sf wrote:
>
> On Sat, 10 Jan 2009 16:46:48 -0700, Arri London >
> wrote:
>
> >Dialup at 26.4, included in the monthly phone bill.
>
> Spring for a 56K modem and you won't look back. Combined with tabbed
> browsing, the only time you won't know you're on broadband is when
> you're downloading something and how often is that?
>


The modem *is* 56 K. It's the phone service that is 26.4. Can't change
that without paying much more. I'm not bothered by it although some of
my friends are LOL. I've been teaching them not to send me large, hi-res
images...

On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:20:32 -0700, Arri London >
wrote:

>The modem *is* 56 K. It's the phone service that is 26.4. Can't change
>that without paying much more. I'm not bothered by it although some of
>my friends are LOL. I've been teaching them not to send me large, hi-res
>images...

so they post them somewhere like picasa or tiny pic for you?


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

In article >,
sf > wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:20:32 -0700, Arri London >
> wrote:
>
> >The modem *is* 56 K. It's the phone service that is 26.4. Can't change
> >that without paying much more. I'm not bothered by it although some of
> >my friends are LOL. I've been teaching them not to send me large, hi-res
> >images...
>
> so they post them somewhere like picasa or tiny pic for you?

In order to see a picture (or anything else) on your computer, you have
to download it. It doesn't matter whether it's an Email attachment or a
web page, it has to be downloaded over the connection. Of course,
people could be trained to dump it on a CD and send it by mail, but that
turns out to be slow also. :-)

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
>
>>On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:20:32 -0700, Arri London >
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>The modem *is* 56 K. It's the phone service that is 26.4. Can't change
>>>that without paying much more. I'm not bothered by it although some of
>>>my friends are LOL. I've been teaching them not to send me large, hi-res
>>>images...
>>
>>so they post them somewhere like picasa or tiny pic for you?
>
>
> In order to see a picture (or anything else) on your computer, you have
> to download it. It doesn't matter whether it's an Email attachment or a
> web page, it has to be downloaded over the connection.

Well, yeah. But Tinypic.com does automatically reduce the file size
which reduces download time.

Of course,
> people could be trained to dump it on a CD and send it by mail, but that
> turns out to be slow also. :-)
>

You're talking LOTS of liver treats...

NO! No bitmaps! Jpeg! Jpeg! Oh, good boy! Good boy for Jpeg!

Wait... Wait... Save for... Save for what? Hmm? Save for web?! Yay!

And what are we doing.... We're what? We're... Reducing the file
size! Woohooo! Who gets a cookie?!

And where do we save it to? It's the drawer with the special silver
frisbee in it... No, NO don't throw the frisbee. What's it called?
CD... what? Yes! CD-RW drive D:!!!! Jackpot! Oh yum yum, treats and
treats and treats.

Kathleen wrote:
>
> Dan Abel wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > sf > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:20:32 -0700, Arri London >
> >>wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>The modem *is* 56 K. It's the phone service that is 26.4. Can't change
> >>>that without paying much more. I'm not bothered by it although some of
> >>>my friends are LOL. I've been teaching them not to send me large, hi-res
> >>>images...
> >>
> >>so they post them somewhere like picasa or tiny pic for you?
> >
> >
> > In order to see a picture (or anything else) on your computer, you have
> > to download it. It doesn't matter whether it's an Email attachment or a
> > web page, it has to be downloaded over the connection.

That is true of course.

> Well, yeah. But Tinypic.com does automatically reduce the file size
> which reduces download time.

It does indeed.

>
> Of course,
> > people could be trained to dump it on a CD and send it by mail, but that
> > turns out to be slow also. :-)


Amazing how many of my email acquaintances haven't managed to do that
correctly either.
> >
>
> You're talking LOTS of liver treats...
>
> NO! No bitmaps! Jpeg! Jpeg! Oh, good boy! Good boy for Jpeg!


LOL there ya go! I'd make a terrible trainer though My language to
said friends hasn't always been so encouraging.

