Hi Group,
Yikes! What the *&%$# happened to our group format. Not quite
as easy to browse through the messages is it? I suppose I;ll get used
to it after a while. Personally, I liked the old one much better! What
does everyone else think?
Stuck in the Past,
Michael

On 1 Dec 2004 21:08:37 -0800, "MrMortise"
wrote:

Hi Group,
Yikes! What the *&%$# happened to our group format. Not quite
as easy to browse through the messages is it? I suppose I;ll get used
to it after a while. Personally, I liked the old one much better! What
does everyone else think?
Stuck in the Past,
Michael

Looks the same to me

I get here through Google, and they've installed a new *beta* version
of Google Groups. Looks completely different, fewer threads on top,
harder to navigate, and full of glitches--lost links, odd happenings (I
attempted to drag a window larger only to have it disappear completely,
returning me to where I started, only now 'where I started' looked
different), etc. It is a *beta* version, but damn. . . .
I don't like it.

Dan

In article .com,
MrMortise wrote:

Hi Group,
Yikes! What the *&%$# happened to our group format. Not quite
as easy to browse through the messages is it? I suppose I;ll get used
to it after a while. Personally, I liked the old one much better! What
does everyone else think?
Stuck in the Past,
Michael


Ummmmm... "format"? This is Usenet. It doesn't have a format (other
than line width), because it's plain text.

Instead of being stuck in the past, methinks you've upgraded something.
That something makes your newsreading experience different. Start
there, and work forward.

Kevin

But my posting gets posted immediately!!! WOW!!!

Dan

Steve wrote:
Looks the same to me

Looks like Google just rolled out there new groups stuff for
rec.woodworking. Looks interesting, tho not that relevant to those of
us who don't use Google to read newgroups.

-BAT

wrote:
But my posting gets posted immediately!!! WOW!!!

Dan


Yeah, not just Google posts, either - I'm posting through my NNTP host
and it's showing right up on groups.google.com. For the rest of us,
this means searching Usenet via Google will no longer be 8 hours in the
past, which is cool...

-BAT

Brett A. Thomas wrote:
wrote:
But my posting gets posted immediately!!! WOW!!!

Dan


Yeah, not just Google posts, either - I'm posting through my NNTP
host
and it's showing right up on groups.google.com. For the rest of us,
this means searching Usenet via Google will no longer be 8 hours in
the
past, which is cool...

-BAT
Whatever happened to "If it ain't broke don't fix it."?

FoggyTown

wrote:
I get here through Google, and they've installed a new *beta* version
of Google Groups. Looks completely different, fewer threads on top,
harder to navigate, and full of glitches--lost links, odd happenings
(I
attempted to drag a window larger only to have it disappear
completely,
returning me to where I started, only now 'where I started' looked
different), etc. It is a *beta* version, but damn. . . .
I don't like it.

Dan
I also use the Google news and YES the new format Sucketh big time.
It's their new format with more advertisements. They complicated a
newsreader that was simple and easy. Oh well for now it's still free.

"foggytown" wrote in message
Whatever happened to "If it ain't broke don't fix it."?

No ****! The number of posts change when you sort differently, and more than
half of the posts by name that used to be there are missing.

I don't use it much, but will now use it less.

Progress ain't what it used to be.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04

MrMortise wrote:
Hi Group,
Yikes! What the *&%$# happened to our group format. Not quite
as easy to browse through the messages is it? I suppose I;ll get used
to it after a while. Personally, I liked the old one much better! What
does everyone else think?



Huh? It looks the same as always here.



--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

" Yikes! What the *&%$# happened to our group format.

?????????????

Group Format?

I come in through the newsgroup servers. It has always looked this bad to
me.

