

[Bob]

I am also experiencing this problem with IE 6.0 and
Win98SE. Tech Support document 822071 says this is
a "known problem with IE6.0", whatever that means. There
is no fix provided on that document page. Very
frustrating. MS appears to blame it on the web page
designer by saying that the problem occurs because the
image uses 4097 or 4098 bytes, thereby causing the
problem. Sounds stupid to me. Why can't MS just fix the
problem?

 

[H Leboeuf]

Tried everything, then rule out parasites.
Dealing with Unwanted Spyware, Parasites, Toolbars and Search Engines
http://mvps.org/winhelp2002/unwanted.htm

 

[Robert Aldwinckle]

Why can't MS just fix the problem?

Please don't confuse symptoms with problems.
There is a common symptom: Red-X.
Red-X is a signal to the user that some kind of problem
occurred when trying to render an image URL.
There are many problems associated with that signal.
Some are valid and some appear to be invalid or avoidable.

Your problem
<TITLE>822071 - Cannot View Some PNG Images</TITLE>
must have nothing to do with the whatever the problem is that
OP Dave has because we see no .png images at the site that
he is complaining about.

Unfortunately I can't see any other problem with his site.

Without any better diagnostics to differentiate the symptoms
we are left with analysing each occurrence on a case by case
basis. That's what I wish MS would do about this issue--give us
better diagnostics and tools so we could really document a "problem".


HTH

Robert Aldwinckle

 

[Charlie Tame]

Unfortunately I can't see any other problem with his site.

Without any better diagnostics to differentiate the symptoms
we are left with analysing each occurrence on a case by case
basis. That's what I wish MS would do about this issue--give us
better diagnostics and tools so we could really document a "problem".

That's what made me look at the images and file extensions, I wonder if his
problem is to do with whatever is rendering the images. Could it be
something like the weird Dell Inspiron GFX settings for instance - the one
that causes fuzzy images or whatever?

Charlie

 

[Robert Aldwinckle]

Could it be something like the weird Dell Inspiron GFX settings
for instance - the one that causes fuzzy images or whatever?

Maybe but I doubt it. Consider what that seems to imply:
that there are conditions during the rendering process by the video drivers
when they sometimes give up and give a Red-X and sometimes give
a "fuzzy image"? Why not just a fuzzier image?
However, this would be a good reason to do my usual suggested
tests of offline rendering. If the images are cached but rendering
as a Red-X even offline that would be yet another different cause
of the symptom. Of course then you would have to start wondering
about things like random file corruption in the TIF and somehow
monitoring that possibility... <sigh>

All along I have been guessing that my instances of "invalid" Red-X
had some kind of "network timing" component. Previously I had been
pointing people at a post by Kent W. England where he documented
some timing parameters for DNS and TCP but he discounted this
idea when I asked him about it and when I looked at the coarseness
of the values involved (granularity of seconds) I started doubting that
as a solution too. Nevertheless, I think that if we could get some
transparent diagnostics which would show timings (in milliseconds)
we'd see proof that some Red-X just represent requests that have
timed out in some manner. Being able to control that timeout could
go a long way to reducing the number of "invalid" Red-X.

<
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=...2016b42a&seekm=ulaO$m0$BHA.1208@tkmsftngp02#s >


Robert

 

[Charlie Tame]

Maybe but I doubt it. Consider what that seems to imply:
that there are conditions during the rendering process by the video drivers
when they sometimes give up and give a Red-X and sometimes give
a "fuzzy image"? Why not just a fuzzier image?
However, this would be a good reason to do my usual suggested
tests of offline rendering. If the images are cached but rendering
as a Red-X even offline that would be yet another different cause
of the symptom. Of course then you would have to start wondering
about things like random file corruption in the TIF and somehow
monitoring that possibility... <sigh>

Something I've wondered about, interesting points above by the way.

We know that some cross-site problems arose one time and there's also a
"Data sources across domains" setting and I've kinda noticed that since
these fixes (not just these but around that time you understand) some
oddities occasionally show up here.

So I conclude that IE can tell the difference between domains / ip addresses
whatever but what about in the case of a big site where load balancing is
involved etc? Might some flaw or bug cause IE to recognise that the page is
on remote machine "a" while the pics are on remote machine "b", or could it
simply be a time to fetch factor?

I always took it for granted that on my little web site everything lands up
together on the same drive etc, but actually the hosting company is no small
amateur operationso it's quite possible that it involves different machines
in this way. That would explain why it only happens sometimes.

I can't really see it but then random behaviors are always a pain to find.

Charlie

 

[Robert Aldwinckle]

what about in the case of a big site where load balancing is involved etc?

Here's a previous post about that (specifically point 6).
It also contains a fairly complete summary of my suggestions
for diagnosing Red-X problems.

< http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=O1Xsed#nCHA.2440@TK2MSFTNGP11 >

(Google Groups search for
"red-x" privacy author:aldwinckle group:microsoft.*.ie6.browser
)

 

[Charlie Tame]

Here's a previous post about that (specifically point 6).
It also contains a fairly complete summary of my suggestions
for diagnosing Red-X problems.

<

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&selm=O1Xsed#nCHA.2440@TK2MSFTNGP11 >

Thanks Robert, glad you shipped in with your comments now. It's sometimes
quite hard to see what's going on when things are hard to duplicate.

Charlie