html compliant news group reader
Todd Hillson
group that cannot handle html in post? Others, please include and
freeware/shareware that is html compliant that you are using.
Personally, I use Netscape 4.0, no problems reading post containing
html.
Todd Hillson
>
> In article <Jdst2.2122$Fs.21...@news4.mia>,
> Stephen Dyer <sdy...@ihatespam.bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >No problems here. Using IE 4.01. Can't see why anyone wouldn't upgrade their
> >browser/mail program to a newer version (most are free) unless their
> >computers are just too dated.
>
> With all due respect, I have another perspective. I access the
> newsgroups via a unix shell account, and use the program trn to read
> them. There is nothing dated about either the shell hosts or my personal
> computer.
Ok, thats one and one.
>
> "If Microsoft were to sell a product 'Microsoft Pick My Nose and Scratch
> My *ss' this person might buy it. If there were a new version on the
> horizon, 'Microsoft Pick My Nose and Scratch My Ass 2000' this person
> would probably be anxiously awaiting it, with some vague and
> foundationless fear that if they don't they will be rendered incapable of
> wiping their own noses and scratching their own *ss as a result of some
> Y2K problem."
>
> <Rant off.>
>
> Craig
They promised the Y2K bug will be fixed in MPMNaSMA 2001. ROLFLMAO
Stephen Dyer
Craig Bingman
Stephen Dyer <sdy...@ihatespam.bellsouth.net> wrote:
With all due respect, I have another perspective. I access the
newsgroups via a unix shell account, and use the program trn to read
them. There is nothing dated about either the shell hosts or my personal
computer.
There are good places for html markup, like on web pages. It is great
there, I love it. There are places where html markup is distracting and
an utter waste of bandwidth, like on this newsgroup.
Whenever I see a post to this newsgroup full of html markup, I'll either
skip it or wade through it, depending on my mood at the time and the
relative level of interest that I have in the subject matter. The same
applies to e-mail. At no point does a little bell go off in my head
indicating that I should upgrade my newsreader.
Oh, another thought occurs to me. "Someone apparently either just got a
new computer and either doesn't know how to use it properly, or does not
care to comply with the conventions of this newsgroup."
If I thought about it further, this would be my next thought: "Oh, this
person probably buys a lot of microsoft products and installs all the new
upgrades that they sell almost immediately. They do so in response to
some vague, foundationless and yet apparently compelling suggestion that
this new Microsoft product will make their life easier in some sense. The
actual outcome is more likely that they will be frustrated unnecessarily
for some time."
Ted Kunich
Craig Bingman wrote:
> "If Microsoft were to sell a product 'Microsoft Pick My Nose and Scratch
> My *ss' this person might buy it. If there were a new version on the
> horizon, 'Microsoft Pick My Nose and Scratch My Ass 2000' this person
> would probably be anxiously awaiting it, with some vague and
> foundationless fear that if they don't they will be rendered incapable of
> wiping their own noses and scratching their own *ss as a result of some
> Y2K problem."
>
> <Rant off.>
>
> Craig
Go Craig Go!!!!!
F@#$%@'n Macroshit and their crappy products....
TK
J. Lower
<sdy...@ihatespam.bellsouth.net> wrote:
> No problems here. Using IE 4.01. Can't see why anyone wouldn't upgrade their
> browser/mail program to a newer version (most are free) unless their
> computers are just too dated.
I can't understand why anyone would use the brain-dead newsreaders (or
email clients) built into IE and Netscape. As for html, I will continue
to poke pins into little voodoo dolls representing html posters.
--
| ***** Coming Soon - The iMacquarium! ***** |
| Jim Lower | See my Computer->Aquarium conversions at |
| jlo...@home.com | http://members.home.com/jlower/ |
Stephen Dyer
>email clients) built into IE and Netscape. As for html, I will continue
>to poke pins into little voodoo dolls representing html posters.
