Batteries That Do Not Leak w/Age?
(PeteCresswell)
with age?
I just had my second episode of Mallory Duracells gooping up a
flashlight.
If the answer is "no", can anybody venture a proactive
replacement interval for size "C" cells?
--
PeteCresswell
Brenda Ann
"(PeteCresswell)" wrote in message
news:c4p0f6puc97m5gbkp...@4ax.com...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Duracell batteries are the most notorious for leaking. Almost any brand is
better, but they'll all leak eventually. If a flashlight isn't used much, I
would say the batterie should be able to go about a year between changes. If
it's used a lot, perhaps 6 months or until the batteries discharge. If you
leave the flashlight on until the batteries discharge, all bets are off.
Allodoxaphobia
And, can anyone suggest a good technique to extract bad, swollen
"C" batteries (accumulators) out of a Mag-Lite flashlight (torch)?
Lately I've been thinking "a good old fashioned cork-screw!"
The flashlight (torch) looks ok otherwise...
Jonesy
--
Marvin L Jones | jonz | W3DHJ | linux
38.24N 104.55W | @ config.com | Jonesy | OS/2
* Killfiling google & XXXXbanter.com: jonz.net/ng.htm
tm
"Allodoxaphobia" <knock_you...@example.net> wrote in message
news:slrnif11up.2u16.k...@shell.config.com...
> On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 21:01:43 -0500, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>> Is there any such thing as an alkaline battery that does not leak
>> with age?
>>
>> I just had my second episode of Mallory Duracells gooping up a
>> flashlight.
>>
>> If the answer is "no", can anybody venture a proactive
>> replacement interval for size "C" cells?
>
> And, can anyone suggest a good technique to extract bad, swollen
> "C" batteries (accumulators) out of a Mag-Lite flashlight (torch)?
>
> Lately I've been thinking "a good old fashioned cork-screw!"
>
> The flashlight (torch) looks ok otherwise...
>
> Jonesy
I use a course 4.5 inch deck screw and vise grips. Some PB Blaster sprayed
in first and allow to soak.
D Yuniskis
> On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 21:01:43 -0500, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>> Is there any such thing as an alkaline battery that does not leak
>> with age?
>>
>> I just had my second episode of Mallory Duracells gooping up a
>> flashlight.
>>
>> If the answer is "no", can anybody venture a proactive
>> replacement interval for size "C" cells?
>
> And, can anyone suggest a good technique to extract bad, swollen
> "C" batteries (accumulators) out of a Mag-Lite flashlight (torch)?
>
> Lately I've been thinking "a good old fashioned cork-screw!"
>
> The flashlight (torch) looks ok otherwise...
I recently had to extract AA size cells from such a flashlight.
I found a twist drill (sized a bit smaller than the cell dia.)
worked effectively (use a drill press if you don't have a steady
hand as going in "off axis" will damage the flashlight).
Dental instruments are handy for fishing out the remnants of
the "gored" cells.
(N.B. watch your penetration lest you drill past the "frontmost"
cell and into the mechanism itself!)
HTH,
--don
Trevor Wilson
**Yep, although the answer is probably not going to help you all that much.
Back in 1986, I purchased a JVC TV set. The remote control came fitted with
three JVC branded alkaline batteries (AA size). I finally handed the set
over to a family member back in 2000. I figured I should check the
batteries, even though the remote worked fine. Sure enough, the batteries
weren't leaking, but the cell Volts had fallen to less than 1 Volt in each.
A new set of cells and I handed the set over.
JVC alkalines rule!
I've never seen another JVC branded alkaline.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Jeff Liebermann
wrote:
>Is there any such thing as an alkaline battery that does not leak
>with age?
Yes.
<http://gadgets.softpedia.com/news/New-Hitachi-Maxell-Alkaline-Batteries-Touted-As-Leak-Proof-789-01.html>
However, I have no experience with these. I've been wrapping my
flashlight batteries in cellophane wrap for years. I have had leaks,
but little damage.
>I just had my second episode of Mallory Duracells gooping up a
>flashlight.
How old were the batteries?
>If the answer is "no", can anybody venture a proactive
>replacement interval for size "C" cells?
5 years would be my guess. The ideal self discharge rate of about 2%
for alkalines should leave you with a 90% charge after 5 years.