Kinda like it.

wrote:

I get here through Google,

Why? Doesn't the gte.net NNTP server carry rec.woodworking?

and they've installed a new *beta* version
of Google Groups. Looks completely different, fewer threads on top,
harder to navigate, and full of glitches--lost links, odd happenings (I
attempted to drag a window larger only to have it disappear completely,
returning me to where I started, only now 'where I started' looked
different), etc. It is a *beta* version, but damn. . . .
I don't like it.

Dan

--
--John
Reply to jclarke at ae tee tee global dot net
(was jclarke at eye bee em dot net)

On 2 Dec 2004 04:23:56 -0800, wrote:


wrote:
I get here through Google, and they've installed a new *beta* version
of Google Groups. Looks completely different, fewer threads on top,
harder to navigate, and full of glitches--lost links, odd happenings
(I
attempted to drag a window larger only to have it disappear
completely,
returning me to where I started, only now 'where I started' looked
different), etc. It is a *beta* version, but damn. . . .
I don't like it.

Dan
I also use the Google news and YES the new format Sucketh big time.
It's their new format with more advertisements. They complicated a
newsreader that was simple and easy. Oh well for now it's still free.


mozilla has some good tools for killing the ads.

On 1 Dec 2004 22:20:33 -0800, wrote:

I get here through Google, and they've installed a new *beta* version
of Google Groups. Looks completely different, fewer threads on top,
harder to navigate, and full of glitches--lost links, odd happenings (I
attempted to drag a window larger only to have it disappear completely,
returning me to where I started, only now 'where I started' looked
different), etc. It is a *beta* version, but damn. . . .
I don't like it.

Get Free Agent newsreader [www.forte.com]. You can sort by subject
[simple then to delete crap by message header], enlarge a window at a
click, or return back the same way ..... incoming email facility with
Agent, but just outgoing in the free version, but who cares?

On 1 Dec 2004 21:08:37 -0800, "MrMortise"
wrote:

Hi Group,
Yikes! What the *&%$# happened to our group format. Not quite
as easy to browse through the messages is it? I suppose I;ll get used
to it after a while. Personally, I liked the old one much better! What
does everyone else think?

The format is the same, just a larger percentage of glass along with
the gems.

On Wed, 01 Dec 2004 21:08:37 -0800, MrMortise wrote:

Hi Group,
Yikes! What the *&%$# happened to our group format. Not quite as easy to
browse through the messages is it? I suppose I;ll get used to it after a
while. Personally, I liked the old one much better! What does everyone
else think?

Ah, marketing above all else. Read all about it:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=528&e=2&u=/ap/20041202/ap_on_hi_te/google_groups

-Doug

On 1 Dec 2004 21:08:37 -0800, MrMortise wrote:
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1101964120 11970 127.0.0.1 (2 Dec 2004 05:08:40 GMT)

Hi Group,
Yikes! What the *&%$# happened to our group format. Not quite
as easy to browse through the messages is it?

Apparently, groups.google.com has changed it's web interface to Usenet
groups. Depending on what kind of system you have, you've got lots
of options to read Usenet that don't involve google's interface.
What are you using for a computer?

Dave Hinz

On Thu, 02 Dec 2004 00:26:28 -0600, Kevin Craig wrote:

Ummmmm... "format"? This is Usenet. It doesn't have a format (other
than line width), because it's plain text.
Instead of being stuck in the past, methinks you've upgraded something.
That something makes your newsreading experience different. Start
there, and work forward.

Ummmm, yeah, those of us who looked at his headers already identified
the problem and proposed some options for him.

On 1 Dec 2004 21:08:37 -0800, "MrMortise"
wrote:

Hi Group,
Yikes! What the *&%$# happened to our group format. Not quite
as easy to browse through the messages is it? I suppose I;ll get used
to it after a while. Personally, I liked the old one much better! What
does everyone else think?
Stuck in the Past,
Michael
what format???

On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 08:11:03 -0600, "RonB" wrote:


" Yikes! What the *&%$# happened to our group format.

?????????????

Group Format?

I come in through the newsgroup servers. It has always looked this bad to
me.

