 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 08:26:25 -0700, Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom>
wrote:
>Stephen wrote:
>> And he sounds like the sort of person who thinks he is smarter than he
>> actually is.
>
>I think you're taking him more seriously than a web site named "the best
>page in the universe" warrants. :-)
Well any published writing that is raciest should be taken seriously,
one way or another. Also he slagged off one of my favourite humors, it
makes my bile rise. ;)
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 10:10:28 +0100, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> Novell's things
>>
>> aka IPX and SPX. ;-)
>
> Oh, that was *them*, was it?
Yes, it was.
> [I don't have fond memories of IPX...]
Well, get ready for it again, because IPv6 uses some of the ideas from
IPX.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Jim Henderson" <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote in message
news:48495f52$1@news.povray.org...
> On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 10:14:28 -0400, Warp wrote:
>
> > OTOH, 24 Mbit/s ADSL is completely normal
>
> In Europe, yes. In the US, no. I got an upgrade recently (for free) to
> 3 Mbps from 1.5. It's amazing that that still qualifies as "broadband"
> here in the US.
Down in my neck of the woods 128kb/s qualifies as broadband :-(
512k ADSL's the fastest you can get at a reasonable price.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:48492f4f@news.povray.org...
> Er... well even today, downloading *8GB* is rather challenging. [The
> largest file I've ever downloaded was 4GB, and that took 3 days. I think
> it was Star Wreck - damn amusing, BTW!]
Not bad. I draw the line at files over 100MB. Even that will take a few
hours.
What's your bandwidth and cap?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gail Shaw wrote:
> Not bad. I draw the line at files over 100MB. Even that will take a few
> hours.
Wow. I get annoyed if I can't pull a DVD worth down in an hour. :-)
Class G wireless seems kind of creaky to me.
--
Darren New / San Diego, CA, USA (PST)
Helpful housekeeping hints:
Check your feather pillows for holes
before putting them in the washing machine.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Darren New" <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote in message
news:484c4efa$1@news.povray.org...
> Gail Shaw wrote:
> > Not bad. I draw the line at files over 100MB. Even that will take a few
> > hours.
>
> Wow. I get annoyed if I can't pull a DVD worth down in an hour. :-)
LOL. Different worlds almost. A DVD worth is a month for me. Literally. I
have a 5GB monthly cap.
I checked my download history from end May. 67MB file - 2 hours 12 min. My
3G card's a lot faster, but the cap's a lot lower too.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Gail Shaw <initialsurname@sentech sa dot com> wrote:
> "Jim Henderson" <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote in message
> news:48495f52$1@news.povray.org...
> > On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 10:14:28 -0400, Warp wrote:
> >
> > > OTOH, 24 Mbit/s ADSL is completely normal
> >
> > In Europe, yes. In the US, no. I got an upgrade recently (for free) to
> > 3 Mbps from 1.5. It's amazing that that still qualifies as "broadband"
> > here in the US.
> Down in my neck of the woods 128kb/s qualifies as broadband :-(
> 512k ADSL's the fastest you can get at a reasonable price.
I have 1/1 Mbit/s ADSL as part of my rent. I could upgrade it to
10/2 Mbit/s by paying 19.90 euros/month, and 24/2 Mbit/s for 29.90
euros/month.
I suppose there are some benefits to living in a technology paradise. :P
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 23:23:12 +0200, Gail Shaw wrote:
> "Jim Henderson" <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote in message
> news:48495f52$1@news.povray.org...
>> On Fri, 06 Jun 2008 10:14:28 -0400, Warp wrote:
>>
>> > OTOH, 24 Mbit/s ADSL is completely normal
>>
>> In Europe, yes. In the US, no. I got an upgrade recently (for free)
>> to 3 Mbps from 1.5. It's amazing that that still qualifies as
>> "broadband" here in the US.
>
> Down in my neck of the woods 128kb/s qualifies as broadband :-( 512k
> ADSL's the fastest you can get at a reasonable price.
Ouch.
I can remember wanting to get a T1 to my house, at the low, low price of
$1,500 a month.
There's no way I could have afforded that then, heck, I couldn't afford
it *now*.
im
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Warp" <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> wrote in message
news:484c584b@news.povray.org...
> I have 1/1 Mbit/s ADSL as part of my rent. I could upgrade it to
> 10/2 Mbit/s by paying 19.90 euros/month, and 24/2 Mbit/s for 29.90
> euros/month.
*drool*
384kb/s ADSL with a 2GB cap costs around 20 euro/month here
I'm currently paying around 45 euro/month for 256kb/s (theoretical, 128kb/s
is max I've ever seen) wireless internet with a 5 GB cap
> I suppose there are some benefits to living in a technology paradise. :P
>
Yup. Indeed there are...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
And lo on Fri, 06 Jun 2008 13:04:15 +0100, Warp <war### [at] tagpovrayorg> did
spake, saying:
> Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>> Well, I can say with authority that Windows 3.11 was simply an
>> application program that runs under MS-DOS.
>
> Don't you mean "over"? If you say "under" you are effectively saying
> that the underlying system was Windows 3.11, and you ran DOS on top of
> it. Clearly you meant the other way around: The underlying system was
> DOS, and Windows ran on top of it.
Read it in the context of 'Windows 3.11 was under the control of DOS'
--
Phil Cook
--
I once tried to be apathetic, but I just couldn't be bothered
http://flipc.blogspot.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
