> > From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2006/06/21 Wed AM 05:52:56 GMT > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: July PUG deadline today > > I don't want to start a flame war here, and before this escalates further, > perhaps you can define what constitutes a long time, Ann. How long does it > take for you to DL an image of about 150K? What do you mean when you say > it slows your system down? > > What speed is your modem and connection? How old is your computer, and how > fast is the processor and the hard drives? > > I'm asking because it's easy to just bandy about terms, but without some > details they mean nothing. > > I'm on dial-up, and my connection is often about 46 whatevers per second, > not the full 56 of the modem's rating. Regardless, I've no problem > downloading a file of about 200k. I've not timed it, but such a file is > well within my patience limit, and certainly doesn't seem excessive. > > Godders' files load pretty quickly for me, and, more than some people, I > know he makes an effort to keep the size reasonable. Posting a link to > larger sized files requires that he use more of his resources to allow a > broader range of people, on a wider range of machines, to view his work, > should they care to. That, imo, is far from elitist. It's whatever the > opposite of elitist is. And, FWIW, his larger files download pretty > quickly on my machine as well. > > Now, in truth, I don't know what other factors besides the modem speed and > the connection speed effect the final download speed, and it may be because > my machine is newer than yours that things move a little faster, but, in > all honesty, I don't believe that a larger hard drive or faster or more > memory, or a faster CPU, have that great an effect on how long it takes to > DL a file. If those things do, maybe there are some tweaks and adjustments > you can make to your machine. You don't seem very computer savvy, so maybe > some of the more knowledgeable folks here can help you. You've certainly > got a number of friends here who know what they're doing in this regard.
Not to answer too much for Ann but I know her machine is probably the better part of ten years old. Its inbuilt memory will be smaller than the size of picture file we are talking about. The HDD may well be full enough to cause problems with scratch files. The processor, IIRC, is a 233Mhz. Combined with an modem of unknown, but possibly equally ancient, provenance I imagine most modern webpages take a noticable time to download. Using a semi-multitasking OS will not help. All of these combine to create a situation whereby her machine _does_ have a considerable effect on her participation. Ann will not be the only one who participates in this list with these technical "shortcomings". The corollary to that depends on the conscience of the individual. > > Perhaps you've been a little quick to pass judgement on Godders and Paul. > > Shel > > > > > [Original Message] > > From: Ann Sanfedele > > > > What, Paul, you too? > > > > Dial-up is NOT dead by a long shot. > > I can't even get anything else in my neighborhood right > > now even if i could afford it.... and I can't. > > > > As it is, I can't see half the stuff you guys post to the > > list to look at because it > > takes so long to load and it slows down the system trying. > > > > I wish I could have faster access - it takes me too long to > > list things on ebay, too > > long to do everything, but what part of some of us don't > > have the bucks don't you > > guys understand?? > > > > IT really is very hurtful > > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > ----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
