Question - What's "DUW"?

[Mike Poore]

I'm curious about the *DUW* that shows on the thread header, from time to time. :dunno:

[Bluerauder]

I'm curious about the *DUW* that shows on the thread header, from time to time. :dunno:
DUW = Don't You Wish ??? ;)

Or .... could be "Dexia Universal Workstation" :confused:

[Eric91Z]

I think it usually means Dial-Up Warning. In other words, there are usually a number of pictures in the thread and will take forever to load if you are on dial-up.

[MarauderMark]

I think it usually means Dial-Up Warning. In other words, there are usually a number of pictures in the thread and will take forever to load if you are on dial-up.
Heh i saw that before .Thanks for the clarification:up:

[Petrograde]

I was wondering about that too,.. thanks! :up:

[MM03MOK]

Thanks Eric. When some threads get ladened with pictures, I've started adding "Dial-Up Warning" to the titles, if it's not already part of it.

One thing that would help is that it's not necessary to "quote" a string of pictures that are in a post. I've seen this happen multiple times in one thread alone. Not necessary. Same thing happens with full posts but those aren't bandwidth hogs. We can't forget our bandwidth-challenged brethren and sisteren! ;)

[Petrograde]

is anyone still even using dial-up? :P

[MENINBLK]

is anyone still even using dial-up? :P

More than 50% of Americas that access the internet,
arte still accessing it through Dial Up because there are no other
methods of access available to them.

So for those of you with Broadband, consider yourself lucky.

America is not as "Plugged In" as you think it is...

[SergntMac]

is anyone still even using dial-up? :PYeah...Ya gottaproblemwiddat? LOL...

[SergntMac]

Yeah, it bugs me too when someone quotes a full page essay, just to say "that's cool".

[Petrograde]

More than 50% of Americas that access the internet,
arte still accessing it through Dial Up because there are no other
methods of access available to them.

So for those of you with Broadband, consider yourself lucky.

America is not as "Plugged In" as you think it is...

really? only more than 50%? wow,.. I guess I'm a lucky bastage! :P

[gdmjoe]

Petrograde - is anyone still even using dial-up? :P
Yes sir ..... advantage(?) of moving to Timbuk3 in the pucker-brush where there isn't cable nor DSL (yet) and a dish connection would be $600 up-front and ~$60 / month. :depress:

*For the time being, I've gone with NetZero HiSpeed and it t'ain't toooooo bad. Though I sure do miss my BellSouth FastAccess DSL.

[Tallboy]

More than 50% of Americas that access the internet,
arte still accessing it through Dial Up because there are no other
methods of access available to them.

So for those of you with Broadband, consider yourself lucky.

America is not as "Plugged In" as you think it is...

Wrong.

Broadband is available to 99 percent of the U.S. population. The FCC found more than one service provider is present in 83 percent of the nation's Zip codes.

[shakes_26]

Yes but there are plenty o' cheap a$$es out there. And I beleive the Dumas family is quite large too..... :rolleyes:


Wrong.

Broadband is available to 99 percent of the U.S. population. The FCC found more than one service provider is present in 83 percent of the nation's Zip codes.

[MM03MOK]

Here's your July 2005 FCC report.

http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Reports/FCC-State_Link/IAD/hspd0705.pdf


For reporting purposes, high-speed lines are connections that deliver services at speeds exceeding 200 kilobits per second (kbps) in at least one direction, while advanced services lines are connections that deliver services at speeds exceeding 200 kbps in both directions.

At the end of 2004, the service providers that report to the Commission had at least one high-speed service subscriber in 95% of the nation’s zip codes. Our analysis indicates that 99% of the country’ s population lives in the se zip codes.

It's misleading in using 200 kbps as the base for "high-speed lines" though it is almost 4 times faster than a standard dial-up. Also, only one subscriber in a zip code means that whole zip code has access. This is not at all true, especially where DSL is concerned.