However, getting the battery hot, as in your vehicle (or bicycle),
will rapidly decrease the self discharge rate. When the battery gets
nearly dead (at about 25% capacity), it starts to belch hydrogen,
which is the major cause of leakage.
--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Jeff Liebermann
<knock_you...@example.net> wrote:
>And, can anyone suggest a good technique to extract bad, swollen
>"C" batteries (accumulators) out of a Mag-Lite flashlight (torch)?
Maglite flashlights all have screw on caps at both ends of the
flashlight. Unscrew both ends, lubricate, and beat on the battery
with a wooden dowel and hammer.
<http://www.maglite.com/anatomy.asp>
Maglite flashlights are not warrantied for battery leakage. However,
they do have an arrangement with some battery manufactories to replace
your Maglite at their expense. See bottom of:
<http://www.maglite.com/faq_details.asp?faqProd=D>
William Sommerwerck
(Duracell was very good about fixing one of the items.) Some have had the
opposite experience, having trouble with Energizers and not with Duracells,
but the majority of leaks seem to be from Duracells. I will not purchase
Duracells. and use them only if they .
When I say "leak", I mean liquid coming out of the cell. I'm not talking
about the solid deposits that sometimes appear with any alkaline cell.
For AA cells, get Costco Kirkland, made by Hitachi. They're cheap (25 cents
each) and have reasonably good capacity. I've used them for several years
and have no complaints.
If you use the flashlight often, get some high-capacity NiMH C cells and a
charger. The higher-capacity NiMH cells have a capacity equal to or greater
than a disposable cell, so their cost is quickly recouped with items you use
a lot.
Mark Zacharias
news:8lbok1...@mid.individual.net...
I recently acquired a Micronta 22-206 FET multimeter dating from 1975.
It was in it's box with packing, the controls were seized but responded to
lubrication, and the original 1975 batteries were still there. A "C" cell
and a 9v battery, both Radio Shack's brand, dead as a doornail, but NO
leakage.
They were pristine. Boy, did I feel lucky that day.
Mark Z.
(PeteCresswell)
>
>How old were the batteries?
Dunno, but now I am going to start putting a strip of electrical
tape on each device and writing the battery date on it.
With that in place, I think 12-month replacement sounds
reasonable. I'm not going for the last dime, just want the thing
to work when I need it.
--
PeteCresswell
Meat Plow
Duracell is notorious for leaks. I've pounded out a couple from my two 3D
cell lights before switching to Energizer.
--
Live Fast, Die Young and Leave a Pretty Corpse
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
Does anyone still sell 10 year shelf life lithium cells?
Do they actually last that long?
Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to misquote it.
Jeff Liebermann
wrote:
>Per Jeff Liebermann:
>>
>>How old were the batteries?
>
>Dunno, but now I am going to start putting a strip of electrical
>tape on each device and writing the battery date on it.
Umm... it's kinda difficult to scribble on electrical tape. I suggest
a stick on address label instead.
>With that in place, I think 12-month replacement sounds
>reasonable. I'm not going for the last dime, just want the thing
>to work when I need it.
When the site comes back up, you might want to dig through:
<http://www.candlepowerforums.com>
Most of the users in that forum make their own flashlights (and
bicycle lights) because the commercial stuff is either overpriced or
not very reliable.
Note: The 5 year battery cycle time is my guess and may not reflect
reality. I'll ask the local emergency services people what they
consider to be reasonable.
Pilgrim
Meat Plow <mhy...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 21:01:43 -0500, (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>
> > Is there any such thing as an alkaline battery that does not leak with
> > age?
> >
> > I just had my second episode of Mallory Duracells gooping up a
> > flashlight.
> >
> > If the answer is "no", can anybody venture a proactive replacement
> > interval for size "C" cells?
>
> Duracell is notorious for leaks. I've pounded out a couple from my two 3D
> cell lights before switching to Energizer.
I don't think any of the popular brands are better or worse than the
other. My experience has been just the opposite of of the above poster.
I use Duracells almost exclusively because I have had nothing but
trouble with Energizers. So you make your choice and make periodic
checks on your devices. Yes a PIA.
Chuck P.
Wild_Bill
obsessive behavior to many, but I've been doing it for years.
I typically place a bit of pressure sensitive adhesive/self-stick paper
label on or inside a battery cover, or write a month/year directly on one of
the batteries with a Sharpie marker.
The paper label can hold several dates before it needs replaced, or erase a
previous date if marked in pencil.