>
> Wait... Wait... Save for... Save for what? Hmm? Save for web?! Yay!

ROTFL.

>
> And what are we doing.... We're what? We're... Reducing the file
> size! Woohooo! Who gets a cookie?!

Spot on!

>
> And where do we save it to? It's the drawer with the special silver
> frisbee in it...


Did you mean the 'cup holder'? Hey is *that* what it's really for
hehehe.

No, NO don't throw the frisbee. What's it called?
> CD... what? Yes! CD-RW drive D:!!!! Jackpot! Oh yum yum, treats and
> treats and treats.


You need to write a book about this, you know.

Arri London wrote:
>
> Kathleen wrote:
>
>>Dan Abel wrote:
>>
>>
>>>In article >,
>>> sf > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:20:32 -0700, Arri London >
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>The modem *is* 56 K. It's the phone service that is 26.4. Can't change
>>>>>that without paying much more. I'm not bothered by it although some of
>>>>>my friends are LOL. I've been teaching them not to send me large, hi-res
>>>>>images...
>>>>
>>>>so they post them somewhere like picasa or tiny pic for you?
>>>
>>>
>>>In order to see a picture (or anything else) on your computer, you have
>>>to download it. It doesn't matter whether it's an Email attachment or a
>>>web page, it has to be downloaded over the connection.
>
>
> That is true of course.
>
>
>>Well, yeah. But Tinypic.com does automatically reduce the file size
>>which reduces download time.
>
>
> It does indeed.
>
>
>> Of course,
>>
>>>people could be trained to dump it on a CD and send it by mail, but that
>>>turns out to be slow also. :-)
>
>
>
> Amazing how many of my email acquaintances haven't managed to do that
> correctly either.
>
>>You're talking LOTS of liver treats...
>>
>>NO! No bitmaps! Jpeg! Jpeg! Oh, good boy! Good boy for Jpeg!
>
>
>
> LOL there ya go! I'd make a terrible trainer though My language to
> said friends hasn't always been so encouraging.
>
>
>>Wait... Wait... Save for... Save for what? Hmm? Save for web?! Yay!
>
>
> ROTFL.
>
>
>>And what are we doing.... We're what? We're... Reducing the file
>>size! Woohooo! Who gets a cookie?!
>
>
> Spot on!
>
>
>>And where do we save it to? It's the drawer with the special silver
>>frisbee in it...
>
>
>
> Did you mean the 'cup holder'? Hey is *that* what it's really for
> hehehe.
>
> No, NO don't throw the frisbee. What's it called?
>
>>CD... what? Yes! CD-RW drive D:!!!! Jackpot! Oh yum yum, treats and
>>treats and treats.
>
> You need to write a book about this, you know.

So I've been told.

"Kathleen" > wrote in message
...
> Arri London wrote:
>>
>> Kathleen wrote:
>>
>>>Dan Abel wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>In article >,
>>>> sf > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:20:32 -0700, Arri London >
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>The modem *is* 56 K. It's the phone service that is 26.4. Can't change
>>>>>>that without paying much more. I'm not bothered by it although some of
>>>>>>my friends are LOL. I've been teaching them not to send me large,
>>>>>>hi-res
>>>>>>images...
>>>>>
>>>>>so they post them somewhere like picasa or tiny pic for you?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>In order to see a picture (or anything else) on your computer, you have
>>>>to download it. It doesn't matter whether it's an Email attachment or a
>>>>web page, it has to be downloaded over the connection.
>>
>>
>> That is true of course.
>>
>>
>>>Well, yeah. But Tinypic.com does automatically reduce the file size
>>>which reduces download time.
>>
>>
>> It does indeed.
>>
>>
>>> Of course,
>>>
>>>>people could be trained to dump it on a CD and send it by mail, but that
>>>>turns out to be slow also. :-)
>>
>>
>>
>> Amazing how many of my email acquaintances haven't managed to do that
>> correctly either.
>>
>>>You're talking LOTS of liver treats...
>>>
>>>NO! No bitmaps! Jpeg! Jpeg! Oh, good boy! Good boy for Jpeg!
>>
>>
>>
>> LOL there ya go! I'd make a terrible trainer though My language to
>> said friends hasn't always been so encouraging.
>>
>>
>>>Wait... Wait... Save for... Save for what? Hmm? Save for web?! Yay!
>>
>>
>> ROTFL.
>>
>>
>>>And what are we doing.... We're what? We're... Reducing the file
>>>size! Woohooo! Who gets a cookie?!
>>
>>
>> Spot on!
>>
>>
>>>And where do we save it to? It's the drawer with the special silver
>>>frisbee in it...
>>
>>
>>
>> Did you mean the 'cup holder'? Hey is *that* what it's really for hehehe.
>>
>> No, NO don't throw the frisbee. What's it called?
>>
>>>CD... what? Yes! CD-RW drive D:!!!! Jackpot! Oh yum yum, treats and
>>>treats and treats.
>>
>> You need to write a book about this, you know.
>
> Sew I've been told.

