Re: Top-Posting

half_pint said:

At that resolution I would have to be very close to the scren to read
comfortaly

Which resolution was that? Can't tell from a top posted comment.

And it isn't the resolution that matters, more the screen size. I'm
writing this on a screen that is 1024x768 (standard VGA) with the
Thunderbird window almost full screen. I can see at least 30 lines of
text on the default font setting, and about ten messages in the message
list above it.

The monitor is an iMac so is about 16" diagonal.

Either you have particular vision difficulties or you are using a very
low res monitor that is also quite small.

...d

I am using a 14" monitor, at 800 by 600, I can try 1024x768 but quality of
the text
is rather too poor, I can read it but I don't like it
My eyesite is fine , I don't need glasses although one eye is not as good as
the
other, the good eye, which does all the work, is perfect.
The fonts in OE are a bit light and grey.
Actually adjusting the brightness (turning it down) make it a lot more
readable but still a touch on the small side.
I will try it like this for a while, I can get 20-23 lines in the display
window
which ain't too bad.

"David Martin" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

half_pint said:

At that resolution I would have to be very close to the scren to read
comfortaly

Which resolution was that? Can't tell from a top posted comment.

And it isn't the resolution that matters, more the screen size. I'm
writing this on a screen that is 1024x768 (standard VGA) with the
Thunderbird window almost full screen. I can see at least 30 lines of
text on the default font setting, and about ten messages in the message
list above it.

The monitor is an iMac so is about 16" diagonal.

Either you have particular vision difficulties or you are using a very
low res monitor that is also quite small.

..d

half_pint said:

I am using a 14" monitor, at 800 by 600, I can try 1024x768 but quality of
the text
is rather too poor, I can read it but I don't like it

That I can understand. I suppose I am rather spoiled with the kit I can
use. If I was on 14" I'd minimise the message list and maximise the
content pane. Hide the graphical bits and use the hotkeys for
navigation. That would improve the visual interface considerably.

Getting used to the hot keys does take a bit of time. It is my first
usability test though, usign an app without the mouse.

Quoted message said:

The fonts in OE are a bit light and grey.

Fix them. It should be a menu option. If not, try a different newsreader.

Quoted message said:

Actually adjusting the brightness (turning it down) make it a lot more
readable but still a touch on the small side.
I will try it like this for a while, I can get 20-23 lines in the display
window
which ain't too bad.

That posting does explain a lot about your approach. When I was on
screens that small I was using an exclusively text based newsreader (tin
or rn on unix or vms)

...d

On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 22:39:17 -0000 someone who may be "half_pint"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Well you only have to click the previous message,

You are assuming that the previous message on your newsreader is the
same as the previous message on someone else's newsreader.

As well as not clogging up computers and bandwidth trimming a
previous posting also gives a little time for some thought.

It also makes the reply easier to read when responding to multiple
parts of a posting.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 23:36:55 -0000, "half_pint" <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

I am using a 14" monitor, at 800 by 600, I can try 1024x768 but quality of
the text is rather too poor, I can read it but I don't like it

Having switched for a moment to 800x600 (17" monitor) and having
changed nothing else, I can view 21 lines in the message panel of
FreeAgent. In 1024x768, I can see 34 lines. Yet again, I would be able
to see more if I enlarged the previewing panel.

The reply window of FreeAgent is quite a lot larger than the
previewing window.

I used to use a 15" screen with an 800x600 resolution and had no
trouble with viewing or making sense of longer posts. However, I have
to agree that a larger screen does help. Several years ago, an old
kite-flying friend of mine had to struggle along with his 25" monitor;
poor soul. I wonder what he is forced to use now?

James

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 12:01:11 GMT someone who may be James Hodson
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

I used to use a 15" screen with an 800x600 resolution and had no
trouble with viewing or making sense of longer posts.

That is how I used to look at Usenet at home. As you say, no great
problem with longer posts. However, last night I exterminated the
old monitor in favour of a newer replacement, which does make things
a lot better.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On 22/12/04 1:39 pm, in article [email hidden],

David Hansen said:

On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 12:01:11 GMT someone who may be James Hodson
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

I used to use a 15" screen with an 800x600 resolution and had no
trouble with viewing or making sense of longer posts.

That is how I used to look at Usenet at home. As you say, no great
problem with longer posts. However, last night I exterminated the
old monitor in favour of a newer replacement, which does make things
a lot better.

My 17" monitor has just died. One candidate to replace it is an old SGI
1600sw if I can find the DVI adapter. Great resolution (1600x1200), just
need a microscope to read the text.

...d

David Martin said:

My 17" monitor has just died. One candidate to replace it is an old SGI
1600sw if I can find the DVI adapter. Great resolution (1600x1200), just
need a microscope to read the text.

Without specs I read NGs from a few inches anyway :-8

But 1600x1200 does sound rather good. I might even try it myself.

James

begin On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 21:41:32 -0000, "half_pint"
<[email hidden]> wrote in message
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

No you did the correct thing,

In order to illustrate the folly of top-posting? He did indeed.

Guy
--
"then came ye chavves, theyre cartes girded wyth candels
blue, and theyre beastes wyth straynge horn-lyke thyngs
onn theyre arses that theyre fartes be herde from myles
around." Chaucer, the Sheppey Tales