Kinda like it.

me too... but I use Agent to access NG's through giganews, and some
folks use their browser or outhouse express and come through free NG
servers.. which in some cases is sorta like getting your news through
Harbor Freight, you get what you pay for..YMMV

On 1 Dec 2004 21:08:37 -0800, "MrMortise"
wrote:

Hi Group,
Yikes! What the *&%$# happened to our group format. Not quite
as easy to browse through the messages is it? I suppose I;ll get used
to it after a while. Personally, I liked the old one much better! What
does everyone else think?
Stuck in the Past,
Michael
=====================
I have been accused of being stuck in the past on a few
occasions...BUT I sure as the devil have not noticed any change
in the "format" ...whatever you mean by that ... of this newsgroup...
I use Agent (free version naturally) as my news reader...

The only thing that I have noticed is that I can update any of my
normal 20 or so newsgroups that I follow in seconds BUT it usually
takes 2 to 3 times longer to update rec. woodworking...

message count does not seem to be the reason..

Bob Griffiths

"J. Clarke" wrote in message ...
wrote:

I get here through Google,

Why? Doesn't the gte.net NNTP server carry rec.woodworking?


Never thought to look; just always used Google since that's how I found the WrecK.

Dan

In article .com,
says...
Hi Group,
Yikes! What the *&%$# happened to our group format. Not quite
as easy to browse through the messages is it? I suppose I;ll get used
to it after a while. Personally, I liked the old one much better! What
does everyone else think?
Stuck in the Past,
Michael


Old Format, new format?

looks like the same old store to me.
--
MikeG
Heirloom Woods
www.heirloom-woods.net

Hi Group,
Yikes! What the *&%$# happened to our group format. Not quite
as easy to browse through the messages is it? I suppose I;ll get used
to it after a while. Personally, I liked the old one much better! What
does everyone else think?
Stuck in the Past,
Michael
=====================
Hello Group,
Man, I am losing it I guess! I didn't do anything different
today. I logged on and now, theway I have been seeing this news group
is exactly the same as it was,except for there is no "New Beta" logo
at the top. I'm not sure how or why my entire screen changed but it
did! It's back and just the way I like it! Now I will need to
investigate to figure out "how it do that".
Thanks for your patience. I promise I'll get my meds checked!
Michael

On 2 Dec 2004 11:46:15 -0800, (Dan Cullimore) wrote:

"J. Clarke" wrote in message ...
wrote:

I get here through Google,

Why? Doesn't the gte.net NNTP server carry rec.woodworking?


Never thought to look; just always used Google since that's how I found the WrecK.

Try out a newsreader... you might like it better. I rarely even use
the "web"- too many ads and other bs. And, you can access
alt.binaries.pictures.woodworking then, along with all the other
binary groups (something Google doesn't support) It's just as easy as
setting up an e-mail account.

Dan

Aut inveniam viam aut faciam

mrmortise wrote:

did! It's back and just the way I like it! Now I will need to
investigate to figure out "how it do that".
Thanks for your patience. I promise I'll get my meds checked!

Whatever it is you saw, or think you saw, it had nothing to do with the
newsgroup itself. It sounds like you're using some kind of proprietary
browser/reader thing through some service like AOL or something, and they
changed the look and feel of it somehow.

This newsgroup is a part of Usenet or USENet or USENET or whatever capitals
it's supposed to have. It's ancient technology dating back before the dawn
of graphical user interfaces and other such froofery. I used to read
usenet with a program called "rn" that made me read through every single
article in a newgroup in series. It didn't do threading, it didn't let you
preview the subject headers, or anything like that.

Usenet hasn't changed since those days. Only the face of the programs (or
web interfaces, even) we use to access it. Plus all the irritating people
posting HTML crap and top posting because they don't know any better, and
all the spammers. I guess it's not the same as it always was, but the
underlying technology still is.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/
http://rosegarden.sourceforge.net/tutorial/

Dear Group,
Aha! it's simply the new group button. Try it and you'll see the
difference. It all boils down to a personal preference. The new one
doesn't show as many threads and, therefore, is limiting to me. I'll
stick to the old
thank you!