I'll replace batteries in flashlights and test meters/equipment after a
year, even if they're not low, and put a piece of tape over the terminals of
a 9V, or put AAA, AAs and others in a small zip-close bag, keeping sets
together.. then use those previously used batteries for temporary use of
checking other devices (after quickly checking them with a tester).
I also label my rechargeable power tool batteries, so I can see the last
time they were charged.
Any time I notice that they haven't had a recent charge, I'll refresh their
charge and remark 'em.
It's not a big deal, after one gets used to marking things regularly.. at
least it eliminates all the guessing.
--
Cheers,
WB
.............
"(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid> wrote in message
news:39a2f69ambb3uh9iq...@4ax.com...
Jim Yanik
news:slrnif2iv...@cable.mendelson.com:
> (PeteCresswell) wrote:
>> Is there any such thing as an alkaline battery that does not leak
>> with age?
>>
>> I just had my second episode of Mallory Duracells gooping up a
>> flashlight.
>>
>> If the answer is "no", can anybody venture a proactive
>> replacement interval for size "C" cells?
>
> Does anyone still sell 10 year shelf life lithium cells?
>
> Do they actually last that long?
>
> Geoff.
the 123 cells I got from Surefire have not leaked in over 8 years.
marked with an Exp date of 5-2013.
I have no idea who makes them for Surefire.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com
(PeteCresswell)
>When the site comes back up, you might want to dig through:
><http://www.candlepowerforums.com>
>Most of the users in that forum make their own flashlights (and
>bicycle lights) because the commercial stuff is either overpriced or
>not very reliable.
It's back up and looks promising except that somebody's gone
overboard with image verification. It's required for every post,
every search, and every preview - even when the user is logged
in.
--
PeteCresswell
David Nebenzahl
Sounds like that sucks. Maybe you ought to notify them?
I just get a totally blank page when I try to go there.
--
The fashion in killing has an insouciant, flirty style this spring,
with the flaunting of well-defined muscle, wrapped in flags.
- Comment from an article on Antiwar.com (http://antiwar.com)
Jeff Liebermann
<nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>On 11/28/2010 10:26 AM (PeteCresswell) spake thus:
>
>> Per Jeff Liebermann:
>>
>>> When the site comes back up, you might want to dig through:
>>> <http://www.candlepowerforums.com> Most of the users in that forum
>>> make their own flashlights (and bicycle lights) because the
>>> commercial stuff is either overpriced or not very reliable.
>>
>> It's back up and looks promising except that somebody's gone
>> overboard with image verification. It's required for every post,
>> every search, and every preview - even when the user is logged
>> in.
>Sounds like that sucks. Maybe you ought to notify them?
>I just get a totally blank page when I try to go there.
I got a page or two before it crawled to a stop. The site is VERY
slow. However, new posts seem to be appearing on the pages I was able
to view. If it ever comes back, it's the main site for experimenting
with flashlights and illumination devices.
Oops... Looks like they're down again:
CPF is closed at this time in order to fix a
few things from the upgrade.
It make take some time. I don't know.
The grammar error makes me suspect that someone has been up all night.
The Peeler
wrote:
I've even seen 1.5V button cells leak and bugger up a perfectly good
quartz wristwatch.
David Nebenzahl
> On Sun, 28 Nov 2010 18:24:28 -0800, David Nebenzahl
> <nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>
>> On 11/28/2010 10:26 AM (PeteCresswell) spake thus:
>>
>>> Per Jeff Liebermann:
>>>
>>>> When the site comes back up, you might want to dig through:
>>>> <http://www.candlepowerforums.com> Most of the users in that
>>>> forum make their own flashlights (and bicycle lights) because
>>>> the commercial stuff is either overpriced or not very reliable.
>>>
>>> It's back up and looks promising except that somebody's gone
>>> overboard with image verification. It's required for every post,
>>> every search, and every preview - even when the user is logged
>>> in.
>
>> Sounds like that sucks. Maybe you ought to notify them? I just get
>> a totally blank page when I try to go there.
>
> I got a page or two before it crawled to a stop. The site is VERY
> slow. However, new posts seem to be appearing on the pages I was able
> to view. If it ever comes back, it's the main site for experimenting
> with flashlights and illumination devices.
>
> Oops... Looks like they're down again:
> CPF is closed at this time in order to fix a
> few things from the upgrade.
