Nieminen Mika wrote:
> 
>   Since I'm tired of windows nerds saying lies as "unix is in text mode only"
> or "there are no programs for unix", I started a couple of programs in this
> Sparcstation 5 with SunOS and took a snapshot.
> 
> http://www.cs.tut.fi/~warp/snapshot.gif
> 
>   (Of course all those programs would be situated in separated screens in the
> virtual desktop, but I put them together for the "photograph".)
>   There wasn't enough space for a word processing program, but I thought the
> spreadsheet would be enough proof that there are that kind of programs too.
>   Btw, I just saw in the snapshot that GIMP's gradient editor can also save
> in povray format. Cool. I have to test that.
> 
> --
> main(i){char*_="BdsyFBThhHFBThhHFRz]NFTITQF|DJIFHQhhF";while(i=
> *_++)for(;i>1;printf("%s",i-70?i&1?"[]":" ":(i=0,"\n")),i/=2);} /*- Warp. -*/

It's so overfull that it just looks like my desktop on my machine! :-)
Yeah the lies about UNIX and text mode are just not to kill. I'm just
waiting for the day when Bill Gates declares that GUI where invented by
him personally!

Marc
-- 
Marc Schimmler

Post a reply to this message

Boy is this getting ugly.<paranoid delusion> First of all, HTML in newsgroups is
Netscape's and Microsofts way of trying to "upgrade" the quality of newsgroups,
and also force everyone to use their products.</paranoid delusion> Their
marketing departments probably think that if people want to read a newsgroup bad
enough and that newsgroup has HTML posts, then they'll start using HTML savvy
news readers.

Hey, these are marketing people, what can I say.

I personally use Netscape to read this newsgroup becauseI like the feel of it. I
don't know anybody who likes it and they all use other programs to read news. I
don't like them. I've tried them. I was once concerned that I was posting
messages in HTML and then being ignored for it. I changed my preferences to
always send in text (and hopefully it's still doing it) because I know a lot of
people here don't have HTML savvy readers,and don't want them.

Newsgroups are for text. If people want HTML they'll set up a javascript
bulleten board for the world wide web.

Josh English
eng### [at] spiritonecom

Lue Ebra wrote:

> I've watched the flamewars regarding html usage, and frankly, I think it's
> getting ridiculous. Half of the threads I pull are flames about html, and
> half of those are in html. I understand that a lot of you run newsreaders
> that don't support html and some of you have to pay for each megabyte you
> download. probably the rest of you don't give a flying flip either way. That
> breaks us up into roughly three groups.
>  For the third group, good on you. You're more interested in the actual meat
> of the matter than the frills and frippery.
>  For the first group, A) Get a grip. Do you flame a webmaster because his
> Netscape 4 javascript blew a tire on your IE3.01 browser? Didn't think so.
> You usually just pick up and move on, gleaning the pertinent info and
> disregarding the rest (unless the error makes that impossible, of course).
> B) Get a better newsreader. While free may be good, getting that rinky-dinky
> 120K newsreader off the "Biggest Collection of Free Crap CD" that came with
> "Technoweenie" magazine (wait a minute.. I think I subscribe to that one..oh
> well) doesn't constitute a really smart move. You're not running Netscape
> 1.0, or mIRC 2.3, or POVray 1.0 so quit reading the news with something that
> went out with Windows 3.0. Upgrading isn't a sin, doesn't require a great
> deal of work (nor brains) and generally makes life a little easier. (Now
> watch, I'll get return flame from someone running Win 3.0 using the first
> release of Free Agent and Mosaic 1.0 on a 386sx16.)
> As for you Pay-Per-Byte ppl: get a real ISP, you're not even getting kissed.
> What possible advantage could they have? I've got unlimited access for
> $15/month for Lakshmi's sake. Even AOL's better than that (and ultimately
> cheaper). On a regular basis, I cycle through my Browser cache at a sitting
> (which is set at 300 MEGS). Can you imagine how much that would cost in a
> month? I can.. $15!
> Now that I've vented that, I'm expecting another 3 dozen posts in flame..
> the REAL drag to html postings. Funny.. a 2K html post generates 50K of
> flame (kinda like the fliers in the Sunday paper).
>
> --
> Lue Ebra
> "Only you can prevent forest fires" -Smokey the Bear
>
> PS: I posted this in plain text format for a reason.. so you wouldn't skip
> it just because it's html.