Michael

"mrmortise" wrote in message
Dear Group,
Aha! it's simply the new group button. Try it and you'll see the
difference. It all boils down to a personal preference. The new one
doesn't show as many threads and, therefore, is limiting to me. I'll
stick to the old

For a while yesterday the search results for the newsgroups was the new beta
format. They have now changed back to the original search results screen
(well, not exactly - for those who were familiar with the original
dejanews).

I did, and it appears a number of others did likewise, take the time to
respond by e-mail to what looked to me like regression instead of
progress.That may well be why the old Google search results format is back,
at least for a while.

It is interesting that the total number of results returned on any given
name was cut in half under the beta ... which may be academic because IIRC
you can't get more than a 1000 results to display no matter the hits
returned.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04

I think I'm missing a few posts as I look at this. I'm pretty sure
there've been posts since Dec 1 and I'm not seeing them, so this may
have already been mentioned. But here I go anyway.

Anybody click on "About this group" and then check out the "All time
top posters" list? Congratulations, JOAT!

All time top posters
13154
8772
8106
8018
5147
4657
4180
4019
3731
3579

I read a book titled "If it ain't broke... BREAK IT!" Sometimes that's the
only way something "acceptable" gets to be "exceptional".

Richard

"foggytown" wrote in message
oups.com...

Brett A. Thomas wrote:
wrote:
But my posting gets posted immediately!!! WOW!!!

Dan


Yeah, not just Google posts, either - I'm posting through my NNTP
host
and it's showing right up on groups.google.com. For the rest of us,
this means searching Usenet via Google will no longer be 8 hours in
the
past, which is cool...

-BAT
Whatever happened to "If it ain't broke don't fix it."?

FoggyTown

"Richard" wrote in message
I read a book titled "If it ain't broke... BREAK IT!" Sometimes that's
the
only way something "acceptable" gets to be "exceptional".

Yabut, not in this case. There is apparently no such thing that even
approaches "acceptable" from the current crop of ADD web "designers" at
places like Goggle ... where commercial opportunity takes precedence over
content, and ''whiz, bang and glitter' takes precedence over the logical
presentation of information.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04

On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 06:39:25 -0600, Swingman wrote:
"Richard" wrote in message
I read a book titled "If it ain't broke... BREAK IT!" Sometimes that's
the
only way something "acceptable" gets to be "exceptional".

Yabut, not in this case. There is apparently no such thing that even
approaches "acceptable" from the current crop of ADD web "designers" at
places like Goggle ... where commercial opportunity takes precedence over
content, and ''whiz, bang and glitter' takes precedence over the logical
presentation of information.

Well then, maybe they should ask for their money back for what Google
is charging them...

In article ,
Swingman wrote:
"Richard" wrote in message
I read a book titled "If it ain't broke... BREAK IT!" Sometimes that's
the
only way something "acceptable" gets to be "exceptional".

Yabut, not in this case. There is apparently no such thing that even
approaches "acceptable" from the current crop of ADD web "designers" at
places like Goggle ... where commercial opportunity takes precedence over
content, and ''whiz, bang and glitter' takes precedence over the logical
presentation of information.

Think about 'who pays for the work', and then explain _why_ you are surprised
at the priorities. grin

"Robert Bonomi" wrote in message

Think about 'who pays for the work', and then explain _why_ you are
surprised
at the priorities. grin

No surprise at all ... twas merely an ongoing observation, based on
perspective and participation (some willing, some reluctant, some forced),
in a culture where the idea that pictures, once worth "a thousand words"
will somehow be worth more and crowbar your wallet out of your pocket faster
when flashing, when changing every 2 seconds, and when accompanied by sound
effects not found in nature.

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 11/06/04