> It make take some time. I don't know.
>
> The grammar error makes me suspect that someone has been up all night.
Still down tonight. All I get is <null>--a completely blank page, no
source code, no nothing. Are they ever going to get that sucker up again?
Bob Villa
> On Fri, 26 Nov 2010 21:01:43 -0500, "(PeteCresswell)" <x...@y.Invalid>
> wrote:
>
> >Is there any such thing as an alkaline battery that does not leak
> >with age?
>
> Yes.
> However, I have no experience with these. I've been wrapping my
> flashlight batteries in cellophane wrap for years. I have had leaks,
> but little damage.
>
> >I just had my second episode of Mallory Duracells gooping up a
> >flashlight.
>
> How old were the batteries?
>
> >If the answer is "no", can anybody venture a proactive
> >replacement interval for size "C" cells?
>
> 5 years would be my guess. The ideal self discharge rate of about 2%
> for alkalines should leave you with a 90% charge after 5 years.
> However, getting the battery hot, as in your vehicle (or bicycle),
> will rapidly decrease the self discharge rate. When the battery gets
> nearly dead (at about 25% capacity), it starts to belch hydrogen,
> which is the major cause of leakage.
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
> 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
Maxells used to be available at the local Fleet Farm. They lasted,
didn't leak, and were cheap. The packaging was white with black and
gold.
They were made in Japan and now China.
Jeff Liebermann
<nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
I don't know, but I do have a marginal guess at what really happened.
Yet another failed server upgrade.
The splash screen is back now, but with a slightly different message.
CPF is closed at this time in order to update the keywords
and hopefully improve the search function.
It make take some time. I don't know.
Same grammar error which still makes me wonder. I do wish they would
return as I have an LED project to research.
Many years ago, I was watching a large vendor move their servers from
one ISP facility to another. The site was subsequently down for about
10 days. It was later rumored that the truck carrying the server had
been hijacked and possibly held for ransom. I was never able to
confirm the story, but it's possible.
Patience... Your leaky batteries can wait.
Incidentally, I decided to check my assorted battery operated devices
for leaky batteries. Several TV/stereo remote controls had leaky
cells. My IR thermometer leaked. D cells in several flashlights were
bulging, but not leaking yet. Several AA cells in a walkie talkie
leaked. There was no single manufacturer or type that could be
considered a problem. Most were the original cells that came with the
remote and thermometer. The leaky radio and flashlights were
Duracell. None of the Kirkland (Costco) batteries leaked (probably
because they were newer than the others).
David Nebenzahl
> On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 22:54:54 -0800, David Nebenzahl
> <nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>
>> On 11/28/2010 8:51 PM Jeff Liebermann spake thus:
>>
>>>
>>> Oops... Looks like they're down again:
>>> CPF is closed at this time in order to fix a
>>> few things from the upgrade.
>>> It make take some time. I don't know.
>>>
>>> The grammar error makes me suspect that someone has been up all
>>> night.
>>
>> Still down tonight. All I get is <null>--a completely blank page,
>> no source code, no nothing. Are they ever going to get that sucker
>> up again?
>
> I don't know, but I do have a marginal guess at what really happened.
> Yet another failed server upgrade.
>
> The splash screen is back now, but with a slightly different message.
> CPF is closed at this time in order to update the keywords
> and hopefully improve the search function.
> It make take some time. I don't know.
So why do you get *something* while I get *nothing*? Null. Nada. Zip.
(Using an otherwise apparently well-working copy of Firefox (3.6.8).)
Michael A. Terrell
David Nebenzahl wrote:
>
> On 12/1/2010 10:24 AM Jeff Liebermann spake thus:
>
> > On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 22:54:54 -0800, David Nebenzahl
> > <nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
> >
> >> On 11/28/2010 8:51 PM Jeff Liebermann spake thus:
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Oops... Looks like they're down again:
> >>> CPF is closed at this time in order to fix a
> >>> few things from the upgrade.
> >>> It make take some time. I don't know.
> >>>
> >>> The grammar error makes me suspect that someone has been up all
> >>> night.
> >>
> >> Still down tonight. All I get is <null>--a completely blank page,
> >> no source code, no nothing. Are they ever going to get that sucker
> >> up again?
> >
> > I don't know, but I do have a marginal guess at what really happened.
> > Yet another failed server upgrade.
> >
> > The splash screen is back now, but with a slightly different message.
