 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sun, 06 Feb 2000 09:12:34 -0800, Ken <tyl### [at] pacbell net> wrote:
>
>
>Steve wrote:
>
>> >irritatingly long (it MUST download all the images twice for some reason that
>> >I don't know), etc.
>>
>> Netscape seems to d/l the images twice here too, extremely annoying, I thought
>> it was something to do with the way I upgraded it.
>
>I have used Netscape exclusively since I started reading these groups
>2-3 years ago. I have never had to download a message twice to see it.
>I have heard others mention this before but I suspect it is operator
>error rather than a problem with Netscape.
This is only on Linux. My only real dissapointment of moving to 100% Linux
is that what used to be a fantastic package for win95 totally sucks in its
Linux incarnation, the mail clients all suck aswell, but it's stable and fairly
fast, and it's interesting. Oh yess I can run 4 instances of Pov, all long
(2-5 day) renders at the same time, and read my mail, my news, compile
software, go surfing with out noticing that I've got so much going on in the
background.
--
Cheers
Steve email mailto:sjl### [at] ndirectcouk
%HAV-A-NICEDAY Error not enough coffee 0 pps.
web http://www.ndirect.co.uk/~sjlen/
or http://start.at/zero-pps
11:36pm up 8:14, 3 users, load average: 2.00, 2.09, 2.09
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Ken <tyl### [at] pacbellnet> wrote:
: I have used Netscape exclusively since I started reading these groups
: 2-3 years ago. I have never had to download a message twice to see it.
It's not that I have to download the message twice to see it; it's that
netscape downloads it twice all by itself although I don't understand why.
The first time it downloads it, it looks just fine, everything is ok. Then
it starts to to download it again, for no apparent reason (funny enough,
this doesn't happen always, but most of the time).
My expression "it must download the image twice" just expressed my
frustration.
--
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Fri, 04 Feb 2000 22:35:58 -0800, Jon A. Cruz wrote:
>I am one of the average people who are more comfortable reading information
>that's not
>splayed completely across the screen, but is instead kept in nicer columns.
>Plain text
>posting is usually wrapped to 80 columns or less, and is more legible. HTML
>postings
>usually don't as well. Take a peek at your average newspaper or magazine to get
>and
>idea of what I mean about columns.
Funny you should mention that... :)
--
These are my opinions. I do NOT speak for the POV-Team.
The superpatch: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/superpatch/
My other stuff: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Sat, 05 Feb 2000 10:42:51 -0800, Leroy Whetstone wrote:
><HTML>
>Is this submission <HTML>?</HTML>
In the netscape sense of the word, yeah. In reality, no, it's
noncompliant. The > sign should be >
--
These are my opinions. I do NOT speak for the POV-Team.
The superpatch: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/superpatch/
My other stuff: http://www2.fwi.com/~parkerr/traces.html
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <slr### [at] rongwmicrocom> ,
ron### [at] povrayorg (Ron Parker) wrote:
>><HTML>
>>Is this submission <HTML>?</HTML>
>
> In the netscape sense of the word, yeah. In reality, no, it's
> noncompliant. The > sign should be >
Interesting you mention that, just yesterday I ran into that trap when
generating a simply html page with the Netscape Communicator Composer.
It is a really annoying bug...
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
