This is topic What happened to the "Quote" button? in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.
To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=000578
Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 12-11-2001, 10:24 AM:
I just started using Netscape 6.2 and I can't find the "Quote" button when replying to messages. It seems to be either automatically quote everything or nothing. Is it me? Did I do something wrong? Not sure I like this new one.------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut
http://www.muellersatomics.com/
Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 12-11-2001, 12:27 PM:
Never mind I tossed 6.2 what a piece of junk. Stay away from it------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut
http://www.muellersatomics.com/
Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 12-11-2001, 02:57 PM:
Yes, you came to the same conclusion I did. Stick to 4.7 for as long as you can.
Posted by Dennis Atkinson (Member # 345) on 12-11-2001, 04:35 PM:
I went back to 4.78 also.
AOL bought Netscape and messed up everything.
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-11-2001, 06:11 PM:
I've NEVER seen a Quote button on this site. Where is it supposed to be?
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-11-2001, 06:43 PM:
I don't know either Joe. If there is such a feature, it must be something that I accidentally hacked out while I was hacking something else in. I'm not really a programmer, I just pretend to be one. 
Posted by Jesse Skeen (Member # 586) on 12-11-2001, 08:57 PM:
I thought Ian hacked it?
Posted by Steven Gorsky (Member # 603) on 12-11-2001, 09:31 PM:
The problem with Netscape Navigator 6.x is that it's not a finished product. They are beta versions of the open source Mozilla project, which has not yet gotten to 1.0. Navigator 6.2 is based on a build that is about two months old. It has improved greatly since that release, but still needs work - mostly polish.I think it's coming along nicely for a complete rewrite of the original product. Besides don't tell me you think Navigator 4.7x (4.79 is the latest) is perfect. It has it's own share of bugs, a lot from code written when the internet was a very different place.
Steven Gorsky
Posted by Aaron Haney (Member # 747) on 12-11-2001, 09:46 PM:
A lot of UBB/vBulliten style message boards have a quote button, but this one does not. However, it's easy to get confused and think you saw one here rather than somewhere else, becuase these types of boards tend to look the same.I've sometimes manually entered quotes in my posts here using the [ quote ] tag, complete with markup for the person's name and so on, just like vB 2.0 boards automatically do for you. Like this:
quote:
Brad Miller wrote:
I don't know either Joe. If there is such a feature, it must be something that I accidentally hacked out while I was hacking something else in. I'm not really a programmer, I just pretend to be one.
I think it makes it very clear what is being quoted, and where it came from, but it is a bit of a pain to do it manually. It would be nice if the site had a quote button to automatically generated that sort of thing. Many UBB and vB sites do, but for some reason, this one does not.
Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 12-11-2001, 11:26 PM:
If you are a Mac user, therer is a program called UBB Writer that is an off-line editor that you can add UBB tags at the click of a button. Just cut/paste the text to be quoted right off the page, hilight it and click on a button. The [quote] tags are inserted in the proper places.Don't know if it's got a PC version but I'm sure there's something like it out there.
Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 12-12-2001, 12:18 AM:
As far as hacking in the code to do a quote button, that is something I prefer not to do. My reasoning is because in a linear discussion format like this, quoting a post above that you are responding to is not necessary.Some examples:
"Yes, there is a Windows version." That would tell you to look directly above at the last post since it is not adressed to anyone in particular, for that is the post my answer is referencing. (No, I have no idea if there is a Windows version or not.)
"Jesse, don't you mean Joe?" That tells you that my response is in reference to Jesse's post above.
The only time these two will not work is if one particular person has posted multiple times before you in the thread. In that instance it is easy to word your response so that it makes sense. The use of repeating (or "quoting") someone's earlier post, unless it is really far back on the page, just seems to distract. In the case of a response to an older post, Aaron has the best solution.
Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 12-12-2001, 01:25 AM:
BAH! Just use MicroShaft's Internet Explorer. 
Posted by John Walsh (Member # 168) on 12-12-2001, 09:03 AM:
A lot of people like Opera, but the free download version seems to put in banner ads.There are several good features in Microsoft's IE, but I found that it was little features that it does not have that bugged me. For example, you have to type "www.film-tech.com" in IE, but just "film-tech" when using Netscape.