Why? I'm open minded. Give me a good reason NOT to use the brain-dead
newsreader built into OutlookExpress? I have No problem following the
unwritten rules of this group regarding html.
Stephen Dyer
>newsgroups via a unix shell account, and use the program trn to read
>them. There is nothing dated about either the shell hosts or my personal
>computer.
I've never used trn, so I was unaware of its inability to read html.
>
>There are good places for html markup, like on web pages. It is great
>there, I love it. There are places where html markup is distracting and
>an utter waste of bandwidth, like on this newsgroup.
Agreed, but the original question I was responding to was : "What software
are people using in this group that cannot handle html in post?" The
question did not ask whether it is appropriate to use it or not.
>Whenever I see a post to this newsgroup full of html markup, I'll either
>skip it or wade through it, depending on my mood at the time and the
>relative level of interest that I have in the subject matter. The same
>applies to e-mail. At no point does a little bell go off in my head
>indicating that I should upgrade my newsreader.
To each his own.
>"If Microsoft were to sell a product 'Microsoft Pick My Nose and Scratch
>My *ss' this person might buy it.
Hey, I would. That's just 2 less things I have to worry about. I would
prefer it if this program were written by another software company though. I
would hate for it to crash in the middle of picking a nice large booger.
Craig, it is OK to be afraid of technology. It's OK to hate Microsoft.
I hate Microsoft too, but I'm willing to accept that Bill Gates & his empire
are a part of my life and probably will be for quite some time. You can
either be disgruntled or just deal with it and move on. No hard feelings.
Stephen
><Rant off.>
Larry
bandwidth in Newsgroups. Agent is by far the best newsgroup/email
reader out there (IMHO). Put HTML in its place - on a Web page.
Craig wrote:
>
>"If Microsoft were to sell a product 'Microsoft Pick My Nose and Scratch
>My *ss' this person might buy it. If there were a new version on the
This had me laughing for hours!
Larry in Baltimore
Nullman
browser. I don't even bother with posts if I have to "open" it.
T. Hink
sending html mail?
Netscape's mail program doesn't seem to differentiate between html and text
only.
Prof. Ryan Jackson
Do you have a release date on this? The current version keeps
crashing on me.
Ryan
Charles J DeVito
Prof. Ryan Jackson wrote:
Download the 'Microsoft Pick My Nose and Scratch My Ass 98 Service Pack',
which is available free from their web site. Installing it requires the
purchase of a $495 licensing fee, but is guaranteed to prevent further
crashing of things into your nose and/or ass......
--
Charles J DeVito
Ravenheart Enterprises
rh...@gte.net
Co-owner of the Reefk...@majordomo.net mailing list,subscribe at
http://www.peak.org/cgi-bin/majordomo?reefkeepers:majordomo.net
Todd Hillson
>
> So if i'm using say... netscape communicator... how do i make sure i'm not
> sending html mail?
>
> Netscape's mail program doesn't seem to differentiate between html and text
> only.
>
> Nullman wrote:
Go to Edit/Preferences/Mail & Groups/Messages, on top of that box,
message properties, you will see a check box for automatically sending
html mail, un-check it. Go to More Options at the bottom of this dialog
box, lower section has a radio buttons, click the top one "always ask
what to do". Don't worry it doesn't always ask, mine never has after I
did this.
Snurglepa
Bob and Terri Odenweller
Kevin T
accounts out there in academia which don't use html reading software. Most
colleges don't let students subscribe to NG's anyway....
--
-Kevin T. (Chucker on #reefs)
e-mail me at: ktom...@rochester.rr.com.com (remove 2nd ".com")
Todd Hillson wrote in message <36B648B7...@teleport.com>...
Todd Hillson
>
> In article <Jdst2.2122$Fs.21...@news4.mia>, "Stephen Dyer"
> <sdy...@ihatespam.bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > No problems here. Using IE 4.01. Can't see why anyone wouldn't upgrade their
> > browser/mail program to a newer version (most are free) unless their
> > computers are just too dated.
