Global warming?

Page 3 of 5  
Doug Kanter Wrote:

Enjoy your newsreader
-- golddog
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

We have one each. Of course we enjoy them, thankyou; you're the one having a problem reading usent without a newsreader.
Janet
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
golddog wrote: [...]

That's why Usenet early on developed the convention of bottom posting, and of showing the snips. Too many people here top-post, too many people here snip carelessly, etc. Conventions are arbitrary, but that doesn't make them pointless. Spalng's a knvnshn, tuu. (And the only reason you can decipher that is that I'm using a few of the E. spelling conventions.
HTH
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
the first people on usenet were scientists and email was linear, not packaged like it is now, further messages were THREADED like it is now so we KNOW what the topic of the message is as we scroll thru. I know cause I was there at the start. we didnt all have puters at home and it would sometimes take days before we got an answer to an email so it was pretty easy to forget what the person was talking about. everyone is using readers that THREAD messages, that is line up the posts with the OP first and then replies as they come in, right?
the problem of bottom posting is the nesting sequence....................
last person to post name at top

last persons message
.... a lot of the time the nesting is all screwed up with posting in between the nests and often there is confusion about who said what along with this is the fact that 1. people rarely snip ANYTHING so the previous messages go on well out of sight and 2. last persons comment is usually of the "me too" variety .... all this makes me delete the entire post
contrast that with the utter simplicity and cleanness of top posting:
last person to post name at top last persons message

now if, for some reason, the reader DOESNT know what the topic is they can scroll down to the next person they are responding to. OR, they can erase the next person and respond to the first person.
so instead of:

It is much more logical if it is:

Ingrid
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ List Manager: Puregold Goldfish List at http://weloveteaching.com/puregold / sign up: http://groups.google.com/groups/dir?hl=en&q=puregold&qt_s=Group+lookup www.drsolo.com Solve the problem, dont waste energy finding who's to blame ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I receive no money, gifts, discounts or other compensation for all the damn work I do, nor for any of the recommendations I make. AND I DID NOT AUTHORIZE ADS AT THE OLD PUREGOLD SITE
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@wi.rr.xx.com wrote:

[snip]
The problem is the mix of top and bottom posting, the inconsistent and/or careless snipping, etc.
NB that I snipped the rest of your post, which consisted of previous posts that are more or less irrelevant to my answer to your comment.
There are newsreaders that will display threads in a tree when to display threads. I don't know about Outlook, since I've never used it.
HTH
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Outlook does not do newsgroups.
--


Travis in Shoreline Washington


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Oh Really? Then what I'm reading is a figment of my imagination????!! Or is it you, Travis, who is a figment? Murri
wrote:

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
4 Feb 2006 16:45:20 -0500:

Murri, Outlook doesn't do newsgroups, Outlook Express does and is a different programme.
ie: "X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.2180"
--
Regards Erik Vastmasd


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Who the hell still uses the old version???!! Or are you trying to gently inform me that Travis is running an ancient copy of Windows, pre outlook express? If so, that's sad. Murri

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Vamoose troll.
--

Travis in Shoreline (just North of Seattle) Washington
USDA Zone 8
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Erik Vastmasd wrote:

Ok, OK, I'm sorry, I use Internet Explorer _only_ for updating Windows, and I use no other Microsoft program, ever, so I've long forgotten what they are, so it's my mistake, so get a life already. Please!
HTH
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

You are using Outlook Express 6 not Outlook.
--


Travis in Shoreline Washington


Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

If you are reading newsgroups then you must be using Outlook Express, different from Outlook.

And for my own part I also prefer bottom posting, especially when the original or reply is snipped properly so that it makes sense. Top posting is kind of like answering a question before it is asked.
Example: Yes.
Is the sky blue?
Makes more sense if it rerads:

Yes.
Mr. Bill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

You're using Outlook Express, not Outlook.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Doug Kanter wrote:

OK, OK, I'm sorry I triggered this fight.
I don't use any MS program if I can help it, have never, ever used Outlook or Outlook Express, and never will, in fact have removed as much of Outlook/Outlook Express as I could, have removed all other MS programs except Internet Explorer, since Microdaft insists on ActiveX for updating, so I can't use Mozilla, so I didn't know that "Outlook" isn't just a short form of "Outlook Express", which is what I thunk, but refer to different programs, etc etc etc.
So kwitcherfitin, already!
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I understand not using some MS stuff, but considering how cheap hard disk space is these days, why do you waste time removing things? Just don't use them.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Doug Kanter wrote:

Older machine, smaller HD, two OSs. Made the mistake of installing W2K on a 2GB partition, which was touted as "minimum required." Shoulda known better. Need W2K mostly for an estimating program my wife uses, and use it for web access because Bell Sympatico doesn't play well with OS/2. Bah! The "good" desktop runs on OS/2, and I've experimented with Linux on it.
Currently debating whether to go to another notebook (for my wife -- I have a Mac G4), or another desktop. I like desktops - I can tinker with them easily. And there are some really good buys out there, of "old" mobos that were cutting edge a mere 18 months ago.... H'm. OTOH, a laptop would suit my wife just fine, she could take it to the office, etc.
Difficult....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

How old is "old"? It's amazing what more RAM can do for a computer. In fact, it's the best way to spend upgrade money, followed by a larger hard disk, and then a better video card (which is counterintuitive, but it really does help, because of all the graphics on the web).
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Doug Kanter wrote:

In its 5th year. And yes, I've considered doubling the RAM to 512MB, the max for this mobo, and installing a new video card and adding a larger HD. But when TigerDirect offers a bare-bones bundle (tower w/ 350W PS, year-old mobo with an Athlon 2MHz CPU, 512MB RAM, AGP video and 7.1 capable sound on board) for under $400Can, spending $100 to $200 for 3 pieces of hardware looks a little unwise.
Hence my difficulty. Do I assemble a new PC for about $500 total of new parts, or buy a middling quality laptop for about $1000 (keeping in mind that todays' middling quality was cutting edge a year ro so ago.)
HTH
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It's hard to say, really. It seems like every 6 months or so, the web takes on new functionality which requires more resources. Listen to online radio on a machine that's struggling to keep up, and you get jittery music. The best approach over the years has always been to buy the best you can afford, because it'll be outdated sooner if you don't. Or, beef up what you've already got, if it'll satisfy the need. I did this last year with a pentium 3 (more memory, better video), and it helped quite a bit with basic office work (huge spreadsheets, faxing from the computer) and web radio, which I often do simultaneously. But, it's still not enough for a new pastime, recording live music. So....onward. Roof on the house, or new computer? Hmmm...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.