12379f108b97
tech

Hello Wayne - 

--8<--cut 

WC>> The blasted computer running Win XP at a GHz with cable
WC>> modem is three times slower than my 66 Mhz 486 running
WC>> Windows 3.1 and a 28,800 dialup!!! 

--8<--cut 

WC> I was attempting to load www.gist.com hardly a slow page
WC> but I left the computer in disgust before it ever loaded. 

CA>> Once you have the newer hardware and software you're
CA>> forced to accept the 'alternate' page with all the bloat
CA>> which, as you have said, would make you wonder what you
CA>> had gotten for the money. 

WC> I'm certain FTP would have been fast but I was just trying
WC> to surf and that was impossibly slow. Getting to FTP would
WC> be another matter entirely. It was obvious the slowup
WC> wasn't in the net connection but the incredibly sleepy Win
WC> XP. 

I'm not familiar with www.gist.com but will look at it later
(not online right now). As I said, there are often two or more
versions of the same page rotated by 'sniffers' according to
what browser they can detect. Your being at a newer machine
with a newer browser earned you the full-blown page is my guess. 

(Some time passes ...) 

OK ... I tried www.gist.com using W31 Opera v3.62 and it loaded
in 23 seconds but the TV listings display was skewed and parts
were unreadable (offscreen to the right). I found this in the
source code (HTML) of that page: 

 

You can easilly see by this they are 'sniffing' to determine
what OS and what browser I am using. This is incorrect, btw,
Opera v3.62 should be ID'd as Mozilla 3 not 4. Other javascript
added to the page changed names when I tried using the unix
LYNX text-only browser. When accessing via LYNX I get: 

 

This line is in the same location as the one above but
indicates the LYNX browser has been 'sniffed'. The other
included javascript name changes to 'breadcrumbs' which gives
you an idea of the maturity of the persons writing the HTML
code to refer to text-only as 'bread crumbs'? 

Netscape v4.08 did load the page with no problems the first
time but would not load the page again nor refresh the page? 

When I tried using IEx v3.0f the screen just sat there no page
display was sent back to my browser at all. My second attempt
using LYNX also delivered no page display but the first and
third did? I would say children have written their 'sniffer'
and their HTML and the website is somewhat fubar'd? There is
nothing there that requires this degree of complexity, it's
just a waste of time/money to write a website this way. 

This is not to say XP is perfect or wonderful, only that you
happened to select a fubar'd website as a test. My daughter has
been writing websites for several years now and I assist when
she is on overload. My opinion of what is 'fubar' is somewhat
of a professional opinion? 

Try using http://tv.yahoo.com/ and you will get a fast,
efficient, useful display for local or cable (your choice). The
link to this TV page (and more) is setup on my default browser
homepage at: 

http://www.undercoverdesign.com/dosghost/homepage.asp 

WC> What an incredibly pretty picture the monitor presented but
WC> ask the damned thing to _DO_ anything and you'd best be
WC> prepared to take a nap :-( 

Most do like the 'presentation' side of XP. I've not spent
enough time with it to really notice but I _think_ it has
translucent menus and I do like that myself. 

WC> The landlady told me it took a long time to boot but I
WC> didn't attempt that as I don't expect to live long enough
WC> to see that through to the finish. 

I do think everyone using XP has mentioned it does take awhile
to come alive, yes. 

>
>        ,                                        ,
>      o/      Charles_Angelich  - DOS Ghost       \o       ,
>       __o/
>     / >  www.undercoverdesign.com/dosghost/faf/  < \   __\__
 

___ * ATP/16bit 2.31 * 
... DOS the Ghost in the Machine! http://www.undercoverdesign.com/dosghost/

--- Maximus/2 3.01