>
> email clients) built into IE and Netscape. As for html, I will continue
> to poke pins into little voodoo dolls representing html posters.
Whats so brain dead about these programs?
Craig Bingman
Stephen Dyer <sdy...@ihatespam.bellsouth.net> wrote:
>I've never used trn, so I was unaware of its inability to read html.
With trn, html comes in as the plain text version, as in you see the markup.
>Agreed, but the original question I was responding to was : "What software
>are people using in this group that cannot handle html in post?" The
>question did not ask whether it is appropriate to use it or not.
I use trn, and it doesn't "handle" html, at least not gracefully.
> Craig, it is OK to be afraid of technology.
It is peculiar to me that you have mistaken me for some kind of
technophobe just because I don't see the value of sending posts riddled
with html markup to a text-only newsgroup.
> It's OK to hate Microsoft.
I do have a fairly well developed dislike of them.
>I hate Microsoft too, but I'm willing to accept that Bill Gates & his empire
>are a part of my life and probably will be for quite some time. You can
>either be disgruntled or just deal with it and move on. No hard feelings.
Or I can get in a Red Hat Linux box for $50 what it would cost me
thousands of dollars to get from Microsoft. Speaking of which, some of
the calculations that I performed on my home computer using GNU/Linux are
on www.aquariumfrontiers.com.
Granted, I could have used a microsloth compiler for that... but why?
Craig
Chris
REALLY REALLY prefer that people leave their HTML out of newsgroups.
If I want to see bad markups, blinking text and obnoxious colors I'll
either go to someone's poorly-made home page or to Vegas.
The Usenet is, and always has been, a text medium. If you really are
good at HTML, feel free to mark up your post on your web-page and
provide me a link in the TEXT ONLY vesion here online. otherwise,
you're just wasting the time it takes for me to DL messages I cannot
(and will not) read.
Oh -- I've been known to browse the from various machines at work on
lunch-hour and some of them (like my ultrasparc and my 500 Mhz
Alpha/Linux machine) could blow the hell outta anything you can buy
for the desktop in an Intel flavor. I won't downgrade them to a
"modern" browser because they are work machines -- not my toys.
-Chris
On Tue, 02 Feb 1999 01:07:53 GMT, "Stephen Dyer"
Todd Hillson
>
> I use agent. I like agent. I've used Netscape -- but even then I
> REALLY REALLY prefer that people leave their HTML out of newsgroups.
>
> If I want to see bad markups, blinking text and obnoxious colors I'll
> either go to someone's poorly-made home page or to Vegas.
I've never seen html post with blinking text and obnoxious colors.
Neither does my web page.
I don't want to see here either.
> The Usenet is, and always has been, a text medium.
That's fine, what I use html markup for is posting scientific names in
their correct form, italics enclosed in (). If that's not possible then
underline it in (). With html turned off I can't do that. My personal
machine is also my work machine. I hate having to switch every thing
back and forth when I use and receive e-mail that is work related.
>If you really are
> good at HTML, feel free to mark up your post on your web-page and
> provide me a link in the TEXT ONLY vesion here online. otherwise,
> you're just wasting the time it takes for me to DL messages I cannot
> (and will not) read.
What's this DL problem, are html post that bigger than a text only
post? Currently, text only, I can get 200 post downloaded for off-line
reading in less than a minute using a phone line and 56K modem.
Stephen Dyer
>
>It is peculiar to me that you have mistaken me for some kind of
>technophobe just because I don't see the value of sending posts riddled
>with html markup to a text-only newsgroup.
This shot was not taken about html. It was taken towards the fact that
you would not appreciate the value of a software program called 'Microsoft
Pick My Nose and Scratch My *ss.'
I would value this program and purchase it and any upgrades as soon as
they become available.
Chris
<hill...@teleport.com> wrote:
>> The Usenet is, and always has been, a text medium.
