------------- And now for something completely different... (Read the Zero file) - File 1 of 1 - B-52_Stratofortress.rar (000/248)

[Lee[_2_]]

This post is about 85mb. It is a book. It is in pdf format. There are no
sneaky little bugs hiding in it.

I post this 'cause it's a GOOD book. *Lots* of tech stuff, lots of history,
tail numbers, named birds, all the auger-jobs and around 200 hundred
pictures - color and B/W.

Some may have this book. I'd guess most don't.

For those who can't handle RAR files, let me know and I (or someone else if
I'm away for a while) can walk you through the EASY steps. Most of you may
already have all the software you need to unarchive it and not know it.
As for the reader, does anyone *not* have Adobe Acrobat?

No flames please. It *is* a binary file. It has LOTS of photos. It *is*
about an aircraft. And for the resident site pest, I'm not making any money
off this book, so it isn't "SPAM!"

Again, it is a *good* book.

------------------------------------------------

Tony Thornborough, Peter E. Davies - Boeing B-52 Stratofortress
Crowood Press | 1998 | ISBN: 1861261136 | 176 pages | PDF | 84.89 MB

[Steve Vernon]

"Lee" > wrote in message
6.95...
> This post is about 85mb. It is a book. It is in pdf format. There are no
> sneaky little bugs hiding in it.
>
> I post this 'cause it's a GOOD book. *Lots* of tech stuff, lots of
> history,
> tail numbers, named birds, all the auger-jobs and around 200 hundred
> pictures - color and B/W.
>
> Some may have this book. I'd guess most don't.
>
> For those who can't handle RAR files, let me know and I (or someone else
> if
> I'm away for a while) can walk you through the EASY steps. Most of you may
> already have all the software you need to unarchive it and not know it.
> As for the reader, does anyone *not* have Adobe Acrobat?
>
> No flames please. It *is* a binary file. It has LOTS of photos. It *is*
> about an aircraft. And for the resident site pest, I'm not making any
> money
> off this book, so it isn't "SPAM!"
>
> Again, it is a *good* book.
>
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Tony Thornborough, Peter E. Davies - Boeing B-52 Stratofortress
> Crowood Press | 1998 | ISBN: 1861261136 | 176 pages | PDF | 84.89 MB

i agree with all you say, but don't we have alt.binaries.multimedia.aviation
for posts such as these?

[Lee[_2_]]

"Steve Vernon" > wrote in
:


>
> i agree with all you say, but don't we have
> alt.binaries.multimedia.aviation for posts such as these?
>


It is not a multimedia file. It is a book.

Out of the eighty-five thousand-odd groups carried by my service do the
words "aviation" and "books" appear in any newsgroup name. So, posting this
anywhere in usenet is going to be a violation of some arbitrary "Do Not"
rule.

The closet applicable group is this one (binaries? Check. pictures? Check.
aviation? Check), where I believe some might actually appreciate knowing
about nearly every detail of the Buff livery.

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Lee" > wrote

> It is not a multimedia file. It is a book.
>
> Out of the eighty-five thousand-odd groups carried by my service do the
> words "aviation" and "books" appear in any newsgroup name. So, posting
> this
> anywhere in usenet is going to be a violation of some arbitrary "Do Not"
> rule.

How about giving a blow by blow about how to read the files with Microsoft
OE, using what free program (totally free, not trial, not pay by using an
advertisers product.

I am fairly smart with a computer, but I could not figure it out in a
reasonable period of time, and gave up. I gotta think there is a better
way.
--
Jim in NC

[Dave Kearton[_3_]]

"Lee" > wrote in message
. 91...
> "Steve Vernon" > wrote in
> :
>
>
>>
>> i agree with all you say, but don't we have
>> alt.binaries.multimedia.aviation for posts such as these?
>>
>
>
> It is not a multimedia file. It is a book.
>
> Out of the eighty-five thousand-odd groups carried by my service do the
> words "aviation" and "books" appear in any newsgroup name. So, posting
> this
> anywhere in usenet is going to be a violation of some arbitrary "Do Not"
> rule.
>
> The closet applicable group is this one (binaries? Check. pictures? Check.
> aviation? Check), where I believe some might actually appreciate knowing
> about nearly every detail of the Buff livery.