Post a reply to this message

The BIGGEST reason I hate HTML postings is that if you change the font --
EVERY OTHER MESSAGE after that uses that font. It's really annoying.
(and yes, I DO use an updated newsreader.)

How hard is it to check a box that says "send in plain text only"?
oh wait, that requires READING something to find out where to do that.

--
Twy### [at] twystednet
------------------------------------------------------------
povray.doc -- An engaging tale about a spanish guy named Manual.
------------------------------------------------------------

Post a reply to this message

>  Firstly, you have the typical attitude of a windows nerd.
>  If you say to a windows nerd "a command line shell is very handy" what he
>actually reads is "GUIs suck, the command line is much better than any GUI
>in everything and everyone should get rid of all graphic interfaces and use
>only text-based command line interpreters".

I fear the typical Windows-nerd would at first ask: "what is a command
line"?

>  If you say to a windows nerd "you should also take into consideration
>text-based html browsers when you make a html web page" what he actually
>reads is "you have to include only text in your pages, no pictures, no
>frames, not even colors, no any other thing but only text".

A Windows-nerd will not know that WWW-Pages are pure ASCII, and will not
know that there IS a pure text-based representation of that  Web-Page.

>  If you say to windows nerd "UNIX is a very good operating system" they
>only see an antisocial geek sitting in a dark corner using a VT100-type
>text terminal typing cryptical commands and using programs from the early
>60's (everything in text mode, of course).

He (W. Nerd) will not know that that there are other OSes (besides that he
doesn't know what an OS is, anyway)

I'm Windows user ( but hopefully not a Nerd), Unix-User, and yes, in some
aspects I still like Windows.
As Web-developer in a small company I tried to state that it's no good idea
to develop only for the very newest features of the newest Browsers and
leave the rest of the world outside, but I told a wall. (they developed
websites for MSIE and Netscape ver. 4 only about a year ago, and wondered
why there was so little resonance on their super-duper designs), so at last
I left that company, now doing database design for much higher income...


Greetings,

Mathias

Post a reply to this message

Here I go again...
Ok, I'm not the one to speak, i think I've sent one or two HTML posts here, by
mistake.
As for WHY I don't like HTML messages, there are some reasons :

-others ignore it, I understand them.
-I don't like the "feel" of the reading of HTML messages in netscape, sorry, takes
memory
and is unstable feeling to it.
-I pay by the MINUTE for internet(phone) time, and this news-group isn't the fastest
existing.

