Offline Readers

On (27 Jan 97) Tom-Remi Flygel wrote to All...

 TF> what on earth is the point in posting html-codes in newsgroups???
 TF> Most people *DON'T* use their web-browser to read/write in
 TF> newsgroups!! The most common are offline readers

May I ask which readers have you used for newsgroups? Obviously, something
that allows the importation of ascii art files (without the continuous cut
and paste) would be quite useful? Right now I'm using my fido point system,
but something that works with Netscape would be great.

Angele

Angele Ryan wrote in alt.ascii-art 02-Feb-97 19:04:31:

>On (27 Jan 97) Tom-Remi Flygel wrote to All...

 TF>> what on earth is the point in posting html-codes in newsgroups???
 TF>> Most people *DON'T* use their web-browser to read/write in
 TF>> newsgroups!! The most common are offline readers

>May I ask which readers have you used for newsgroups? Obviously, something
>that allows the importation of ascii art files (without the continuous cut
>and paste) would be quite useful? Right now I'm using my fido point system,
>but something that works with Netscape would be great.

I'm using an offline reader called Thor for the Amiga. And I'm positively
sure that most people do use an offliner for newsgroups, and HTML-codes
looks like shit in pure ascii-text. Therefore my protest against the
guy who posted 1��pages of pure HTML-code.. What's the point??
Any1 have opinions?? (I might be wrong y'know:)

>Angele


<tsb>
.    .____.____   .___ .__ .____.
|--  |   /| / /   |  /_|- '| / /| Running A12oo/o3o-4o^18Mb RAM^85oMb HD
�\__\!__/ `  /    l   (�\__`  / l uSR 28k8 Sp�rtster ��Email:tom...@online.no
             \ -b7x!          \   oN iRC: Nazgul (mostly EFNet)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-

Tom-Remi Flygel wrote:
> 
> Angele Ryan wrote in alt.ascii-art 02-Feb-97 19:04:31:
> 
> >On (27 Jan 97) Tom-Remi Flygel wrote to All...
> 
>  TF>> what on earth is the point in posting html-codes in newsgroups???
>  TF>> Most people *DON'T* use their web-browser to read/write in
>  TF>> newsgroups!! The most common are offline readers

This is utter nonsense.  I use Netscape for reading the newsgroups.
I have an unlimited account so there is no point in downloading a rash
of messages to read offline when I can pick and choose while online.
 

> I'm using an offline reader called Thor for the Amiga. And I'm positively
> sure that most people do use an offliner for newsgroups, and HTML-codes
> looks like shit in pure ascii-text. Therefore my protest against the
> guy who posted 1� pages of pure HTML-code.. What's the point??
> Any1 have opinions?? (I might be wrong y'know:)

I think you protest "because you use an offline reader" and so have to
download all the garbage to read a few good messages.
The html code produces the same result on a browser as it would if
being seen on a web page.  

I'm with you in that the newsgroups aren't really the place for html
code as it shows little regard for the people using unix or readers
that don't handle the html.

Just my $.02... ;-)


Later,
Planer

pla...@odyssey.net meinte am 05.02.97
zum Thema "Re: Offline Readers":

p> >  TF>> newsgroups!! The most common are offline readers
p>
p> This is utter nonsense.  I use Netscape for reading the newsgroups.
p> I have an unlimited account so there is no point in downloading a rash
p> of messages to read offline when I can pick and choose while online.

Ehm..just because you are using Netscape does not mean that the statement
about offline readers is nonsense. I'd actually agree with that one,  
because usenet readers who do not use their office/student/whatever  
accounts have to pay for their online time, so offline reading is a
much cheaper alternative. I don't want to know what I'd have to pay per
month if I would read all this stuff online... ;-)

p> I think you protest "because you use an offline reader" and so have to
p> download all the garbage to read a few good messages.

How do you distinguish between good and bad stuff without reading it?
A new Netscape feature (red=bad, green=good) ? ;-)

Ciao
  Bernd
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
WWW = World Wide Waste of bandwidth
## CrossPoint v3.1 ##

On Wed, 05 Feb 1997 17:11:22 -0800, Planer <pla...@odyssey.net> wrote:

>Tom-Remi Flygel wrote:
>> 
>>  TF>> what on earth is the point in posting html-codes in newsgroups???
>>  TF>> Most people *DON'T* use their web-browser to read/write in
>>  TF>> newsgroups!! The most common are offline readers
>
>This is utter nonsense.  I use Netscape for reading the newsgroups.
>I have an unlimited account so there is no point in downloading a rash
>of messages to read offline when I can pick and choose while online.

Since he said 'most people', and not 'pla...@odyssey.net', I submit that his
observation is still valid - which means that for 'most people', that stuff is
garbage. However, if you are, in fact, 'most people', then I withdraw the
comment.

>I think you protest "because you use an offline reader" and so have to
>download all the garbage to read a few good messages.

Well... the truth is we don't. We can download only headers, and mark just
those messages we want to actually pick up. There are few things more
frustrating than sitting and waiting for the message to appear on the screen
with excruciating slowness on a busy system - even at 28.8 speed. You really
couldn't pay me enough to do it that way. Reading on my own local stand-alone
system leaves me with far more productive time than I could have the other way.
After all, I don't really have to sit and watch the messages download. Federal
legislation allows me to do other things while it's happening.

