-=> ROY J. TELLASON wrote to WAYNE CHIRNSIDE <=-

 RJT> The linux box is at 800x600,  the monitor will supposedly do
 RJT> 1024x768,

 WC> The latter figure is what I'm running 98 at and it'll go one higher
 WC> before the sync slips.

 RJT> Oh.  Sounds like it's a bit more capable then the one I have on the 98
 RJT> box here.  The one I have on the linux box is also,  as it happens,  an
 RJT> older P-B monitor.  I picked it up at a yard sale for $5...

This one came out of a dumpster across the street :-)
Also a P.B. and so old it just squeaked in with energy star compliance.

 RJT> but I have some bugs to get out of the modelines in the config
 RJT> file before that's working right.  I also have an IBM monitor here
 RJT> that'll only do 640x480 and 1024x768,  but _not_ 800x600 for some
 RJT> strange reason -- was told that before I got it.  I had that
 RJT> hooked up to the OS/2 box and at the higher resolution things got
 RJT> very small.

 WC> That is a problem for me.

 RJT> Wouldn't be a problem on a bigger monitor,  I guess.

 Long range plan.

 WC> Landlady sprung for a 21 inch flat screen and loves it.

 RJT> I don't think I've ever seen a flat screen that size.  I really should
 RJT> go out shopping one of these days,  just to get a handle on what's out
 RJT> there.

 I did a buffered streaming video last night and the quality
 was remarkable. If they get the DSL lines up to spec to what
 is now technically possible we'll be able to watch HDTV
 unbuffered on a monitor!!!

 WC> I'm not crowded here so I could easily go 640 x 480 but what would
 WC> that do to the ladies of alt.binary.pictures.erotic.brunette ;-)

 RJT> Depends on the resolution of the original image,  and on what you are
 RJT> using to view them in terms of software.  Sometimes with that sort of
 RJT> thing color depth can be more important than resolution.  You'll have
 RJT> to fiddle with settings and see what works for you.

Seems these artistic expressive types are now using some
rather high quality digital cameras or scanners to post
as the images on this system are in many cases as good as
chemical photography 8x10's.

 RJT> Once you get linux
 RJT> going,  you'll also have to play a little with "the
gimp",  that's one
 RJT> hell of a powerful program,  and I haven't even begun to explore all of
 RJT> its capabilities,  though I am at this point getting some useful work
 RJT> done with it,  mostly cropping images that have absurd amounts of
 RJT> graphic "border" around them featuring names of companies that no
 RJT> longer exist,  bbs numbers that haven't existed for a number of years,
 RJT> and similar stuff.  Start out with a .gif file that's up around
 RJT> 600-700K,  and removing this sort of junk cuts the size in half.
 RJT> Convert it to .jpg and the end result is down around 40-60k!  I guess
 RJT> that padding lets them look like they're filling up a cdrom,  when in
 RJT> reality they're not doing anything close.

Someone sent me a PDF with just a short message and photo, around
.5 meg, later sent same photo JPG, 66K and the image was larger.

 RJT> One nice thing about the browser window that's currently on the screen
 RJT> is a pair of magnifying glass icons on the toolbar,  one with a + next
 RJT> to it,  and one with a -.  These will let you get real comfortable and
 RJT> scale things to whatever works for you...

I need that. Looking at Barnes & Noble they had Redhat 7.3
with a book but it said it required 128 Meg RAM :-(

 WC> I need to get back to the NEC which has Linux on it but I also need
 WC> to slow down for a bit. Definately will get Linux going when I
 WC> switch ISP's as I expect my authorization SMTP problem to vanish.
 WC> See post to me from paul Williams in last packet regarding an ISP
 WC> at 10 dollars a month where he claims nationwide numbers.

 RJT> Yeah,  I noticed that...

Just had a unpleasant thought I might _have_ to buy Norton's
firewall and virus package as I'm not certain Internet Junction
allows you to access the server directly to review mail
before downloading it locally. I would think they would
though I'll have to check into it.
I've filtered out a lot of
malicious file attachments that way as well as cut my spam now
down to 10 percent of what it once was. Norton's not too bad at
30 bucks after rebate but it's 60 out of pocket at CompUSA.
 
--- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.43