> > CPF is closed at this time in order to update the keywords
> > and hopefully improve the search function.
> > It make take some time. I don't know.
>
> So why do you get *something* while I get *nothing*? Null. Nada. Zip.
Have you cleared your catche?
--
For the last time: I am not a mad scientist, I'm just a very ticked off
scientist!!!
Jeff Liebermann
<nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>So why do you get *something* while I get *nothing*? Null. Nada. Zip.
>(Using an otherwise apparently well-working copy of Firefox (3.6.8).)
You might want to double check the version again. Although Firefox is
almost up to date (3.6.12 is current), your Thunderbird, that you're
using to post messages, is far out of date:
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (Windows/20070604)
Current is 3.1.6. You'll need to download a fresh copy as update
doesn't alway work between major version changes.
Even if you get a blank page, right click on it in Firefox and select
"view page info". You should see a list of META tags that describe
the web page. Argh, he's got robots=noindex set. Grrrr... Anyway,
if you get the info, but not the page, fix your browser.
I can't tell you why you don't show anything. Windoze has an
irritating habit of caching DNS failures, so please flush your DNS
cache with:
Start -> run -> cmd <enter>
ipconfig /flushdns
Shut down Firefox, and try again.
It might also be amusing to see if DNS is returning the same IP
address for you. If they're moving servers, they'll also be moving IP
addresses, which takes time to propagate.
C:\>nslookup
Default Server: DD-WRT
Address: 192.168.1.1
> set type=ANY
> www.candlepowerforums.com
Server: DD-WRT
Address: 192.168.1.1
Non-authoritative answer:
www.candlepowerforums.com internet address = 72.167.36.24
candlepowerforums.com nameserver = ns67.worldnic.com
candlepowerforums.com nameserver = ns68.worldnic.com
ns67.worldnic.com internet address = 205.178.190.34
ns68.worldnic.com internet address = 206.188.198.34
Checking the authoritative server:
> server ns68.worldnic.com
Default Server: ns68.worldnic.com
Address: 206.188.198.34
> www.candlepowerforums.com
Server: ns68.worldnic.com
Address: 206.188.198.34
www.candlepowerforums.com internet address = 72.167.36.24
Same, so there's probably no IP changes involved. Try it at your end.
If DNS is acting weird, you might want to check if you have a DNS
redirector malware installed by trying to view any of the anti-virus
web sites. Otherwise, I'll need to know some more details about your
setup before I can conjur a fix.
Jeff Liebermann
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> So why do you get *something* while I get *nothing*? Null. Nada. Zip.
> Have you cleared your catche?
In Firefox, you can force reloading the page from scratch with:
Press and hold Shift and left-click the Reload button.
Press "Ctrl + F5" or press "Ctrl + Shift + R" (Windows,Linux)
Press "Cmd + Shift + R" (MAC)
However, that doesn't always work, you can clear the cache at:
Tools -> Options -> Advanced -> Network
-> Offline Storage (Cache): "Clear Now"
David Nebenzahl
> On Wed, 01 Dec 2010 13:55:39 -0500, "Michael A. Terrell"
> <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>> So why do you get *something* while I get *nothing*? Null. Nada. Zip.
>
>> Have you cleared your catche?
Yes. Did nothing. (I did use ipconfig, which did flush the cache, but it
made no difference.)
So today I tried something: loading the page in IE. (That shows you just
how loathe I am to use that POS.) It loaded the page. Sort of.
I think this comes down to a "purity" issue. Let me explain.
IE did load something, but I'd hardly call it a useable web page. As the
status indicator at lower left so succinctly puts it, it was "Done, but
with errors on page". I believe these errors are on the part of the site
owners, but of course I can't be sure.
As rendered by IE, there's a *huge* expanse of blank blue space above
the page, and the page is badly formatted, with the forum list sqoze
into a narrow column on the left side.
So what I *think* happens with Firefox is that it detects errors, and
then, in the infinite wisdom of its geekish authors, simply refuses to
go any further, resulting in a COMPLETELY BLANK PAGE. (I've objected to
this behavior for years, arguing that in an imperfect world full of
imperfect and non-compliant web coding that it's better to render
*something* than to put one's nose in the air, metaphorically speaking,
and refuse to render *anything*--or at least leave this option up to the
user--but no, the geeks insist on purity here, damn the real-world
consequences.)