//Spider

Post a reply to this message

Nieminen Mika wrote in message <36b1a665.0@news.povray.org>...
>  Evidently you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
>  Firstly, you have the typical attitude of a windows nerd.
>  If you say to a windows nerd "a command line shell is very handy" what he
>actually reads is "GUIs suck, the command line is much better than any GUI
>in everything and everyone should get rid of all graphic interfaces and use
>only text-based command line interpreters".
>  If you say to a windows nerd "you should also take into consideration
>text-based html browsers when you make a html web page" what he actually
>reads is "you have to include only text in your pages, no pictures, no
>frames, not even colors, no any other thing but only text".
>  If you say to windows nerd "UNIX is a very good operating system" they
>only see an antisocial geek sitting in a dark corner using a VT100-type
>text terminal typing cryptical commands and using programs from the early
>60's (everything in text mode, of course).
>  An of course, if you say to a windows nerd "stop sending HTML to the
news"
>what they read is "stop using netscape".
>  As a typical windows nerd, you even talked about mIRC as if it was the
>only IRC-client out there.
>  As a typical windows nerd, you confuse program development with standards
>development. You think that if program X (for windows, of course) has a new
>feature, that's the new standard and everyone should change to that.
>  As a typical windows nerd, you suppose that people who is not using the
>same programs as you are not using the latest versions and state-of-art
>programs.
>  As a typical windows nerd, you are completely unable to understand that
>the only thing you have to do to stop sending html is to uncheck one option
>in netscape and that this will not affect news reading in any way.
>  As a typical windows nerd you suppose that everyone can and like to use
>netscape as a news reader. It's true that almost everybody can use it, but
>it isn't true that everyobdy likes it.
>  Netscape takes a lot of resources (it really is a memory and cpu hog), it
>takes a very long time to start an its news reader is in some aspects very
>limited. Some people want to control in a more precise way what articles
>they want to read and in which way.
>  "Upgrading", as you call it, from an efficient real news reader to
>netscape would make life a pain to those people. They will loose lots of
>features they were using. It would actually be a downgrade.
>  The fact that you can send html documents to the news with netscape
doesn't
>make it a standard. If I started to send eg. tex-documents or postscript
>documents, who would read that? The fact that you can do something doesn't
>mean that everyone is doing the same thing and even less that it's a
>standard.
>
>  And all the problem is that one checkbox which these windows nerds are
>completely unable to uncheck.
>  Luckily enough those windows nerds constitute a very little percent of
>the net users (at least here).
>
>: PS: I posted this in plain text format for a reason.. so you wouldn't
skip
>: it just because it's html.
>
>  Why should you send anything in html here? I can't think of any reason.
>  Ah... But windows nerds don't need reasons.
>
>--
>main(i){char*_="BdsyFBThhHFBThhHFRz]NFTITQF|DJIFHQhhF";while(i=
>*_++)for(;i>1;printf("%s",i-70?i&1?"[]":" ":(i=0,"\n")),i/=2);} /*-
Warp. -*/

Other than the fact that letting us know you're running *nix, your point is?
My post was a rant mainly pointed at americans (who are for the most part
spoon-fed, pompous, egotistical idiot. I really should have stated than. I
don't know about you, but I'm looking at typical day in this group 65% flame
(15 out of 23 threads). That was the basis of my rant.. I'm being called
"ignorant" and "don't know what I'm talking about" because I left out three
little words.."in the US". Well, I should have said that. But don't you get
it? This Ng's for the discussion of POV, not blasting some newbie because
(s)he doesn't know how to change his(her) Windoze reader from one format to
another. That's for Usenet.. No, I don't see this much angst on there..
My post was for ppl in the US.. for you Europeans, (and Aussie's) some of
you are acting like us spoiled americans (well.. we're not all spoiled,
there are a few decent americans somewhere) but this post wasn't meant for
you
Maybe there should be a povray.angst.angst.angst group, eh?

--
Lue Ebra
"BitchX: The choice of a GNU generation" - Panasync

Post a reply to this message

Nice atmosphere in here. I'm toasting marshmallows on it.
BTW. Is this in HTML? I've never looked/cared.

    Graham.

Nieminen Mika wrote:

>   Evidently you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
>   Firstly, you have the typical attitude of a windows nerd.
>   If you say to a windows nerd "a command line shell is very handy" what he
> actually reads is "GUIs suck, the command line is much better than any GUI
> in everything and everyone should get rid of all graphic interfaces and use
> only text-based command line interpreters".
>   If you say to a windows nerd "you should also take into consideration
> text-based html browsers when you make a html web page" what he actually
> reads is "you have to include only text in your pages, no pictures, no
> frames, not even colors, no any other thing but only text".
>   If you say to windows nerd "UNIX is a very good operating system" they
> only see an antisocial geek sitting in a dark corner using a VT100-type
> text terminal typing cryptical commands and using programs from the early
> 60's (everything in text mode, of course).
>   An of course, if you say to a windows nerd "stop sending HTML to the news"
> what they read is "stop using netscape".
>   As a typical windows nerd, you even talked about mIRC as if it was the
> only IRC-client out there.
>   As a typical windows nerd, you confuse program development with standards
> development. You think that if program X (for windows, of course) has a new
> feature, that's the new standard and everyone should change to that.
>   As a typical windows nerd, you suppose that people who is not using the
> same programs as you are not using the latest versions and state-of-art
> programs.
>   As a typical windows nerd, you are completely unable to understand that
> the only thing you have to do to stop sending html is to uncheck one option
> in netscape and that this will not affect news reading in any way.
>   As a typical windows nerd you suppose that everyone can and like to use
> netscape as a news reader. It's true that almost everybody can use it, but
> it isn't true that everyobdy likes it.
>   Netscape takes a lot of resources (it really is a memory and cpu hog), it
> takes a very long time to start an its news reader is in some aspects very
> limited. Some people want to control in a more precise way what articles
> they want to read and in which way.
>   "Upgrading", as you call it, from an efficient real news reader to
> netscape would make life a pain to those people. They will loose lots of
> features they were using. It would actually be a downgrade.
>   The fact that you can send html documents to the news with netscape doesn't
> make it a standard. If I started to send eg. tex-documents or postscript
> documents, who would read that? The fact that you can do something doesn't
> mean that everyone is doing the same thing and even less that it's a
> standard.
>
>   And all the problem is that one checkbox which these windows nerds are
> completely unable to uncheck.
>   Luckily enough those windows nerds constitute a very little percent of
> the net users (at least here).
>
> : PS: I posted this in plain text format for a reason.. so you wouldn't skip
> : it just because it's html.
>
>   Why should you send anything in html here? I can't think of any reason.
>   Ah... But windows nerds don't need reasons.
>
> --
> main(i){char*_="BdsyFBThhHFBThhHFRz]NFTITQF|DJIFHQhhF";while(i=
> *_++)for(;i>1;printf("%s",i-70?i&1?"[]":" ":(i=0,"\n")),i/=2);} /*- Warp. -*/

Post a reply to this message

Lue Ebra wrote in message <36b16545.0@news.povray.org>...
>I've watched the flamewars regarding html usage, and frankly, I think it's
>getting ridiculous. Half of the threads I pull are flames about html, and
>half of those are in html. I understand that a lot of you run newsreaders
>that don't support html and some of you have to pay for each megabyte you
>download. probably the rest of you don't give a flying flip either way.
That
>breaks us up into roughly three groups.
> For the third group, good on you. You're more interested in the actual
meat
>of the matter than the frills and frippery.
> For the first group, A) Get a grip. Do you flame a webmaster because his
>Netscape 4 javascript blew a tire on your IE3.01 browser? Didn't think so.
>You usually just pick up and move on, gleaning the pertinent info and
>disregarding the rest (unless the error makes that impossible, of course).
>B) Get a better newsreader. While free may be good, getting that
rinky-dinky
>120K newsreader off the "Biggest Collection of Free Crap CD" that came with
>"Technoweenie" magazine (wait a minute.. I think I subscribe to that
one..oh
>well) doesn't constitute a really smart move. You're not running Netscape
>1.0, or mIRC 2.3, or POVray 1.0 so quit reading the news with something
that
>went out with Windows 3.0. Upgrading isn't a sin, doesn't require a great
>deal of work (nor brains) and generally makes life a little easier. (Now
>watch, I'll get return flame from someone running Win 3.0 using the first
>release of Free Agent and Mosaic 1.0 on a 386sx16.)
>As for you Pay-Per-Byte ppl: get a real ISP, you're not even getting
kissed.
>What possible advantage could they have? I've got unlimited access for
>$15/month for Lakshmi's sake. Even AOL's better than that (and ultimately
>cheaper). On a regular basis, I cycle through my Browser cache at a sitting
>(which is set at 300 MEGS). Can you imagine how much that would cost in a
>month? I can.. $15!
>Now that I've vented that, I'm expecting another 3 dozen posts in flame..
>the REAL drag to html postings. Funny.. a 2K html post generates 50K of
>flame (kinda like the fliers in the Sunday paper).
>
>--
>Lue Ebra
>"Only you can prevent forest fires" -Smokey the Bear
>
>PS: I posted this in plain text format for a reason.. so you wouldn't skip
>it just because it's html.
>
>
In response to several reflames:
=> The windows nerd Nieminen refers too (unfortunately) is the typical
american windoze user. most of them don't even know that there are other
OSes like Solaris, Linux (all the different brands) OS/2, and good ole
AT&T's (or was it Bell Labs?)original Unix. they wouldn't know about VT100
or ANSI graphics (and definitely not Xwindows)
=> Ron's flaming Pepsi because they built a whole website based on a
plugin..well..in that case I'd have done the same thing..
=>Twist's comment about reading..if ppl actually RTFMed then things like the
VFAQ would be very small (assuming they actually made a decent manual that
came with the proggie). On the average, nobody reads the manual  (I do, and
anything else I can get my hands on)
=> And to Graham: I have some chestnuts, wanna trade :)