You just know that Microsoft will sneak in "phone-home" code to let them follow you around, then sell for advertising reasons.
Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-12-2001, 09:07 AM:
Before using MSIE, I'd suggest reading this:
http://www.newsbytes.com/news/01/172878.html
Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 12-12-2001, 02:39 PM:
Hi, Scott.oooooOOOOOOOOoooooo! Good information on that link. Thanks for pointing that out.
I tried Netscape once, it was a later version 6, if I recall correctly. I hated it, as it wanted to hog my computer too much. I uninstalled it and went back to MSIE. So far, I have not had any problems with MSIE that were stated in the link you provided. But sure does raise an eyebrow or two, doesn't it?
(maybe I didn't have Netscape configured right, but it sure was an overbearing program.)
Cheers.
Paul
Posted by Greg Mueller (Member # 17) on 12-12-2001, 02:48 PM:
Paul I just downloaded Netscape 4.79. It was very painful with a connect speed of 26.4K (thanks Sprint). It took almost 3 hrs and is over 23 meg in size. If you want a copy I'll mail you one, unless you have cable or DSL or somethin, then you can probably download it yourself in about 2 seconds------------------
Greg Mueller
Amateur Astronomer, Machinist, Filmnut
http://www.muellersatomics.com/
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-12-2001, 03:28 PM:
Not even the fastest cable modems can go THAT fast! It would take probably 25 seconds to download (or maybe 50) with what I have. Even if you had an array of T3 lines connected to your house, it still probably wouldn't be too fast since the server it is coming from is sloooooow. Come to think of it, it might take me two minutes to download that from Netscape's server. I've been able to download a 93 Meg file in about 2 minutes from a REALLY good server. Apple has great servers that run off of OS X, which has a BSD core. For some reason Netscape always downloads over twice as fast as Internet Explorer will allow (Mac versions, mind you). What's up with that?It's almost pointless to go above 3mbit when you get broadband. You'll be faster than the servers you're surfing and then you'll be paying for speed that you simply cannot take advantage of in most cases.
Posted by Jerry Chase (Member # 660) on 12-12-2001, 03:35 PM:
"Netscape always downloads over twice as fast as Internet Explorer will allow (Mac versions, mind you). What's up with that?"(Just a guess) Is there a multi-threading download manager built in?
Posted by Paul G. Thompson (Member # 655) on 12-12-2001, 05:49 PM:
Thanks, Greg. I'll email you my address.
Posted by Joe Redifer (Member # 3) on 12-12-2001, 06:20 PM:
Multithreading? Not sure. I have it set up to only download one thing at a time, but that doesn't seem to make any difference.
Posted by Jerry Chase (Member # 660) on 12-12-2001, 06:42 PM:
You can have multiple FTP connections to a download site, whereas IE only uses one. I use Meta Products "Download Express" (free and no ads like Gozilla) as a plug-in, and have noticed a pick up in my download speed. Scott or someone else can probably explain the workings better than I can. I suspect the Mac versions of browsers may have the capability built in. Again, this is just a guess. I haven't researched it.
Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-13-2001, 05:07 AM:
The security hole described in the link provided by Scott is potentially a very nasty one, because (unless I'm missing something) it is an integral part of the IE program code and therefore will get through firewalls. In most cases, these will be configured to allow the default browser unrestricted access to the internet, including access to download program files.
Posted by Christopher Santapaola (Member # 1015) on 12-14-2001, 09:22 AM:
HiIf you need some more download speed there are a few good "accelerators out there. They work by connecting to a page numerous times and downloading different bits all at once. But if you just want to download files try getwrite its is pretty easy to find a reg code and all you have to do is tell it download segments.
http://download.cnet.com/downloads/0-3282264-100-8104275.html?tag=st.dl.10001-103-1.lst-7-7.8104275
------------------
-Life is but a walking shadow, a poor player that walks, and struts its hour upon the stage, and then is heard no more. It is a tale told by an idiot. Full of sound and fury signifying nothing.
Posted by Bob Healey (Member # 1003) on 12-14-2001, 10:34 AM:
Supossedly, Micrsoft issued a patch for that yawning black hole in its security. That hole and a few others for good measure.