So bottom line is that with the software I have, including a pretty
up-to-date version of FF, I cannot view this page.
If you care to diagnose further:
W2K, SP 4
Sygate firewall
Dial-up access
No proxies, spyware (that I know of), virii, etc.
David Nebenzahl
> On Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:37:38 -0800, David Nebenzahl
> <nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>
>> So why do you get *something* while I get *nothing*? Null. Nada.
>> Zip. (Using an otherwise apparently well-working copy of Firefox
>> (3.6.8).)
>
> You might want to double check the version again. Although Firefox is
> almost up to date (3.6.12 is current), your Thunderbird, that you're
> using to post messages, is far out of date:
> User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.4 (Windows/20070604)
> Current is 3.1.6. You'll need to download a fresh copy as update
> doesn't alway work between major version changes.
I have to say--and this is a little off-topic, I realize--that with all
due respect to your astute observations of my software revision levels,
I have no intention of upgrading my copy of Thunderbird. And this is
deliberate on my part.
Why? Because upgrading Firefox, my web browser, is one thing. If it
fucks up, all I lose is, basically, nothing (I keep my bookmarks backed
up well enough). But if the Tbird install goes haywire, I stand to lose
a lot: my previous email messages, address book, not to mention
newsgroup stuff. Oh, I wouldn't actually *lose* it: I know where the
inboxes and such reside, and can save and restore them, but it's a PAIN
IN THE ASS that I wish to avoid.
I've had enough bad luck with this geek-produced software that I'm quite
gun shy about upgrading. And while there are plenty of annoying things
about Thunderbird (like why, on my machine with not a lot of RAM, it
exhibits the most piss-poor memory management I've seen of ANY
application EVER, resulting in occasional "naps" of up to a minute while
it scrambles to purge and reallocate memory), it's a case of better the
devil you know; I'm not interested in discovering all those NEW bugs
they've introduced after fixing the old ones.
So thanks, but no thanks.
We now return to our regularly scheduled programming.
Jeff Liebermann
<nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>So bottom line is that with the software I have, including a pretty
>up-to-date version of FF, I cannot view this page.
Try again. It seems to be back up this morning.
<http://www.candlepowerforums.com>
Hmmm... still has problems. It wants me to register/login before I
can use the search box. I don't think it did that before the upgrade.
David Nebenzahl
> On Thu, 02 Dec 2010 11:56:32 -0800, David Nebenzahl
> <nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>
>> So bottom line is that with the software I have, including a pretty
>> up-to-date version of FF, I cannot view this page.
>
> Try again. It seems to be back up this morning.
> <http://www.candlepowerforums.com>
> Hmmm... still has problems. It wants me to register/login before I
> can use the search box. I don't think it did that before the upgrade.
Judging from the number of error messages that IE (5) reports when
loading that page, there are some serious problems on the sending side
of that site. I don't think it's our software.
Too bad; the content over there is intriguing.
(By the way, the URL that eventually loads is
http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/portal/index.php. Is that correct?)
Sjouke Burry
> On Thu, 02 Dec 2010 11:56:32 -0800, David Nebenzahl
> <nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>
>> So bottom line is that with the software I have, including a pretty
>> up-to-date version of FF, I cannot view this page.
>
> Try again. It seems to be back up this morning.
> <http://www.candlepowerforums.com>
> Hmmm... still has problems. It wants me to register/login before I
> can use the search box. I don't think it did that before the upgrade.
>
>
You can , without login read all of it.
The site is a nice demo, opening a thread is dead slowwww......
And the site does not bother my FF (celeron,xp sp3, ff2.0.0.24)
Wild_Bill
crap that's pumped out every day.
My AVG-free is free to update when needed, everything else is turned off,
that means everything that I can find and manually turn off.
This hack/spit Vista (still just an incomplete W 3.1) machine is about 5
years old, and from the first day of use, before attaching the (modem line
at the time) cable for internet access, I shut off all of the "phone home"
and "report this" and check for updates crap that I could find.
I rarely install anything I've heard or read about, couldn't give a FRA
about reviews, and don't care if it's free.
--
Cheers,
WB
.............
"David Nebenzahl" <nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote in message
news:4cf7fd79$0$2411$8226...@news.adtechcomputers.com...
David Nebenzahl
> I'm another user that knows he can easily live without all of the latest
> crap that's pumped out every day.
Thanks for that.
Now that I've got you on the line, can I make a request of you? Could
you please not top-post? If you look, you'll see that, like, 99.9% of
posters here bottom post.
Now, I know you're a wild guy and all and don't want to be tied down by
boring convention, but this is one that actually makes sense.
Anyhow, just a request.
Jeff Liebermann
<nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>I have no intention of upgrading my copy of Thunderbird. And this is
>deliberate on my part.
Permit me to offer a dissenting opinion on the matter.
Security Advisories for Thunderbird 2.0
<http://www.mozilla.org/security/known-vulnerabilities/thunderbird20.html>
>Why? Because upgrading Firefox, my web browser, is one thing. If it
>fucks up, all I lose is, basically, nothing (I keep my bookmarks backed
>up well enough). But if the Tbird install goes haywire, I stand to lose
>a lot: my previous email messages, address book, not to mention
>newsgroup stuff. Oh, I wouldn't actually *lose* it: I know where the
>inboxes and such reside, and can save and restore them, but it's a PAIN
>IN THE ASS that I wish to avoid.
How to backup Thunderbird email and settings:
<http://www.iopus.com/guides/thunderbird-backup.htm>
There are also programs and plug-ins to make it easier:
<http://www.freeemailtutorials.com/mozillaThunderbird/backupRestore.cwd>
<http://mozbackup.jasnapaka.com>
etc.
Personally, I don't like any of these methods. I run image backups of
the entire hard disk to either a USB drive or over the network to my
NAS (network attached storage) box. This weeks favorite is Acronis
True Image Home 2011.
<http://www.acronis.com/homecomputing/products/trueimage/index.html>
>I've had enough bad luck with this geek-produced software that I'm quite
>gun shy about upgrading.
Same here, but with one difference. I do computer support as a
business and find that it is important to experience upgrades and
other disasters prior to when my customers experience the same
problems. This way, I can answer the panic calls intelligently. For
example:
<http://forums.avg.com/ww-en/avg-free-forum?sec=thread&act=show&id=132999>
Oops(tm).
To give you a better perspective of what you're attempting, try going
through an entire day without making any mistakes. Everything has to
work perfectly at the first attempt. That's not easy to do, even
consciously. If you try it for an extended period, you'll find that
paranoia is the inevitable result, where you do nothing rather than
risk failure. You can't run your life that way, and you should not
try to run your computer that way. If you want to minimize risk, but
not eliminate it completely, it might be best to DELAY upgrades,
instead of ignoring them.
>And while there are plenty of annoying things
>about Thunderbird (like why, on my machine with not a lot of RAM, it
>exhibits the most piss-poor memory management I've seen of ANY
>application EVER, resulting in occasional "naps" of up to a minute while
>it scrambles to purge and reallocate memory), it's a case of better the
>devil you know; I'm not interested in discovering all those NEW bugs
>they've introduced after fixing the old ones.
My customers sometimes ask me "is it time to upgrade"? It's a silly
question because the answer is always obvious. When the machine
becomes painful to use, won't do certain things, and burns time like
the government burns tax revenue, then it's obviously time to upgrade.
I still have machines running W2K because I'm cheap and they're not
worth the cost of an XP license. However, if money is the problem,
then a major upgrade to 3.5GB RAM (the maximum for a 32 bit OS) would
cost you the least.
Incidentally, I'm now resurrecting a Thinkpad X30 PIII/1.2GHz laptop
that looks like it was probably last used as a frizbee.
Dr Frankenstein's monster looked better after I glued everything
together with globs of epoxy. Still, it runs XP SP3 quite nicely, so
it will probably find some use, somewhere.
>So thanks, but no thanks.
You're welcome anyway.
>We now return to our regularly scheduled programming.
--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com je...@cruzio.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS
Jeff Liebermann
<nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>On 12/2/2010 12:13 PM Jeff Liebermann spake thus:
>
>> On Thu, 02 Dec 2010 11:56:32 -0800, David Nebenzahl
>> <nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote:
>>
>>> So bottom line is that with the software I have, including a pretty
>>> up-to-date version of FF, I cannot view this page.
>>
>> Try again. It seems to be back up this morning.
>> <http://www.candlepowerforums.com>
>> Hmmm... still has problems. It wants me to register/login before I
>> can use the search box. I don't think it did that before the upgrade.
>
>Judging from the number of error messages that IE (5) reports when
>loading that page, there are some serious problems on the sending side
>of that site. I don't think it's our software.
I'll call your 5 and raise you to 11 errors. Go thee unto:
<http://validator.w3.org>
and inscribe http://www.candlepowerforums.com in the URL box.
The errors look like they're coming from the CMS (content manglement
system), which is apparently http://www.vbulletin.com of which I know
zilch.
>Too bad; the content over there is intriguing.
Form follows function. I know you'll enjoy the content. If you do
anything with lighting or lighting power, it's the best forum.
>(By the way, the URL that eventually loads is
>http://www.candlepowerforums.com/vb/portal/index.php. Is that correct?)
Yes. That's the start page. Seems to be slowing down as the day
progresses.
Wild_Bill
numerous names and pissy remarks. Or they just filter me, but that's their
privilege.
Bottom posting isn't sensible, or I would have been doing it for the last
12-14 years.
So you see, this is my conventional method.
I've always top-posted for the obvious reason.. convenience for others.
Before scroll mice, it was even slower to get to the bottom of a post to see
a reply.
If you look at a typical thread that's been receiving replies for a couple
of days, there is a lot of previously read junk to scroll down thru to get
to a reply that may be a couple of words. It simply amounts to a lot of
wasted time.
So your position is that everyone should waste that time, because of some
outdated method based on the early BBS networks, correct?
When early online communication began, there were a lot of really slow
connections in the networks, and top posting could've been annoying, when
seeing a post start with a reply at the top because the original post hadn't
made it's way to all points in the network.
Those days are essentially gone forever. If anyone still isn't getting
quality feeds for newsgroups, they should find another service. This APN is
only $3/mo.
After all.. I was replying to you, and you probably knew exactly what the
reply was in regard to, yes?
Years ago, with much less stable feeds, I often encountered dropped
messages, but even then, reading a couple of other replies would reveal the
details of the original post.
Many posters quote everything sent previously by others. After several days,
there is a huge mess to go past, to see a reply.
Trimming previous replies from earlier posts is apparently too much work for
them, and finding the reply comments is often tedious.
As you can see, I've trimmed the previous post, since I'm addressing a
different topic, but there was no need to scroll down past it.
--
Cheers,
WB
.............
"David Nebenzahl" <nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote in message
news:4cf816f0$0$2418$8226...@news.adtechcomputers.com...
David Nebenzahl
> If you look at a typical thread that's been receiving replies for a couple
> of days, there is a lot of previously read junk to scroll down thru to get
> to a reply that may be a couple of words. It simply amounts to a lot of
> wasted time.
>
> So your position is that everyone should waste that time, because of some
> outdated method based on the early BBS networks, correct?
No, it's because there's this advanced technique called "trimming",
which I just demonstrated here. No need to mindlessly copy every part of
a message in a deeply-nested thread. Duh.
Wild_Bill
explained, however it was snipped.
You and I could describe and demonstrate trimming endlessly, and it won't
convince the typical usenet user to trim posts before sending them.
The majority are just too lazy and/or inconsiderate, which no amount of
exchanges will change.
--
Cheers,
WB
.............
"David Nebenzahl" <nob...@but.us.chickens> wrote in message
news:4cf8699d$0$2409$8226...@news.adtechcomputers.com...
Duh.
Bob Villa
Netiquette says "top posting" is rude! IRMC
(PeteCresswell)
>Bottom posting isn't sensible, or I would have been doing it for the last
>12-14 years.
>So you see, this is my conventional method.
+1.
I bottom post because that seems tb what most people want.
But it seems to me like a holdover from the character/line-based
days where one could not easily jump pack to previous articles.
Given a choice between reading top-posted replies and
bottom-posted replies with indiscriminate quoting, I'll take the
top-posted replies any day. The ability to turn quotes on/off
mitigates bottom posting somewhat, but it's still more work to
read.
The ideal would seem tb inserting reply text under the relevant
quoted material and not quoting the whole history of the thread.
--
PeteCresswell
David Nebenzahl
Further confirmation that good posting style depends on more than just
bottom (or inter-) posting. Judicious trimming is a crucial part of it.
Not just lazily tacking your 2-line reply to the bottom of a 200-line
collection of previous posts and replies.
And yes, if one has multiple responses to a post, then posting the
replies directly under the relevant material is the way to go, as most
people seem to do here.