Sewing is as creative as writing?

Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> sf > wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:20:32 -0700, Arri London >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >The modem *is* 56 K. It's the phone service that is 26.4. Can't change
>> >that without paying much more. I'm not bothered by it although some of
>> >my friends are LOL. I've been teaching them not to send me large,
>> >hi-res images...
>>
>> so they post them somewhere like picasa or tiny pic for you?
>
> In order to see a picture (or anything else) on your computer, you have to
> download it. It doesn't matter whether it's an Email attachment or a web
> page, it has to be downloaded over the connection. Of course, people

There actually is a difference. If I get a link in email, I can follow it
at my leisure, tying up my dialup bandwidth when it's not needed for
something with higher priority to me. If I get a large attachment in
email, that ties up my dialup bandwidth then, even if I'm trying to do
Usenet or am trying to do research with my browser.


--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups -
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org

"Blinky the Shark" > wrote in message
news
> Killing all posts from Google Groups -

At least Google delivers most posts.

I'll be amazed if this shows up....

--
http://www.gillsmith999.plus.com/

Gill Smith wrote:

> "Blinky the Shark" > wrote in message
> news >
>> Killing all posts from Google Groups -
>
> At least Google delivers most posts.
>
> I'll be amazed if this shows up....

Yeah, OE does suck. Good thing there are plenty of better clients
available.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups -
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org

"Blinky the Shark" > wrote in message
news
> Gill Smith wrote:
>
>> "Blinky the Shark" > wrote in message
>> news >>
>>> Killing all posts from Google Groups -
>>
>> At least Google delivers most posts.
>>
>> I'll be amazed if this shows up....
>
> Yeah, OE does suck. Good thing there are plenty of better clients
> available.
>
> --
> Blinky
> Killing all posts from Google Groups -
> The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org
>

i've used a lot of readers starting with news xpress back when kenng was
still around.
windows live does pretty much everything i want a newsreader to do and
man...it's pretty.lol.

--
C.D

In article .net>,
lid says...
> Gill Smith wrote:
>
> > "Blinky the Shark" > wrote in message
> > news > >
> >> Killing all posts from Google Groups -
> >
> > At least Google delivers most posts.
> >
> > I'll be amazed if this shows up....
>
> Yeah, OE does suck. Good thing there are plenty of better clients
> available.
>
>

Undoubtedly. I've been using Microplanet Gravity for years. Microplanet
dropped development on it but one of the key developers maintains it to
some degree.

I'm using version 2.6 right now.

In article .net>,
Blinky the Shark > wrote:

> Dan Abel wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > sf > wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:20:32 -0700, Arri London >
> >> wrote:

> >> >my friends are LOL. I've been teaching them not to send me large,
> >> >hi-res images...
> >>
> >> so they post them somewhere like picasa or tiny pic for you?
> >
> > In order to see a picture (or anything else) on your computer, you have to
> > download it. It doesn't matter whether it's an Email attachment or a web
> > page, it has to be downloaded over the connection. Of course, people
>
> There actually is a difference. If I get a link in email, I can follow it
> at my leisure, tying up my dialup bandwidth when it's not needed for
> something with higher priority to me. If I get a large attachment in
> email, that ties up my dialup bandwidth then, even if I'm trying to do
> Usenet or am trying to do research with my browser.

You're right. Thanks for mentioning that.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

Dan Abel wrote:
>
> In article .net>,
> Blinky the Shark > wrote:
>
> > Dan Abel wrote:
> >
> > > In article >,
> > > sf > wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:20:32 -0700, Arri London >
> > >> wrote:
>
> > >> >my friends are LOL. I've been teaching them not to send me large,
> > >> >hi-res images...
> > >>
> > >> so they post them somewhere like picasa or tiny pic for you?
> > >
> > > In order to see a picture (or anything else) on your computer, you have to
> > > download it. It doesn't matter whether it's an Email attachment or a web
> > > page, it has to be downloaded over the connection. Of course, people
> >
> > There actually is a difference. If I get a link in email, I can follow it
> > at my leisure, tying up my dialup bandwidth when it's not needed for
> > something with higher priority to me. If I get a large attachment in
> > email, that ties up my dialup bandwidth then, even if I'm trying to do
> > Usenet or am trying to do research with my browser.
>
> You're right. Thanks for mentioning that.
>
>

Precisely. Links good; huge attachments bad!

Dan Abel wrote:

> In article .net>,
> Blinky the Shark > wrote:
>
>> Dan Abel wrote:
>>
>> > In article >,
>> > sf > wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:20:32 -0700, Arri London >
>> >> wrote:
>
>> >> >my friends are LOL. I've been teaching them not to send me large,
>> >> >hi-res images...
>> >>
>> >> so they post them somewhere like picasa or tiny pic for you?
>> >
>> > In order to see a picture (or anything else) on your computer, you
>> > have to download it. It doesn't matter whether it's an Email
>> > attachment or a web page, it has to be downloaded over the connection.
>> > Of course, people
>>
>> There actually is a difference. If I get a link in email, I can follow
>> it at my leisure, tying up my dialup bandwidth when it's not needed for
>> something with higher priority to me. If I get a large attachment in
>> email, that ties up my dialup bandwidth then, even if I'm trying to do
>> Usenet or am trying to do research with my browser.
>
> You're right. Thanks for mentioning that.

I exist but to serve.

--
Blinky
Killing all posts from Google Groups -
The Usenet Improvement Project: http://improve-usenet.org

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 18:24:06 -0800, Blinky the Shark wrote:

> Dan Abel wrote:
>
>> In article .net>,
>> Blinky the Shark > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> There actually is a difference. If I get a link in email, I can follow
>>> it at my leisure, tying up my dialup bandwidth when it's not needed for
>>> something with higher priority to me. If I get a large attachment in
>>> email, that ties up my dialup bandwidth then, even if I'm trying to do
>>> Usenet or am trying to do research with my browser.
>>
>> You're right. Thanks for mentioning that.
>
> I exist but to serve.

i thought eating surfers figured in there somewhere?

your pal,
blake

sf wrote:
>
> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:20:32 -0700, Arri London >
> wrote:
>
> >The modem *is* 56 K. It's the phone service that is 26.4. Can't change
> >that without paying much more. I'm not bothered by it although some of
> >my friends are LOL. I've been teaching them not to send me large, hi-res
> >images...
>
> so they post them somewhere like picasa or tiny pic for you?
>


Some of the smarter ones do Got the others *nearly* trained to cut
down the size and the resolution. What is the point in sending a pic
that is over 200 dpi anyway? Then there are the ones who insist on
sending me things done (usually without any noticeable skill) in Power
Point LOL.

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:48:01 -0700, Arri London >
wrote:

>
>
>sf wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:20:32 -0700, Arri London >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >The modem *is* 56 K. It's the phone service that is 26.4. Can't change
>> >that without paying much more. I'm not bothered by it although some of
>> >my friends are LOL. I've been teaching them not to send me large, hi-res
>> >images...
>>
>> so they post them somewhere like picasa or tiny pic for you?
>>
>
>
>Some of the smarter ones do Got the others *nearly* trained to cut
>down the size and the resolution. What is the point in sending a pic
>that is over 200 dpi anyway? Then there are the ones who insist on
>sending me things done (usually without any noticeable skill) in Power
>Point LOL.

Ouch! :/ I have a friend (who lives in Spain now) that I can't send
images or anything of any size, so I get it. Those of us on broadband
get so used to sending to others on broadband, we forget how limited
dial up can be. Back in the day, I was sooo glad when I could finally
get to my email via the internet because some files would go on
literally forever downloading over the phone line.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

In article >, Arri London >
wrote:



> sending me things done (usually without any noticeable skill) in Power
> Point LOL.

Aha! Power Point is the magic phrase in our house. It is a synonym for
"totally worthless". My wife will go to a concert or art show, and come
back, and I'll ask her about it, and she'll say, "It was really bad.
I'd rather watch a Power Point.". Both she and I have attended PP
presentations, where somebody paid transportation, hotel and food costs,
only to watch PP garbage. Now, other times I've seen PP presentations
given by people who actually know something, and the PP is just a prop
to help. But sometimes, it's obvious that the presenter looked at this
PP the day before, and it represents everything they know about the
subject. Of course, the presentation consists solely of reading the
slides. Well, I learned to read 50 years ago, and I *don't* want
somebody reading to me!

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 19:01:58 -0800, Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >, Arri London >
> wrote:
>
>> sending me things done (usually without any noticeable skill) in Power
>> Point LOL.
>
> Aha! Power Point is the magic phrase in our house. It is a synonym for
> "totally worthless". My wife will go to a concert or art show, and come
> back, and I'll ask her about it, and she'll say, "It was really bad.
> I'd rather watch a Power Point.". Both she and I have attended PP
> presentations, where somebody paid transportation, hotel and food costs,
> only to watch PP garbage. Now, other times I've seen PP presentations
> given by people who actually know something, and the PP is just a prop
> to help. But sometimes, it's obvious that the presenter looked at this
> PP the day before, and it represents everything they know about the
> subject. Of course, the presentation consists solely of reading the
> slides. Well, I learned to read 50 years ago, and I *don't* want
> somebody reading to me!

maybe you've seen the gettyburg address power point slides:

<http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~russell/gettysburg/>

or the power point review of litertu

<http://www.radosh.net/writing/ppaol.html>

your pal,
blake

Dan Abel wrote:
>
> In article >, Arri London >
> wrote:
>
> > sending me things done (usually without any noticeable skill) in Power
> > Point LOL.
>
> Aha! Power Point is the magic phrase in our house. It is a synonym for
> "totally worthless". My wife will go to a concert or art show, and come
> back, and I'll ask her about it, and she'll say, "It was really bad.
> I'd rather watch a Power Point.". Both she and I have attended PP
> presentations, where somebody paid transportation, hotel and food costs,
> only to watch PP garbage. Now, other times I've seen PP presentations
> given by people who actually know something, and the PP is just a prop
> to help. But sometimes, it's obvious that the presenter looked at this
> PP the day before, and it represents everything they know about the
> subject. Of course, the presentation consists solely of reading the
> slides. Well, I learned to read 50 years ago, and I *don't* want
> somebody reading to me!
>
>


Agreed many times over. Have sat through PP 'presentations' considered
slick just because they were put up on a screen via the inevitable
laptop. Making it high tech doesn't make it *better*.

Nearly got a job at a medical advertising firm just because I came up
with a decent set of slides *without* using PP. Despite calling
themselves 'cutting edge', was expected to move to the middle of nowhere
without relocation expenses or a company car (no public transport).
Couldn't afford to take the job.