Certainly is a worthwhile reference book, thanks for posting it.




--


Cheers

Dave Kearton

[Waldo.Pepper[_2_]]

> How about giving a blow by blow about how to read the files with Microsoft
>OE, using what free program (totally free, not trial, not pay by using an
>advertisers product.
>
>I am fairly smart with a computer, but I could not figure it out in a
>reasonable period of time, and gave up. I gotta think there is a better
>way.

Done.

I wrote this some years ago. Will it do?

http://rapidshare.com/files/222734612/Binary_Newsgroup_Tutorial_for_Outlook_Express_and_ Quickpar.pdf.html

Waldo.

[S.B.[_2_]]

Lee wrote:

> It is not a multimedia file. It is a book.

> Out of the eighty-five thousand-odd groups carried by my service do the
> words "aviation" and "books" appear in any newsgroup name. So, posting this
> anywhere in usenet is going to be a violation of some arbitrary "Do Not"
> rule.

> The closet applicable group is this one (binaries? Check. pictures? Check.
> aviation? Check), where I believe some might actually appreciate knowing
> about nearly every detail of the Buff livery.

alt.binaries.e-book.technical might have been an appropriate place.
Many similar aviation books in .pdf format have been posted there.
Nevertheless, thank you for a most interesting book.

[hielan' laddie]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 04:19:35 -0400, Waldo.Pepper wrote
(in article >):

>> How about giving a blow by blow about how to read the files with Microsoft
>> OE, using what free program (totally free, not trial, not pay by using an
>> advertisers product.
>>
>> I am fairly smart with a computer, but I could not figure it out in a
>> reasonable period of time, and gave up. I gotta think there is a better
>> way.
>
> Done.
>
> I wrote this some years ago. Will it do?
>
>
http://rapidshare.com/files/222734612/Binary_Newsgroup_Tutorial_for_Outlook_Ex

> press_and_Quickpar.pdf.html
>
> Waldo.

Nice tutorial. It still doesn't take the pain out of using MSOE for something
it was never designed to do, but it _does_ show how to do it...

[hielan' laddie]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 01:32:38 -0400, Morgans wrote
(in article >):

>
> "Lee" > wrote
>
>> It is not a multimedia file. It is a book.
>>
>> Out of the eighty-five thousand-odd groups carried by my service do the
>> words "aviation" and "books" appear in any newsgroup name. So, posting
>> this
>> anywhere in usenet is going to be a violation of some arbitrary "Do Not"
>> rule.
>
> How about giving a blow by blow about how to read the files with Microsoft
> OE, using what free program (totally free, not trial, not pay by using an
> advertisers product.

Get Forte Free Agent on Windows or MT-NewsWatcher on Mac. Both are free. Both
are real newsreaders. MSOE is not a real newsreader.

>
> I am fairly smart with a computer, but I could not figure it out in a
> reasonable period of time, and gave up. I gotta think there is a better
> way.
>

The file in question comes in 248 parts. To access it in MSOE you'd have to
select all 248 parts, download them, combine them in some way, and then
decode them with one the myriad free .RAR decoders. (I usually use QuickPAR
on Windows or MaccPAR Deluxe on Macs)

Note that if you use a real newsreader, such as Free Agent or MT-NW, you can
download all 248 parts with one click. If you insist on using MSOE, you're
going to be working too hard when you try to download multi-segment binary
posts. This is because MSOE was not designed to be a real newsreader and you
are trying to use it for activities which are beyond its specs. You can waste
time using MSOE, or you can ignore large binaries, or you can get a real
newsreader. Pick one. It's up to you.

[G Paleologopoulos]

"hielan' laddie" > wrote
...
>
>..............................................
>
> The file in question comes in 248 parts. To access it in MSOE you'd have
> to
> select all 248 parts, download them, combine them in some way, and then
> decode them with one the myriad free .RAR decoders. (I usually use
> QuickPAR
> on Windows or MaccPAR Deluxe on Macs)
>
> Note that if you use a real newsreader, such as Free Agent or MT-NW, you
> can
> download all 248 parts with one click. If you insist on using MSOE, you're
> going to be working too hard when you try to download multi-segment binary
> posts. This is because MSOE was not designed to be a real newsreader and
> you
> are trying to use it for activities which are beyond its specs. You can
> waste
> time using MSOE, or you can ignore large binaries, or you can get a real
> newsreader. Pick one. It's up to you.



Or all this surreal druggery can be bypassed by simly plonking down a URL
for people to click on and get the file.

[Gary R. Schmidt]

Lee wrote:
> This post is about 85mb. It is a book. It is in pdf format. There are no
> sneaky little bugs hiding in it.
>
Missing parts (at my end, anyway):
6, 16, 41, 42, 59, 61, 66, 67, 69, 70, 72, 73, 79, 80, 83, 84, 85, 86,
88, 89, 92, 94, 95, 97, 98, 104, 110, 146, 159, 171, 219, 241, 242, 243,
244, 245.

If I get it all, I'll bung it on a website and post a link.

Cheers,
Gary B-)

[[email protected]]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 09:45:35 +0100, S.B. > wrote:

>Lee wrote:
>
>> It is not a multimedia file. It is a book.
>
>> Out of the eighty-five thousand-odd groups carried by my service do the
>> words "aviation" and "books" appear in any newsgroup name. So, posting this
>> anywhere in usenet is going to be a violation of some arbitrary "Do Not"
>> rule.
>
>> The closet applicable group is this one (binaries? Check. pictures? Check.
>> aviation? Check), where I believe some might actually appreciate knowing
>> about nearly every detail of the Buff livery.
>
>alt.binaries.e-book.technical might have been an appropriate place.
>Many similar aviation books in .pdf format have been posted there.
>Nevertheless, thank you for a most interesting book.


Indeed. Posting PARs would also have been helpful.
------

Robert

Uncommon Aircraft: http://fire.prohosting.com/hud607/uncommon

[hielan' laddie]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 11:50:16 -0400, G Paleologopoulos wrote
(in article <1240069817.97424@athprx03>):

> "hielan' laddie" > wrote
> ...
>>
>> ..............................................
>>
>> The file in question comes in 248 parts. To access it in MSOE you'd have
>> to
>> select all 248 parts, download them, combine them in some way, and then
>> decode them with one the myriad free .RAR decoders. (I usually use
>> QuickPAR
>> on Windows or MaccPAR Deluxe on Macs)
>>
>> Note that if you use a real newsreader, such as Free Agent or MT-NW, you
>> can
>> download all 248 parts with one click. If you insist on using MSOE, you're
>> going to be working too hard when you try to download multi-segment binary
>> posts. This is because MSOE was not designed to be a real newsreader and
>> you
>> are trying to use it for activities which are beyond its specs. You can
>> waste
>> time using MSOE, or you can ignore large binaries, or you can get a real
>> newsreader. Pick one. It's up to you.
>
>
>
> Or all this surreal druggery can be bypassed by simly plonking down a URL
> for people to click on and get the file.
>

Easier (and cheaper!) to post it to USENET as normal, and let those who want
it get it... or not. I see no particular reason to spend _my_ money to make
life easier for others who decline to use free or cheap tools. Free Agent is
free. QuickPAR is free. MT-NW is free. MacPAR Deluxe is free. You can use
'em, or not. It's all the same to me.

And, of course, there is the simple fact that if you _do_ post something with
a URL telling the local denizens where to find your stuff, some people (Hi,
Alan-me-lad! Still haven't reported my 'forged' headers to Newsguy, eh?) will
scream that you're spamming the group, so you end up paying good money to be
slandered. Thanks, but no thanks.

[hielan' laddie]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 12:59:05 -0400, Gary R. Schmidt wrote
(in article >):

> Lee wrote:
>> This post is about 85mb. It is a book. It is in pdf format. There are no
>> sneaky little bugs hiding in it.
>>
> Missing parts (at my end, anyway):
> 6, 16, 41, 42, 59, 61, 66, 67, 69, 70, 72, 73, 79, 80, 83, 84, 85, 86,
> 88, 89, 92, 94, 95, 97, 98, 104, 110, 146, 159, 171, 219, 241, 242, 243,
> 244, 245.
>
> If I get it all, I'll bung it on a website and post a link.
>
> Cheers,
> Gary B-)

I've got the whole thing. I'll repost it.

[hielan' laddie]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 14:44:18 -0400, wrote
(in article >):

> On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 09:45:35 +0100, S.B. > wrote:
>
>> Lee wrote:
>>
>>> It is not a multimedia file. It is a book.
>>
>>> Out of the eighty-five thousand-odd groups carried by my service do the
>>> words "aviation" and "books" appear in any newsgroup name. So, posting
>>> this
>>> anywhere in usenet is going to be a violation of some arbitrary "Do Not"
>>> rule.
>>
>>> The closet applicable group is this one (binaries? Check. pictures? Check.
>>> aviation? Check), where I believe some might actually appreciate knowing
>>> about nearly every detail of the Buff livery.
>>
>> alt.binaries.e-book.technical might have been an appropriate place.
>> Many similar aviation books in .pdf format have been posted there.
>> Nevertheless, thank you for a most interesting book.
>
>
> Indeed. Posting PARs would also have been helpful.
> ------
>
> Robert
>
> Uncommon Aircraft: http://fire.prohosting.com/hud607/uncommon

the whole thing, and some PAR2s, is going up now.

[Mitchell Holman[_3_]]

"Morgans" > wrote in
:

>
> "Lee" > wrote
>
>> It is not a multimedia file. It is a book.
>>
>> Out of the eighty-five thousand-odd groups carried by my service do
>> the words "aviation" and "books" appear in any newsgroup name. So,
>> posting this
>> anywhere in usenet is going to be a violation of some arbitrary "Do
>> Not" rule.
>
> How about giving a blow by blow about how to read the files with
> Microsoft
> OE, using what free program (totally free, not trial, not pay by using
> an advertisers product.
>
> I am fairly smart with a computer, but I could not figure it out in a
> reasonable period of time, and gave up. I gotta think there is a
> better way.


There may be a reason to depart from the file formats
that have been used here for decades but danged if I can
figure out what it is.

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Mitchell Holman" > wrote

> There may be a reason to depart from the file formats
> that have been used here for decades but danged if I can
> figure out what it is.

Amen, brother!

I gave up. The B-52 is not all that interesting to me, anyway.
--
Jim in NC

[heavyhorses]

"hielan' laddie" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 12:59:05 -0400, Gary R. Schmidt wrote
> (in article >):
>
>> Lee wrote:
>>> This post is about 85mb. It is a book. It is in pdf format. There are
>>> no
>>> sneaky little bugs hiding in it.
>>>
>> Missing parts (at my end, anyway):
>> 6, 16, 41, 42, 59, 61, 66, 67, 69, 70, 72, 73, 79, 80, 83, 84, 85, 86,
>> 88, 89, 92, 94, 95, 97, 98, 104, 110, 146, 159, 171, 219, 241, 242, 243,
>> 244, 245.
>>
>> If I get it all, I'll bung it on a website and post a link.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Gary B-)
>
> I've got the whole thing. I'll repost it.

Which bit of "pictures" do you yenc dick heads not understand ?

[Alan Erskine[_3_]]

"heavyhorses" > wrote in message
...

> Which bit of "pictures" do you yenc dick heads not understand ?

This, as I recall, is how the Lee troll came into the argument.

[hielan' laddie]

On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 03:46:16 -0400, heavyhorses wrote
(in article >):

>
> "hielan' laddie" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 12:59:05 -0400, Gary R. Schmidt wrote
>> (in article >):
>>
>>> Lee wrote:
>>>> This post is about 85mb. It is a book. It is in pdf format. There are
>>>> no
>>>> sneaky little bugs hiding in it.
>>>>
>>> Missing parts (at my end, anyway):
>>> 6, 16, 41, 42, 59, 61, 66, 67, 69, 70, 72, 73, 79, 80, 83, 84, 85, 86,
>>> 88, 89, 92, 94, 95, 97, 98, 104, 110, 146, 159, 171, 219, 241, 242, 243,
>>> 244, 245.
>>>
>>> If I get it all, I'll bung it on a website and post a link.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Gary B-)
>>
>> I've got the whole thing. I'll repost it.
>
> Which bit of "pictures" do you yenc dick heads not understand ?
>
>

I see that someone doesn't like YENC. How sad. Too bad.

[hielan' laddie]

On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 05:43:47 -0400, Alan Erskine wrote
(in article >):

> "heavyhorses" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Which bit of "pictures" do you yenc dick heads not understand ?
>
> This, as I recall, is how the Lee troll came into the argument.
>
>

So, Alan-me-lad, have you got around to reporting my 'forged' headers to
Newsguy yet? Didn't think so.

[hielan' laddie]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 22:26:28 -0400, Morgans wrote
(in article >):

>
> "Mitchell Holman" > wrote
>
>> There may be a reason to depart from the file formats
>> that have been used here for decades but danged if I can
>> figure out what it is.
>
> Amen, brother!
>
> I gave up. The B-52 is not all that interesting to me, anyway.
>

Cool. Don't download it.

[Dave W[_2_]]

In article >,
hielan' laddie > wrote:

> On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 22:26:28 -0400, Morgans wrote
> (in article >):
>
> >
> > "Mitchell Holman" > wrote
> >
> >> There may be a reason to depart from the file formats
> >> that have been used here for decades but danged if I can
> >> figure out what it is.
> >
> > Amen, brother!
> >
> > I gave up. The B-52 is not all that interesting to me, anyway.
> >
> Cool. Don't download it.

Yeah, I'm not that turned on by B-52s either, but I downloaded it
anyway. Turns out I didn't need the par files ... the pdf got through
without a glitch. I'm also not a fan of pdf files ... but this one is
very nice. I may even end up appreciating B-52s.

Thanks for the post.

In the ozarks,
Dave W.

[hielan' laddie]

On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 09:28:41 -0400, Dave W wrote
(in article >):

> In article >,
> hielan' laddie > wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 22:26:28 -0400, Morgans wrote
>> (in article >):
>>
>>>
>>> "Mitchell Holman" > wrote
>>>
>>>> There may be a reason to depart from the file formats
>>>> that have been used here for decades but danged if I can
>>>> figure out what it is.
>>>
>>> Amen, brother!
>>>
>>> I gave up. The B-52 is not all that interesting to me, anyway.
>>>
>> Cool. Don't download it.
>
> Yeah, I'm not that turned on by B-52s either, but I downloaded it
> anyway. Turns out I didn't need the par files ... the pdf got through
> without a glitch. I'm also not a fan of pdf files ... but this one is
> very nice. I may even end up appreciating B-52s.
>
> Thanks for the post.
>
> In the ozarks,
> Dave W.

I'm not overly enamored of bombers, except for those produced by Mssrs A. V.
Roe & Company (Lancasters & Vulcans forever!) but B-52 kinda grow on you.

I usually use .PDFs for multi-page posts, instead of posting individual
pages. It's a habit I got into from scanning books for my own use: I'd scan
in the book as a searchable, editable, .PDF. It takes more work, but in the
long run is better as anything which can read .PDFs (and they are legion) can
be used to read the file, and I can search for keywords using standard
indexing systems including those built into both Windows and OS X. I'm
gradually moving my library of old Osprey and Squadron Signal books over to
..PDFs; I'm taking my time because I also want to keep the old books, and to
scan them properly I have to cut pages out and feed them into an ADF. This
destroys the book, so I have to have two books, one to keep and one to scan.
This is expensive, and some of the older books are simply no longer in print.
A collection of .JPGs simply can't substitute for a searchable, editable,
..PDF. Not to mention being more irritating to keep track of.

In any case, this was Lee's work, all I did was repost it and add .PARs.

[Richard[_7_]]

"S.B." > schreef in bericht
...
> Lee wrote:
>
>> It is not a multimedia file. It is a book.
>
>> Out of the eighty-five thousand-odd groups carried by my service do the
>> words "aviation" and "books" appear in any newsgroup name. So, posting
>> this
>> anywhere in usenet is going to be a violation of some arbitrary "Do Not"
>> rule.
>
>> The closet applicable group is this one (binaries? Check. pictures?
>> Check.
>> aviation? Check), where I believe some might actually appreciate knowing
>> about nearly every detail of the Buff livery.
>
> alt.binaries.e-book.technical might have been an appropriate place.
> Many similar aviation books in .pdf format have been posted there.
> Nevertheless, thank you for a most interesting book.

I agree, a.b.e-book technical is where I find a lot of aviation books which
I use as reference for building scalemodels.
This newsgroup, as the names says already, is about pictures of aviation in
binary format, not e-books. So let's keep it simple and fun for everyone out
there.
The book about the B-59 is however a real nice publication, kudo's for that.

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Dave W" > wrote


>
> Yeah, I'm not that turned on by B-52s either, but I downloaded it
> anyway. Turns out I didn't need the par files ... the pdf got through
> without a glitch. I'm also not a fan of pdf files ... but this one is
> very nice. I may even end up appreciating B-52s.
>

Wheere is it in pdf form?
--
Jim in NC

[hielan' laddie]

On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 14:31:59 -0400, Morgans wrote
(in article >):

>
> "Dave W" > wrote
>
>
>>
>> Yeah, I'm not that turned on by B-52s either, but I downloaded it
>> anyway. Turns out I didn't need the par files ... the pdf got through
>> without a glitch. I'm also not a fan of pdf files ... but this one is
>> very nice. I may even end up appreciating B-52s.
>>
>
> Wheere is it in pdf form?
>

Posted yesterday. "b 52 stratofort pdf & pars". One .PDF, 9 .PAR2s. You are
using MSOE or MS Mail (same thing) so you may have a problem downloading it.

[HappiLEE]

"Alan Erskine" > wrote in news:nnCGl.4724$y61.284
@news-server.bigpond.net.au:

> "heavyhorses" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Which bit of "pictures" do you yenc dick heads not understand ?
>
> This, as I recall, is how the Lee troll came into the argument.
>
>

SPAM

[Lee[_2_]]

"Morgans" > wrote in news:vxDGl.53906$LA7.12985
@newsfe20.iad:

>
> "Mitchell Holman" > wrote
>
>> There may be a reason to depart from the file formats
>> that have been used here for decades but danged if I can
>> figure out what it is.
>
> Amen, brother!
>
> I gave up. The B-52 is not all that interesting to me, anyway.


You gave up even after I left you a personal
note and download? Maybe MSOE hid the post
from you since as a rule, it doesn't like exe
files, too scary for it to handle...

Anyway that little program is so simple to
figure out... hell, even I fingered it out.

No one is trying to change anything in here
or how it is done. But the fact remains that
the computer world is changing every day and
there are newer and better ways of getting
information to you. Everyone is missing out on
a lot of stuff by not trying something out
once in a while.

The little things one learns here and there will
help expand their experiences on the net.

Inevitably as the outside world changes, there
will be some of it peeking in here occasionally.
That which one doesn't understand, they either
adapt and overcome or run and hide.

Not trying to sound preachy, but honestly, you
should dump MSOE as your newsreader. There are
a number of excellent ones out there. Some are
free. All you have to do is install, put in your
news server's address and the port # they use and
you are off to the real races.

[terseLEE]

"Alan Erskine" > wrote in news:nnCGl.4724$y61.284
@news-server.bigpond.net.au:

> "heavyhorses" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Which bit of "pictures" do you yenc dick heads not understand ?
>
> This, as I recall, is how the Lee troll came into the argument.
>
>


It doesn't bother me to be called little
names, even by admitted paedophiles.

BUAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHA!

[Mitchell Holman[_3_]]

Lee > wrote in
6.89:

> "Morgans" > wrote in news:vxDGl.53906
$LA7.12985
> @newsfe20.iad:
>
>>
>> "Mitchell Holman" > wrote
>>
>>> There may be a reason to depart from the file formats
>>> that have been used here for decades but danged if I can
>>> figure out what it is.
>>
>> Amen, brother!
>>
>> I gave up. The B-52 is not all that interesting to me, anyway.
>
>
> You gave up even after I left you a personal
> note and download? Maybe MSOE hid the post
> from you since as a rule, it doesn't like exe
> files, too scary for it to handle...
>
> Anyway that little program is so simple to
> figure out... hell, even I fingered it out.
>
> No one is trying to change anything in here
> or how it is done. But the fact remains that
> the computer world is changing every day and
> there are newer and better ways of getting
> information to you. Everyone is missing out on
> a lot of stuff by not trying something out
> once in a while.
>
> The little things one learns here and there will
> help expand their experiences on the net.
>
> Inevitably as the outside world changes, there
> will be some of it peeking in here occasionally.
> That which one doesn't understand, they either
> adapt and overcome or run and hide.
>
> Not trying to sound preachy, but honestly, you
> should dump MSOE as your newsreader.


I don't use MSOE as my newsreader and I still
haven't heard a reason why images cannot be posted
in the standard jpeg format that has been used here
for decades.

Change is nice when there is an advantage.

What is the advantage to rar files?

[Dave Kearton[_3_]]

"Mitchell Holman" > wrote in message
. 130...
>
>
> I don't use MSOE as my newsreader and I still
> haven't heard a reason why images cannot be posted
> in the standard jpeg format that has been used here
> for decades.
>
> Change is nice when there is an advantage.
>
> What is the advantage to rar files?
>
>


I _do_ use OE and now Windows Mail and I didn't have any problems. I
downloaded all the parts - I use a 3rd party usenet host that actually had
all the parts, combining them is easier than it sounds and Winzip decoded
the rar files for me.

I like OE/WM, it does all that I need. The closest I've found for what I
want is Thunderbird, the worst is Opera and I've tried Agent as well as a
couple of others.

I can understand why Lee created the pdf file, it's a book, not just a
collection of pictures. Pdf files were created for online documents,
books, brochures etc, so it makes sense. Reading the B-52 book as 248
jpegs would be a nightmare, I'd have put them into a pdf here. If you
need the pictures, they're easy enough to extract.

I'm not getting into the yEnc debate - that just seems to generate more heat
than light.


Damn fine piece of scanning BTW, I can never get all the pages straight on
the platen, without a _lot_ of work. Maybe it's the document feeder ....


--


Cheers

Dave Kearton

[Lee[_2_]]

"Dave Kearton" > wrote in
:

> "Mitchell Holman" > wrote in message
> . 130...
>>
>>
>> I don't use MSOE as my newsreader and I still
>> haven't heard a reason why images cannot be posted
>> in the standard jpeg format that has been used here
>> for decades.
>>
>> Change is nice when there is an advantage.
>>
>> What is the advantage to rar files?
>>
>>
>
>
> I _do_ use OE and now Windows Mail and I didn't have any problems.
> I downloaded all the parts - I use a 3rd party usenet host that
> actually had all the parts, combining them is easier than it sounds
> and Winzip decoded the rar files for me.
>
> I like OE/WM, it does all that I need. The closest I've found for
> what I want is Thunderbird, the worst is Opera and I've tried Agent as
> well as a couple of others.
>
> I can understand why Lee created the pdf file, it's a book, not just a
> collection of pictures. Pdf files were created for online
> documents, books, brochures etc, so it makes sense. Reading the
> B-52 book as 248 jpegs would be a nightmare, I'd have put them into a
> pdf here. If you need the pictures, they're easy enough to
> extract.
>
> I'm not getting into the yEnc debate - that just seems to generate
> more heat than light.
>
>
> Damn fine piece of scanning BTW, I can never get all the pages
> straight on the platen, without a _lot_ of work. Maybe it's the
> document feeder ....
>
>


Thanks Dave. Very Much in fact.

The two nice comments in a row from you made
it worth the effort.

Glad you enjoyed the book. I did.

[Eraklik]

On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 10:20:47 -0400, hielan' laddie wrote:

> I also want to keep the old books, and to scan them properly I have to
> cut pages out and feed them into an ADF. This destroys the book, so I
> have to have two books, one to keep and one to scan. This is expensive,

OUCH! About a year ago, I came across a flatbed, "manual-feed" book
scanner that cost about $250 US. The scan window extended as much as
technically possible (considering cost) to the edge of the machine.
You'd place the book's "gutter" (binding side of a page) at the edge and
scan away. True, no auto doc. feeder, but far better than un-binding.

Do Google on [book scanner], and probably have a look at the suggested
search strings before you commit the phrase and start searching.

The third photo here shows one such scanner:
<http://www.plustek.com/product/book3600.asp>
There are a couple of distressing, glaring misspellings on that page, as
well, fwiw.

It's discounted at the first of the three dealers; that's a company I've
done business with, and can highly recommend. Cost is less than that of
many netbook computers.

As well, it's not a major job to make a copy stand for a modern digital
camera, and the image resolution isn't exactly awful. Do watch for moire
patterns on halftone images, though. Straight-line white LED arrays are
almost affordable...

I apologize if somebody else has also offered this info. The idea of
unbinding pains me, and I felt I had to post soon, although it's not all
that urgent.

Good luck, and best regards! HTH.

nb
who is not Estonian, but nevertheless
surely considers them to be good people.
("Eraklik" means "recluse", afaik.)

[Nicholas Bodley]

On Sun, 19 Apr 2009 23:17:54 +0000, Lee wrote:

> you should dump MSOE as your newsreader. There are a number of excellent
> ones out there. Some are free. All you have to do is install, put in
> your news server's address and the port # they use and you are off to
> the real races.

Sorry to chime in, here, but using OE as a newsreader makes me cringe. In
fact, just the thought of using OE, period, makes me cringe. Thunderbird
for e-mail, anyone?

I heartily agree with the rest of what Lee said. When the history of
computers is written maybe 100 or 150 years from now, the present will be
a period of rapid development. (But, will they ever settle down? :) )

Otoh, one can't lay too much blame -- people buy computers, yet often
don't end up knowing much about how to use them -- as if they were to buy
a car (say, back in 1910 or so) and didn't know, or learn, that it can
move backwards under its own power. Any computer user today, imho, is an
amateur technician, if not a pro.

For a newsreader, Forté Agent is one that's somewhat idiosyncratic (or
was!), but has been one of those that has stood the test of time.

I've recently resumed reading and occasionally posting to USENET; for
now, I have only openSUSE Linux (no MS Windows), and the newsreader
called Pan works really well, so far. Somebody attached a PDF file, e-
mail style, to a message and posted it to thus newsgroup, and I would
have had to do geek stuff (Base 64 decode) to get at the file.

While feet are on the soapbox, PDFs look well set to be the document
format of choice for years to come. If startup of the Acrobat Reader
is a pain, try the free Foxit Reader.

PAR is "Parity Archive"; Wikipedia has a decent article about it. It's a
way of letting a downloader fix corrupted files, for one. Unfortunately,
nobody seems to have had much interest in writing software for PAR2
(improved version) to run on Linux/Unix.

Regards, and hth,

nb

[Nicholas Bodley]

On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 09:51:33 -0400, hielan' laddie wrote:

> Get Forte Free Agent on Windows or MT-NewsWatcher on Mac. Both are free.
> Both are real newsreaders. MSOE is not a real newsreader.

For Linux, Pan is working well, although it's still being developed; I'm
currently using Version 0.132. In general, it works like Forté [Free]
Agent.

Apologies for modest redundancy, but it seemed appropriate.

Regards,

nb