All that also ignores the fact that many people (I hesitate to say 'most') also
use the offline reader for far more than merely 'reading messages'. "Agent"
gives me filtering, filing, posting and other capabilities that Netscape's news
window can't begin to approach.

Its spell chicken is also petty goo.

>Just my $.02... ;-)

And well worth the price. ;-)

Just my $.014 Cdn worth.

Alan

My real address is alanp @ netcom.ca (without spaces)
but I'm sick of email spam.

(don't remember who said this)-----------------------------------
Bernd Wolff wrote in alt.ascii-art on 07-Feb-97:                |
>zum Thema "Re: Offline Readers":                               |
                                                                |
>p> >  TF>> newsgroups!! The most common are offline readers    |
>p>                                                             V
>p> This is utter nonsense.  I use Netscape for reading the newsgroups.
>p> I have an unlimited account so there is no point in downloading a rash
>p> of messages to read offline when I can pick and choose while online.

Yes, but it also costs money *being* online! Not everyone have access to
a PC at school on the evenings.. And using an offline reader saves me
money, and I don't have a great urge to start using a browser while reading
newsgroups only because some people post HTML-code in their messages (very few
actually does that).I also call lots of BBS's, and use the same reader for
those messys..so p-lease..

>Ehm..just because you are using Netscape does not mean that the statement
>about offline readers is nonsense. I'd actually agree with that one,
>because usenet readers who do not use their office/student/whatever
>accounts have to pay for their online time, so offline reading is a
>much cheaper alternative. I don't want to know what I'd have to pay per
>month if I would read all this stuff online... ;-)

Exactly! I am not willing to sift through 200+ messages in my web browser,
spending lots of money while sitting online reading them.. Better to read
them after logoff..

>p> I think you protest "because you use an offline reader" and so have to
>p> download all the garbage to read a few good messages.
I protest because it suxx to look at the HTML-code in normal ascii-modus..
You see clean HTML-garbage..And of course, the message gets big, takes
longer time to download..

>How do you distinguish between good and bad stuff without reading it?
>A new Netscape feature (red=bad, green=good) ? ;-)
Maybe Netscape has certain built-in "bad" words and "good" words and
reacts to them while retrieving the news..=;-D

<tsb>
.    .____.____   .___ .__ .____.
|--  |   /| / /   |  /_|- '| / /| Running A12oo/o3o-4o^18Mb RAM^85oMb HD
�\__\!__/ `  /    l   (�\__`  / l uSR 28k8 Sp�rtster ��Email:tom...@online.no
             \ -b7x!          \   oN iRC: Nazgul (mostly EFNet)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
this is a little off the topic of ascii-art, but what the heck? :)

spam_block wrote in alt.ascii-art on 07-Feb-97:
>On Wed, 05 Feb 1997 17:11:22 -0800, Planer <pla...@odyssey.net> wrote:

>>Tom-Remi Flygel wrote:
>>>
>>>  TF>> what on earth is the point in posting html-codes in newsgroups???
>>>  TF>> Most people *DON'T* use their web-browser to read/write in
>>>  TF>> newsgroups!! The most common are offline readers
>>
>>This is utter nonsense.  I use Netscape for reading the newsgroups.
>>I have an unlimited account so there is no point in downloading a rash
>>of messages to read offline when I can pick and choose while online.

>Since he said 'most people', and not 'pla...@odyssey.net', I submit that his
>observation is still valid - which means that for 'most people', that stuff
>is garbage. However, if you are, in fact, 'most people', then I withdraw the
>comment.

>>I think you protest "because you use an offline reader" and so have to
>>download all the garbage to read a few good messages.

>Well... the truth is we don't. We can download only headers, and mark just
>those messages we want to actually pick up. There are few things more
>frustrating than sitting and waiting for the message to appear on the screen
>with excruciating slowness on a busy system - even at 28.8 speed. You really
>couldn't pay me enough to do it that way. Reading on my own local stand-alone
>system leaves me with far more productive time than I could have the other
>way. After all, I don't really have to sit and watch the messages download.
>Federal legislation allows me to do other things while it's happening.

Yes and you can use the same offline reader to read messages from bbs's,
telnet bbs's and so on..which I do.. newsgroup messages are simply filed
under Internet, while the other systems have their names..Much more
comfortable and cheaper. And you get better time to think through your
answers. So there! :)


>All that also ignores the fact that many people (I hesitate to say 'most')
>also use the offline reader for far more than merely 'reading messages'.
>"Agent" gives me filtering, filing, posting and other capabilities that
>Netscape's news window can't begin to approach.

>Its spell chicken is also petty goo.



<tsb>
.    .____.____   .___ .__ .____.
|--  |   /| / /   |  /_|- '| / /| Running A12oo/o3o-4o^18Mb RAM^85oMb HD
�\__\!__/ `  /    l   (�\__`  / l uSR 28k8 Sp�rtster ��Email:tom...@online.no
             \ -b7x!          \   oN iRC: Nazgul (mostly EFNet)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-