As far as choice is concerned, price is a big factor.

Anywho, be aware that not everyone has high speed connections.

[Blackened300a]

Yeah, it bugs me too when someone quotes a full page essay, just to say "that's cool".

This is cool

[Mike Poore]

Thanks Eric. When some threads get ladened with pictures, I've started adding "Dial-Up Warning" to the titles, if it's not already part of it.

One thing that would help is that it's not necessary to "quote" a string of pictures ... We can't forget our bandwidth-challenged brethren and sisteren! ;)

That's interesting, Mary, and thanks for saving us from ourselves.

Here's a question, from an administrative and or, courtesy standpoint.

Using my hood scoop thread as an example, I posted a question, of about a paragraph, and as the discussion went on, others posted photos to make various points, which got re-posted then, more photos added by other folks. Now, is it the sum of all the pictures in the entire thread that's gonna bog down the guy with dial-up, or is it the total of the pictures in a single post. Is bandwidth (something I see Logan grousing about from time to time) an issue here, and are there ways we can be better guests, such as posting links, rather than pictures?

In my post about the hood scoop, Dave, in my opinion, appropriately posted photos to make his point, as they were an important asset to his argument. In that, case, it seems to me, using links instead of the photos would have become cumbersome, and would have taken away from the discussion. I do agree, however, that those who quoted Dave, along with his pictures, were junking up the issue with needless repetition by re-publishing the photos all over again.

Please share your thoughts on, if, or how, we should add photos, how many is appropriate, and how big/small should they be.

If I start a thread that has photos, should I add the *DUW* header myself?

[MM03MOK]

Here's :bunny:'s opinion/info:

If the pictures are hosted elsewhere, or you use links to another website, there is no strain on Logan's server/bandwidth.
If the pictures are hosted in the Gallery or as attachments, quoting such pictures in a thread is taxing on Logan's bandwidth.
Using links to the Member Gallery is a good idea if there are multiple pictures to be shown. Each link, if you use the URL listed on that photo page, opens a new window for each picture. Or, link to the Member's Gallery page to see multiple pictures. Either of these methods is helpful for dial-up users.
The Gallery default for pictures that are large, seems to be set at 1280x960. Those are too large to appear in a post, both for size and download speed. Resize pictures you want to appear in threads to 640x480.
In a thread, each picture has to download individually, one at a time, so each picture is a drain on time for the dial-up user.
Feel free to add "DUW" to any thread you start that might necessitate it.
Dial-up Members also have this option, found in Edit Options:
Visible Post Elements
<TABLE cellSpacing=3 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD>You have the option to show or hide various elements of messages, which may be of use to users on slow internet connections, or who want to remove extraneous clutter from posts.</TD></TR><TR><TD><LABEL for=cb_showsignatures><INPUT id=cb_showsignatures type=checkbox CHECKED value=1 name=options[showsignatures]>Show Signatures</LABEL><INPUT type=hidden value=1 name=set_options[showsignatures]>
<LABEL for=cb_showavatars><INPUT id=cb_showavatars type=checkbox CHECKED value=1 name=options[showavatars]>Show Avatars</LABEL><INPUT type=hidden value=1 name=set_options[showavatars]>
<LABEL for=cb_showimages><INPUT id=cb_showimages type=checkbox CHECKED value=1 name=options[showimages]>Show Images (including attached images and images in [IMG] code)</LABEL><INPUT type=hidden value=1 name=set_options[showimages]>
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


In the end, just be reasonable.
Logan: can the Gallery default size be reduced, or similar to the last Gallery, also create a smaller version - 640x480?

[Mike Poore]

Thanks Mary. Wonderful explination, and guess what? I didn't know any of that stuff.

Now, there's another issue:

Mary, you are getting verry sleepy.....eyelids getting heavy.....must sleep .......no time to look at other threads .....buttermilk thread can wait until morning .......must get sleep ....soon:sleepy: