If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 21:32:59 -0500, Kurt Weber wrote:
"Greg Copeland" wrote in message news On Tue, 22 Jun 2004 18:52:56 -0500, Kurt Weber wrote: "Greg Copeland" wrote in message news On Mon, 21 Jun 2004 23:31:37 -0500, Kurt Weber wrote: No, I'm just curious why you posted a response which appeared to have nothing to do with my original post. I don't particularly care one way or the other; I'm just curious. Because it was on topic. Care to offer, why it was off topic? It wasn't; nor have I claimed that it ever was. It simply had nothing to do with my original post, and I was curious what it was I said that made you make the post you did so I won't be so ambiguous next time. Great troll. Get a life. End of this thread has been reached. You can call me a troll all you want, but that wouldn't make it true. Grow up. Great way to support your position. Saying it over and over again doesn't support your position in the least and it certainly doesn't make it true. care to support your position? This is what, only the forth time to ask now? Ya, that's what I thought. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
"Greg Copeland" wrote in message
news Great way to support your position. Saying it over and over again doesn't support your position in the least and it certainly doesn't make it true. care to support your position? This is what, only the forth time to ask now? Ya, that's what I thought. The problem, apparently, is that you are confused as to what my position IS. Your original post had nothing to do with the post of mine to which it was replying. I was simply curious as to what it was I wrote that confused you, so I won't make that mistake in the future. I have never claimed that it was "off-topic" for this newsgroup, only that it had nothing to do with my immediately prior post. Nice strawman, though. If I weren't more generous I'd be inclined to think that YOU were trolling. -- Kurt Weber |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 16:19:32 -0500, Kurt Weber wrote:
The problem, apparently, is that you are confused as to what my position IS. LOL. I think not. You positoin is that you posted and I replied, offtopic. Seems fairly clear to me. LOL. Yet, you have no supported, nor even attempted to do so, you position even once. That spells TROLL! Yet again, you passed up the chance to clear the record. Your original post had nothing to do with the post of mine to which it was replying. I was simply curious as to what it was I wrote that confused you, so I won't make that mistake in the future. I have never claimed that it was "off-topic" for this newsgroup, only that it had nothing to do with my immediately prior post. Nice strawman, though. If I weren't more generous I'd be inclined to think that YOU were trolling. Then you need to go back and re-read what I posted. It was on topic. My second post within this thread squarely filled in the holes, for those that couldn't see the obvious. You seemed to of missed on both counts. There is no strawman. Again, feel free to offer why it's off topic. I noticed that you didn't do so. Nice try troll! |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
"Greg Copeland" wrote in message
news Then you need to go back and re-read what I posted. It was on topic. Nor have I claimed that it wasn't. My second post within this thread squarely filled in the holes, for those that couldn't see the obvious. Because, apparently, it wasn't. I stated that the AVSIM website is slow to load. You suggested methods for possibly speeding up the size of downloads from their file library, which had nothing to do with my comment that the website itself is slow-loading. There is no strawman. Apparently there is. Again, feel free to offer why it's off topic. Why? I've never claimed that it was. Why is it so difficult for you to accept that? There's a difference between saying "that bears no relation to what I posted" and "that is off-topic for this newsgroup". -- Kurt Weber |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 17:52:01 -0500, Kurt Weber wrote:
Because, apparently, it wasn't. I stated that the AVSIM website is slow to load. You suggested methods for possibly speeding up the size of downloads from their file library, which had nothing to do with my comment that the website itself is slow-loading. One of the most common causes of a, "slow to load", site is for the serving site to not have enough bandwidth available. Thusly, I offered that using BT will improve the site's available bandwidth (latency to boot) because it helps shift the bandwidth burden away from the serving site. Thusly, leaving more bandwidth for serving pages. I did state that, "slow to load", can mean so many different things. You never once, in spite of my comment, offered more detail. The fact that you're talking about running FS2004, means that you should have a fairly reasonable computer, thusly, "slow loading", should not be related to your computer's speed, unless you have serious problems (virus, trojans, or spyware perhaps?). For me, the site loads lightning fast and I don't have a super powerful computer. That leaves us with two primary canidates. One, your pipe is too small, which I addressed, and two, the server pipe is too small, which I addressed. Both of which, you seemingly rejected. If on the other hand, the data is getting to you and the page is simply not being rendered in a timely manner, in spite of the data being available, it *suggests* that you have problems with your computer. One option, as I provided (which should address your crashes too), is to install mozilla or firefox (http://www.mozilla.org). For many websites, mozilla, and especially firefox, are able to render pages more quickly than IE. While technically, that's not, "slow to load", it is often confused as being one and the same. All of these facts are why I not only addressed your comments, but why Peter is currently scored very, very low in my reader and close to becoming part of my kill file. Thus far, Peter is proven that he knows enough about technology to be dangerous and no more. Hopefully this addresses your comments and questions. Sincerely, Greg |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
On Sun, 13 Jun 2004 03:43:41 -0500, Kurt Weber wrote:
"Thijs Wolters" wrote in message ... Were can I download for MS fl.sim 2004 (or 2002) the Catalina PBY-5? Thanks for help. Thijs. flightsim.com Better selection than avsim, and a faster-loading website that won't crash your browser to boot. BTW, if you have applications that seem to randomly crash, you might consider using memtest86 (http://www.memtest86.com). Let it run as long as you can, at least overnight. You would be amazed at how often bit errors in memory cause odd application ans OS crashes. Hope this helps. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 23:15:59 -0500, Greg Copeland wrote:
On Wed, 23 Jun 2004 17:52:01 -0500, Kurt Weber wrote: Because, apparently, it wasn't. I stated that the AVSIM website is slow to load. You suggested methods for possibly speeding up the size of downloads from their file library, which had nothing to do with my comment that the website itself is slow-loading. One of the most common causes of a, "slow to load", site is for the serving site to not have enough bandwidth available. Thusly, I offered that using BT will improve the site's available bandwidth (latency to boot) because it helps shift the bandwidth burden away from the serving site. Thusly, leaving more bandwidth for serving pages. I did state that, "slow to load", can mean so many different things. You never once, in spite of my comment, offered more detail. The fact that you're talking about running FS2004, means that you should have a fairly reasonable computer, thusly, "slow loading", should not be related to your computer's speed, unless you have serious problems (virus, trojans, or spyware perhaps?). For me, the site loads lightning fast and I don't have a super powerful computer. That leaves us with two primary canidates. One, your pipe is too small, which I addressed, and two, the server pipe is too small, which I addressed. Both of which, you seemingly rejected. If on the other hand, the data is getting to you and the page is simply not being rendered in a timely manner, in spite of the data being available, it *suggests* that you have problems with your computer. One option, as I provided (which should address your crashes too), is to install mozilla or firefox (http://www.mozilla.org). For many websites, mozilla, and especially firefox, are able to render pages more quickly than IE. While technically, that's not, "slow to load", it is often confused as being one and the same. All of these facts are why I not only addressed your comments, but why Peter is currently scored very, very low in my reader and close to becoming part of my kill file. Thus far, Peter is proven that he knows enough about technology to be dangerous and no more. Hopefully this addresses your comments and questions. Sincerely, Greg I should also add, that my comments assume that you have enough RAM. Greg |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Looking for JPI's older software to download engine monitor data to a PC | Peter R. | Piloting | 11 | February 14th 05 08:58 PM |
Link for Sectiona chart download | Toks Desalu | Piloting | 3 | December 20th 04 02:14 PM |
Anyone has the EDM700 data download software? | Jay Honeck | Owning | 3 | September 11th 04 08:56 AM |
A Requiem For Our Fallen Solders - Free Music Download | Chase The Frog | Naval Aviation | 0 | May 18th 04 09:05 PM |
FS2004 Pauses When Real World Weather Won't Download | Andrew Watson | Simulators | 1 | September 8th 03 09:08 AM |