Lue Ebra
"Only the mind matters in these matters of the mind"

Post a reply to this message

On Fri, 29 Jan 1999 13:12:23 -0500, Lue Ebra <lue### [at] nxuscom> wrote:
>I
>don't know about you, but I'm looking at typical day in this group 65% flame
>(15 out of 23 threads). That was the basis of my rant.. 

...

>But don't you get
>it? This Ng's for the discussion of POV, not blasting some newbie because
>(s)he doesn't know how to change his(her) Windoze reader from one format to
>another. 

You'll note that the last HTML flame I posted was to someone who had 
been gently reminded at least once already to fix his newsreader and 
had apparently decided not to do so.  You'll also note that it 
actually answered his question, once he got past the <blink> tag.  
You can doubtless find examples where I have cursed HTML posts 
without answering the question, but I hope there aren't many.  

Besides, if we don't point out the problem, how can we expect to get 
it fixed?  Those newbies don't even know what their posts look like 
to the rest of us, so they may not realize why nobody's answering 
(or even comprehending) their questions.  A little maintenance is 
necessary if we want to keep this newsgroup usable by all.

If I had been really vindictive, I would have posted the answer in
mixed/multipart, with a text/plain section containing the answer and
a text/html part telling him to read the message with a real newsreader
if he wanted the answer.  But I didn't do that.  All I did was make it
a little inconvenient for him to read the message, just like he did for
me and lots of other people.

/me makes a note to change his default headers and his .signature to 
auto-flame anyone using a web browser to read his posts, using really
irritating JavaScript popups that refuse to go away.  Or not.

Post a reply to this message

Ken wrote:
> 
> Lue Ebra wrote:
> >
> > I've watched the flamewars regarding html usage, and frankly, I think it's
> > getting ridiculous.
> > --
> > Lue Ebra
> 
> No comment.
> 
> --
> Ken Tyler
> 
> tyl### [at] pacbellnet

   I'm going to reverse my earlier statement after reading
some of your replies to the replies to your earlier post
because of some replies you read to another post which
wasn't posted to you but posted to someone else's posted
message who if they have taken offense to the post should
be defending their post because of the replies to that
post and not to any post you have posted yet so far.

  You somehow have missed out somewhere along the line that
this is without a doubt one of the friendliest, most helpful,
courteous groups of people you are likely to find anywhere.
I don't know where you got the idea the people are regularly
flamed on this newsgroup is beyond me. The amount of flaming
on this NG probably runs less than .001% of all messages
posted.
  Whatever your beliefs I recommend you drop your whole line
of attack, apologize to the group as a whole, and lets get back
to talking about raytracing with Pov. As it stands now you are
not winning friends and influencing people with your off topic
rhetoric.
   By the way I am an American and take offense at your attack on
me just because of my nationality. Let that one drop quick or I
will burn you in rendered effigy !!!

-- 
Ken Tyler

tyl### [at] pacbellnet

Post a reply to this message