>
>That's fine, what I use html markup for is posting scientific names in
>their correct form, italics enclosed in (). If that's not possible then
>underline it in (). With html turned off I can't do that. My personal
>machine is also my work machine. I hate having to switch every thing
>back and forth when I use and receive e-mail that is work related.
Well, most of us can figure out that something like amphiprion
melanopus is probably a binomial and Clownfish is a common name
without the help of italics or other emphasis.
Believe me, I would applaud your attempts in ANY OTHER MEDIUM. The
miserable state of written english these days curls my nose hair (My
spelling is bad enough that I can make myself cringe). But on the
usenet it makes things terribly difficult to read when they're wrapped
in HTML tags. As a result, I DON'T TRY to read things that are marked
up in HTML.
Also, I don't understand why you have to "Switch everything around"
there? If you're using e-mail that's text based. Or do you code your
e-mails in HTML, too?
I mention that because I use Eudora or Pine to read e-mail as I'm
never at the same machine for more than a day or two straight. HTML in
e-mail is gibberish to me, also, and could be gibberish to any clients
of people who markup their e-mail with HTML. Fair warning to outlook,
IE and Netscape users.
>
>What's this DL problem, are html post that bigger than a text only
>post? Currently, text only, I can get 200 post downloaded for off-line
>reading in less than a minute using a phone line and 56K modem.
>
The DL problem is more than just the time it takes for a larger post.
That is the beginning of the problem, but you also must realize that I
read a LOT of newsgroups and a LOT of e-mail. Filtering the crap out
isn't easy and I generally mark topics based on subject line and then
mark everything else so I don't DL it.
Well, I can't tell that a post is going to be unreadable by the
subject alone. When I get more and more messages marked up with HTML,
however, I am forced to spend increasing amounts of time downloading
and then viewing posts that are unreadable. This could get very
tiresome if EVERYONE used HTML in their posts to the point where the
newsgroup would become practically useless. Luckily, relatively few
post such unreadable documents in this group. :-)
Usenet is a text medium. It's just a plain fact. HTML belongs on the
WWW. If you can't take me at my word that it's a pain in the butt for
me to deal with people's HTML in here, then so be it. But I still
won't support HTML in Usenet nor will I read posts littered with it.
-Chris
Craig Bingman
Ah, well, then it must be said that our philosophies in life differ
somewhat. I would be concerned that I'd be away from my home PC with
either a booger or an itchy butt, and then just what the heck would I
do, having become dependent on this software for these (pretty durned
important) personal tasks?
Moreover, there would no doubt be a peripheral involved. Perhaps two, as
I'm not sure how a dual-purpose nose-picker and butt-scratcher would go
over. Are these things going to take up an IRQ each? I might well have
to purchase a SCSI interface for my computer, BUT how well do we really
think that a "SCSI (pronounce it for the right effect) nose-picker and
butt-scratcher" is really going to sell? USB versions might have more
market appeal, but personally, there is no way I'm letting a fire-wire
anything get close to either my nose or butt, thank you very much.
Additionally, I'll need to buy peripheral cleaning kits for these
things. Otherwise it is just going to get disgusting. More cash out of
my pocket each year, when I could have just washed my hands (literally
and figuratively) of the whole issue nearly for free.
So go ahead... brand me a technophobe. I prefer to think of myself as
someone who considers the implications before jumping on the next
technology bandwagon.
;-)
Craig
Craig Bingman
Todd Hillson <hill...@teleport.com> wrote:
>That's fine, what I use html markup for is posting scientific names in
>their correct form, italics enclosed in (). If that's not possible then
>underline it in (). With html turned off I can't do that. My personal
>machine is also my work machine. I hate having to switch every thing
>back and forth when I use and receive e-mail that is work related.
There is a text-only convention that covers this with a lot less overhead
than html. For example _A. percula_. Yeah, it isn't in italics, but
there is a general consensus that this markup means italics.
>What's this DL problem, are html post that bigger than a text only
>post? Currently, text only, I can get 200 post downloaded for off-line
>reading in less than a minute using a phone line and 56K modem.
