Sharing a printer on another computer

[relic]

So that's why you 'groan' that I keep a copy of the program for reference?
I don't get it...

Because the subject has been addressed at least 3 times now and each time
you have suggested it's the fault of their newsreader settings. I've used,
or tried, a dozen newsreaders and all see HTML ok. People who use a dial-up
connection shouldn't have to download 9KB (or more) when a pure text message
would be less than 1KB. That's why a lot of readers will show the abuser
their error; it was common in the Windows XP groups I helped in. This group
seems more in-line with the horrible practices of the old microsoft.public
groups at times.

Sorry if I offended you.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

Because the subject has been addressed at least 3 times now and each time you
have suggested it's the fault of their newsreader settings. I've used, or
tried, a dozen newsreaders and all see HTML ok. People who use a dial-up
connection shouldn't have to download 9KB (or more) when a pure text message
would be less than 1KB. That's why a lot of readers will show the abuser
their error; it was common in the Windows XP groups I helped in. This group
seems more in-line with the horrible practices of the old microsoft.public
groups at times.

Sorry if I offended you.

I still don't see why you complain that I keep a copy of the program
for reference. You have not addressed that question...

And yes, each time I have suggested settings. E.g., this newsreader has
four relevant Text Format settings (that I just was reminded of while
looking for something else):

Automatic
Prefer Text format
Prefer HTML format
Always display in text format

I have the last set and have no problem seeing posts.

BTW, I can't find related settings in Dialog, which I also use.

And because I keep a nasty old reference copy of WLM around (even
though I don't use it), I can even report that I can't find a related
setting there, thus learning that for that newsreader (in my version,
at least) the above suggestion doesn't (seem to) fly.

None of which answers why *you* have a problem with WLM, while other
users of WLM (including me, in my tests) are not messed up by HTLM.

I have only tried to help you in the past. We'll see what the future
holds.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 18:24:17 -0700, Gene E. Bloch

You're a good man to go to that trouble. I usually just limit my
WLM advice to the suggestion to upgrade to anything else.

Thank you for not reacting like relic does

 

[Sid9]

Because the subject has been addressed at least 3 times now and each time
you have suggested it's the fault of their newsreader settings. I've used,
or tried, a dozen newsreaders and all see HTML ok. People who use a
dial-up connection shouldn't have to download 9KB (or more) when a pure
text message would be less than 1KB. That's why a lot of readers will show
the abuser their error; it was common in the Windows XP groups I helped
in. This group seems more in-line with the horrible practices of the old
microsoft.public groups at times.

Sorry if I offended you.

Up until recently my news server would not accept HTML messages I uploaded.
Now it does.
When I had the misfortune of having WLM 2011 on my machine it defaulted (I
think) to HTML.
Thanks to good advice on this news group I removed WLM 2011 and replaced it
with WLM 2009.

You said HTML is not suitable for dialup? I agree.
However, dialup is ancient history along with RS232.

I received some advice in HTML format...it was very nice.
Parts were highlighted in color...very readable.

In consideration for those made uncomfortable with HTML I switched to plain
text.

It would nice to know when those using Usenet are ready to join the 21st
Century.

 

[relic]

Thank you for not reacting like relic does

Please block me.

 

[Rebecca]

Please block me.

ME TOO!

 

[XS11E]

You said HTML is not suitable for dialup? I agree.
However, dialup is ancient history along with RS232.

About 40% of the world is still on dialup, here in the US it's around
30%. Actually, the number is MUCH higher when you consider phones, pad
devices, etc. which often operate on EDGE.

 

[Gene E. Bloch]

Please block me.

No, in spite of my name, I rarely, if ever, do that. I might even not
plonk Rebecca, whether she deserves it or not...

 

[Sid9]

About 40% of the world is still on dialup, here in the US it's around
30%. Actually, the number is MUCH higher when you consider phones, pad
devices, etc. which often operate on EDGE.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dial-up_Internet_access

"...A 2008 Pew Internet and American Life Project study states that only 10
percent of American adults still use dial-up Internet access. Reasons for
retaining dial-up access span from lack of infrastructure to high broadband
prices...."

It's hard to believe dialup users would be heavy into Usenet.

I know nothing of the access speed of the other devices you mention, so I
can't comment.

A 4G device, fast enough for video, should suffice for Usenet.

 

[Char Jackson]

You're not serious, are you? The expression was accurate. The NNTP Server I
am using will block messages with images, messages cross-posted to more than
3 newsgroups, and, yes, they block those very large HTML messages. By
"block", the server will not download them to my client.

Oh, ok, I see what he meant. Thanks for clarifying.

It may seem like little more than semantics, but NNTP servers don't
download (or upload) anything to/from the user. Instead, it's the
client that downloads from or uploads to the server. When the original
statement showed up backwards, it threw me, but it's clear now.

 

[XS11E]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dial-up_Internet_access

"...A 2008 Pew Internet and American Life Project study states
that only 10 percent of American adults still use dial-up Internet
access.

Incorrect. Accurate sources show as low as 55% have HSI in the US,
Dept of Commerce shows around 68% but then contradicts their own

It's hard to believe dialup users would be heavy into Usenet.

I was, used dialup for many years and did until recently.

I know nothing of the access speed of the other devices you
mention, so I can't comment.

A 4G device, fast enough for video, should suffice for Usenet.

So will an EDGE device which is available (4g isn't, much, in spite of
the lies the providers tell). EDGE is comparable to a dialup modem, a
bit faster, and it's probably in use for most mobile phones.