NG favourite newsreader

[SINNER]

* John Fitzsimons Wrote in alt.comp.freeware, on Tue, 09 Sep 2003 11:01:24 +1000:

For personal use ? Yep, I am aware of that. You don't appear to be
though. Or are you simply trying to misrepresent things ? Otherwise
why ask where you can download a freeware version ?

Misrepresent things? You mean, take a page from your book? Why bother.

Many freeware programs ask for donations. I have never seen you
complain about that before. Why do you choose to do so now ?

Ask away. Helps other people to know just how good Dialog is.

They should be able to tell by looking at your headers...oops, you don't
use Dialog.

[...]

He could probably go to your home and install it as well. But he
doesn't. If you cannot be bothered reading the license then it is
hardly Marcus's fault.

Interesting that you will not address any of the shortcomings of a beta
program that will eventually be a pay for play program while you slander
a program and its author because you believe it should still be
developed.

I guess there aren't any problems with Dialog, perhaps you should let
Marcus know that it is ready for release especially since you seem to
know so much about newsreader software.

 

[Max Quordlepleen]

If you cannot be bothered to admit that it would be a good thing for
him to let people know about the time limit before downloading, I
guess it's EOT for me.

Well,»Q«, John F will finally admit to being wrong about anything, ever
at the same moment John Howard (another infallible Aussie) learns how
to say the word "Sorry"

 

[Christopher Jahn]

Well, that isn't my experience. In a recent thread in
news.software.readers my comments let to a 113 post thread
that was almost 100% flames by XNews "groupies".

Unless I missed it there was not even a single comment from
Luu Tran. Quite a contrast to Dialog. The Dialog author
regularly responds to my queries/complaints in that
newsgroup. As well as incorporating suggestions made.

Regards, John.

Luu isn't developing Xnews anymore. Once in awhile, a friend
will nag him into one more release.

--
Christopher Jahn
:-(

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/xjahn/Main.html

An idea is not responsible for the people who believe in it.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

I wasn't talking about a file that has all the parts and is
downloading.

I was. And the poster you replied to was talking about previewing
by looking at the first part to decide whether to DL the other
parts, so I thought you were also talking about previewing before
completely DLing an available media file.

I was talking about opening a single multipart.
Where eg. there are five multiparts and only the first is
available.

K. I guess this could be useful in deciding whether or not to
request fills for the missing parts.

In any case, opening a partial file is the same whether the server
has the rest of the file or not.

In this latter situation, only one part of five is available, will
that single (incomplete) part play ?

Maybe. Much depends on the filetype and its encoding. Also, the
one part usually must be the first part, which contains the file's
header.

If so then which media filetypes are we talking about ?

Most partial JPEGs view ok. Depending on how a JPEG is encoded, a
partial copy will either be cut off (so you only see the top) or
will be very low resolution. How much is cut off or how low the
resolution depends on how much of the file you have.

Most partial MP* files will play.

AVI files generally will not, and the various proprietary Windows
media files are a crapshoot.

 

[John Fitzsimons]

* John Fitzsimons Wrote in alt.comp.freeware, on Tue, 09 Sep 2003 11:01:24 +1000:

Mpeg will as will MP3,

Okay. Thanks.

most avi will not. Which ones would you like to talk about?

I simply wanted to know which multiparts would open when incomplete.
A list of two types is pretty short but it is two more than I was
aware of.

My main interest is in graphics multiparts. I wanted to know if "Many
media filetypes are openable even if only a partial file is there."
applied to any of them.

likely the ones you know that DONT work as thats your typical MO.

Why not simply answer the question ? Such dopey statements hardly
help in the answer.

That said, who cares if it will play if the whole thing isnt
available? What good is it?

Well, I thought that if one could open part of a graphic one could
work out whether trying to get any missing parts would be a worthwhile
exercise. As opening only one part of a graphic file doesn't appear
possible from what you say above then I guess that couldn't happen.

Regards, John.

 

[John Fitzsimons]

Luu has better things to than to read and reply to your babble.

He is only interested in hearing from sycophants eh ?

And in contrast to Xnews, the Dialog writer has his own interests in
replying to beta testers. He aims to sell it when beta testing is over.

Fine by me. I will be using the freeware version.

So actually you are a guinea pig for a commercial product. Not really a
reason to beat your chest.
Luu is simply sharing HIS news reader. Once again, his reader.

Fine, and I am simply sharing with others some of the shortcomings of
XNews and attempting to find out what it is capable of.

Regards, John.

 

[John Fitzsimons]

I am not interested in Dialog.

Thought so. Rather explains your inability to understand that there
are better newsreaders than XNews.

Trying out software is not my reason for existance.

Nobody said it was. If however you say XNews is better than Dialog,
when you haven't even tried Dialog, then you look pretty silly making
such a statement.

Regards, John.

 

[John Fitzsimons]

<news:[email protected]>:

I don't recall you being around for it or being involved in Xnews'
development at all.

That sounds like you are talking past tense. Has development stopped ?

Posting a little flamefest to n.s.r hardly qualifies you to
"contrast" the development processes for the two newsreaders.

Typical XNews "groupie" misinformation. The recent flamefest was
totally due to XNews supporters refusing to answer some simple
questions in n.s.r.

Perhaps if XNews supporters simply answered people's questions,
rather than attacked questioners, they might do more for their
software hero ?

The interesting thing was that some guy actually attempted to give me
a sensible answer to my queries and was instantly jumped on by the
XNews fanatics for doing so.

Regards, John.

 

[John Fitzsimons]

<news:[email protected]>:

Most partial JPEGs view ok. Depending on how a JPEG is encoded, a
partial copy will either be cut off (so you only see the top) or
will be very low resolution. How much is cut off or how low the
resolution depends on how much of the file you have.

< snip >

VERY interesting. Thanks for the explanation.

Suppose one had part one of a three part JPEG. Other than trying to
open it would there be any way to tell whether it would depict a full
resolution partial picture OR a full picture of lower resolution ?

Eg. Is there something in the header to look for ?

Regards, John.

 

[John Fitzsimons]

And it came to pass that John Fitzsimons wrote:

Luu isn't developing Xnews anymore. Once in awhile, a friend
will nag him into one more release.

Thanks Christopher. Factual comments about newsreaders are always
helpful for potential uses IMO.

Regards, John.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

Typical XNews "groupie" misinformation. The recent flamefest was
totally due to XNews supporters refusing to answer some simple
questions in n.s.r.

That's a lie. But you already knew that.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

Suppose one had part one of a three part JPEG. Other than trying to
open it would there be any way to tell whether it would depict a full
resolution partial picture OR a full picture of lower resolution ?

Eg. Is there something in the header to look for ?

I don't know. It seems easier to me just to open the file in an image
viewer to find out, rather than in a text or hex viewer to look at its
header info.

You might try a graphics newsgroup for further questions about this.

 

[Bobby]

<

Marcus could have made it much much clearer before a potential user
bothers to download the software. The 40Tude website clearly says
it is beta, but makes no mention of the time limitation.

Thanks Q that was my beef too!

I have not installed the software so was unaware that it was time limited.

Bobby

 

[Bobby]

Wasn't your copy freeware ? How much did you pay for it ?


So you download/use software without checking it's license ?

The license says :

"WARNING This is beta software."

Marcus couldn't have made it much clearer than that.

He also says ;

"EXPIRATION Please note that this version of the software expires
on .... " etc.,

Regards, John.

Well it should be on the site as I read and looked around before downloading
it. I have not unpacked nor installed the software, FYI, I have not read the
license because I downloaded it and while still online read this thread.

If this marcus guy you are so proud of was more upfront
and made it clead on the download site that it was time limited
being that I am on a dial-up connection I
would not have bothered to download it in the first place.

Hope that clears my position up.

Bobby

 

[Onno]

Thought so.

Wow, John! At last you're making some sense.

Rather explains your inability to understand that there
are better newsreaders than XNews.

Ah, guess I cheered a bit too soon.

If however you say XNews is better than Dialog,

I never did.

when you haven't even tried Dialog, then you look pretty silly making
such a statement.

Speak for yourself John. You look very silly making hypothetical
statements.
I am simply not interested in Dialog because I have no need for it, but I
can imagine that other people like it very much.
You, on the other hand, are obsessed with Xnews and can't stand it when
people praise it.

 

[Onno]

Fine by me. I will be using the freeware version.

Really? What features will it have/miss in comparison with the current
version?

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

Fine by me. I will be using the freeware version.

Once upon a time, you used to point out (here in a.c.freeware) that
it was well worth buying the commercial Agent, though there was the
less useful FreeAgent available. Are you sure you won't find
yourself buying Dialog and posting here about its features and low
cost?

 

[John Fitzsimons]

Really? What features will it have/miss in comparison with the current
version?

If all he is currently doing is removing bugs then I expect that
it will be the same functionality as it currently is. From past
experience though I expect that it will have more than it
now has.

Regards, John.

 

[John Fitzsimons]

<news:[email protected]>:

Once upon a time, you used to point out (here in a.c.freeware) that
it was well worth buying the commercial Agent, though there was the
less useful FreeAgent available.

It was worth buying. It is worth buying.

Are you sure you won't find yourself buying Dialog

I possibly will pay for it. Because it helps support the author.
Though I could use it for personal use without paying. As I do at
the moment.

and posting here about its features and low
cost?

I do post here about it's features. As many people ask about
newsreaders. The cost couldn't get lower than "free" so I will
probably post about that as well.

Regards, John.

 

[=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=BBQ=AB?=]

It was worth buying. It is worth buying.

So are many commercial programs. A few people here don't care for
people recommending commercial software in a.c.freeware, though. I
think there's a FAQ which covers this somewhere....

I possibly will pay for it. Because it helps support the author.
Though I could use it for personal use without paying. As I do at
the moment.

Ah, do you mean that as a beta-tester of the limited-distribution you
will be entitled to a gratis copy of the payware Dialog when it is
released?

I do post here about it's features. As many people ask about
newsreaders. The cost couldn't get lower than "free" so I will
probably post about that as well.

I was asking whether you would post here about the features and low
cost of the payware Dialog once it is released, as you did with
Agent. But you knew that.