Depending on the program that generates the html markup, yes, there can
be a substantial amount of overhead involved in going from text-only to
html text.
Craig
Todd Hillson
SNIP
>
> Well, most of us can figure out that something like amphiprion
> melanopus is probably a binomial and Clownfish is a common name
> without the help of italics or other emphasis.
It's just every time I write one and see one, that says in my head, not
formatted correctly.
>
> Believe me, I would applaud your attempts in ANY OTHER MEDIUM. The
> miserable state of written english these days curls my nose hair (My
> spelling is bad enough that I can make myself cringe).
Me to, thank god for spell check. BTW, Netscape has a great spell
checker in it's e-mail. Couldn't resist that.
> But on the
> usenet it makes things terribly difficult to read when they're wrapped
> in HTML tags. As a result, I DON'T TRY to read things that are marked
> up in HTML.
>
> Also, I don't understand why you have to "Switch everything around"
> there? If you're using e-mail that's text based. Or do you code your
> e-mails in HTML, too?
I get allot of e-mail, work related, that has html in it and allot of
attachments. I don't code my e-mail with html. Netscape provides
formatting options when composing mail, it does it automatically. I
don't think people are adding html tags to their post, the software they
use does it.
>
> I mention that because I use Eudora or Pine to read e-mail as I'm
> never at the same machine for more than a day or two straight. HTML in
> e-mail is gibberish to me, also, and could be gibberish to any clients
> of people who markup their e-mail with HTML. Fair warning to outlook,
> IE and Netscape users.
Netscape handles html in e-mail with no problem. I now use two profiles
under Netscape, one that sends e-mail and post with no html and another
I use for work/personal that uses html.
> >
> >What's this DL problem, are html post that bigger than a text only
> >post? Currently, text only, I can get 200 post downloaded for off-line
> >reading in less than a minute using a phone line and 56K modem.
> >
>
> The DL problem is more than just the time it takes for a larger post.
> That is the beginning of the problem, but you also must realize that I
> read a LOT of newsgroups and a LOT of e-mail. Filtering the crap out
> isn't easy and I generally mark topics based on subject line and then
> mark everything else so I don't DL it.
>
> Well, I can't tell that a post is going to be unreadable by the
> subject alone. When I get more and more messages marked up with HTML,
> however, I am forced to spend increasing amounts of time downloading
> and then viewing posts that are unreadable. This could get very
> tiresome if EVERYONE used HTML in their posts to the point where the
> newsgroup would become practically useless. Luckily, relatively few
> post such unreadable documents in this group. :-)
>
> Usenet is a text medium. It's just a plain fact.
What about the binary groups? ;)
> HTML belongs on the
> WWW. If you can't take me at my word that it's a pain in the butt for
> me to deal with people's HTML in here, then so be it. But I still
> won't support HTML in Usenet nor will I read posts littered with it.
>
> -Chris
I just started this thread because I was uncertain why post with html
were such a problem. It's been a good learning exercise.
Todd Hillson
>
> In article <36BD361A...@teleport.com>,
> Todd Hillson <hill...@teleport.com> wrote:
>
> >That's fine, what I use html markup for is posting scientific names in
> >their correct form, italics enclosed in (). If that's not possible then
> >underline it in (). With html turned off I can't do that. My personal
> >machine is also my work machine. I hate having to switch every thing
> >back and forth when I use and receive e-mail that is work related.
>
> There is a text-only convention that covers this with a lot less overhead
> than html. For example _A. percula_. Yeah, it isn't in italics, but
> there is a general consensus that this markup means italics.
>
Thanks, I'll use that.
Craig Bingman
Todd Hillson <hill...@teleport.com> wrote:
>Me to, thank god for spell check. BTW, Netscape has a great spell
>checker in it's e-mail. Couldn't resist that.
Sorry, couldn't resist. I think that should be "me too."
Craig