Author Topic: Headers (sorry)  (Read 5174 times)

cliffton

  • Guest
Headers (sorry)
« on: March 11, 2008, 10:54:36 AM »
In response to this thread.  For some reason I can't post there.  If it was mentioned, I didn't see why.  At any rate, sorry for this. 

I understand alt.binz's methods, and it seems pretty nice.  Lagging by a couple hours sometimes isn't really that bad, and the bandwidth savings are nice.  Headers are still nice sometimes, to be sure I am getting messages.

I disagree that there are "many posts that you cannot find".

I'll regard the "many posts don't show up" statement as an exaggeration until I see meaningful proof.

Quick example then, just something I noticed
VS

I don't know that's enough to add a whole bunch of stuff to alt.binz, but when I end up needing to use another program to check for stuff I'm not saving any bandwidth on headers after all.

Merge with that thread or delete as you please.  Apologies for not posting in the right thread and not knowing why I'm not allowed to.

Offline davidq666

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 1302
  • Watashi Wa Ero Desu!
Re: Headers (sorry)
« Reply #1 on: March 11, 2008, 11:34:11 AM »
First the reason you can't post in the other thread is plain simple:It is a thread of the request section. you are not a contributor and only contributors can post requests. I do see the point a lot of people make about header support. there are good reasons for and against it. i personaly am quite happy the way alt.binz is since i've discovered hitnews is supporting xpat which in fact lets me search headers. by puting in one free space i basicaly get all headers. and by limiting it to only like 10000 most recent posts it doesn't even take that long...

Offline Hecks

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2011
  • naughty cop
Re: Headers (sorry)
« Reply #2 on: March 11, 2008, 07:16:25 PM »
We really don't need another thread about this, but thanks anyway for your comments.

Actually, if non-contributors want to continue the discussion here, why not.

/unlock

-Hecks
« Last Edit: March 11, 2008, 07:18:09 PM by Hecks »

Offline Hecks

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2011
  • naughty cop
Re: Headers (sorry)
« Reply #3 on: March 11, 2008, 07:28:36 PM »
from NLSS results in Alt.Binz:

re: #a.b.mm@efnet - lost.s04e06.hdtv.xvid-xor - 02/33 - "lost.s04e06.hdtv.xvid-xor.par2" yenc  << password protected, "go to my web site", bullshit! >>
#a.b.mm@efnet - lost.s04e06.hdtv.xvid-xor - 01/33 - "lost.s04e06.hdtv.xvid-xor.par2" yenc -- password protected crap
re: #a.b.mm@efnet - lost.s04e06.hdtv.xvid-xor - 00/33 - "lost.s04e06.hdtv.xvid-xor.nzb" yenc tippi changed his name to phoenie   **is there no way to get rid of this guy?**
re: #a.b.mm@efnet - lost.s04e06.hdtv.xvid-xor - 02/33 - "lost.s04e06.hdtv.xvid-xor.par2" yenc fake needs a pw

from NZBIndex in Alt.Binz:

Re: #a.b.mm@EFNet - Lost.S04E06.HDTV.XviD-XOR - 02/33 - "lost.s04e06.hdtv.xvid-xor.par2" yEnc << Password Protected, "go to my web site", BULLSHIT! >>
Re: #a.b.mm@EFNet - Lost.S04E06.HDTV.XviD-XOR - 02/33 - "lost.s04e06.hdtv.xvid-xor.par2" yEnc FAKE needs a PW
Re: #a.b.mm@EFNet - Req 45298 - Lost.S04E06.HDTV.XviD-XOR - 01/32 - "tvshow_newepisode.par2" yEnc DO NOT DL - FAKE - PW PROTECT!!!

« Last Edit: March 11, 2008, 07:31:47 PM by Hecks »

Daedalus21

  • Guest
Re: Headers (sorry)
« Reply #4 on: June 08, 2008, 02:33:43 AM »
IMHO there are a number of reasons, arguable though they may be, to add header downloads as an option.
They are:

1. It makes finding response posts easier. I think the original poster has a valid point. Hecks' response, while clearly well intentioned, misses the point in my opinion.

2. It would make picture groups easier

3. It would make it easier to follow conversations. I would rather not split my connections between clients

4. It would make browsing easier

5. All of the above doesn't require any additional cost over just that of a server. In other words, you don't have to subscribe to something like NLSS. By the way, doesn't that mean purchasing NL?

6. Adds yet another tool to use in case your favorite NZB site(s) go down.

Thank you for the opportunity to express my opinion.




Offline Hecks

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2011
  • naughty cop
Re: Headers (sorry)
« Reply #5 on: June 08, 2008, 04:40:30 AM »
In response:

1. How, exactly?

2. Why?

3. Alt.Binz is a binary newsreader.  'Conversations' aren't meant to be followed by it.  You don't expect to use it for email, do you?  Horses for courses.

4. On the contrary, browsing via header downloading is a PITA.  Dear lord, surely you can't be suggesting that the ability to browse  10 groups via Newzleech and Binsearch in 30 seconds flat (use the BROWSE button), including monsters like a.b.boneless, is harder than downloading *all* of the headers and searching them locally?  Why oh why do people persist in this basic fallacy?  You might as well argue that it would be easier to browse IMDB if you cached their db locally.

5. The 'costs' are many and varied, not least in your bandwidth and local drive usage.  For server-side searching if you really need it, use Xpat.  There are many many free indexing sites to choose from, each with different options and types of service.

6. Cost vs benefit: large cost, tiny benefit for a minority of people living in the past.

« Last Edit: June 08, 2008, 04:42:19 AM by Hecks »

Daedalus21

  • Guest
Re: Headers (sorry)
« Reply #6 on: June 08, 2008, 08:55:00 AM »
1. Because didn't you have to go searching for the re post, whereas the op saw it at a glance? And didn't you have to resort to NLSS which is a pay service? At any rate, I am not arguing that is impossible but that it would merely be easier.

2. Because by the time you add it to the queue, click the download button, navigate to the folder, and open it with a viewer, you could have already seen it. That is especially true if there is some sort of built in picture viewer.

3. No sir, I did not say anything about e mail. I'm just talking about usenet.

4. I respectfully disagree. I didn't say a word about boneless either. You said that. Surely you're not suggesting that I'm suggesting doing away with the search tabs? What I am suggesting is that if you update your headers regularly (some clients can do this for you automatically every so many minutes) that it is an order of magnitude more convenient to browse a virtual group which may contain 10 related groups than it is to browse with one of the ones you mentioned.

5. Downloading headers is free. Most servers, that I'm aware of anyway, don't count header downloads against you. Have you ever tried the GN accelerator? Some servers don't support XPAT.

6. I couldn't disagree more.





Offline Hecks

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2011
  • naughty cop
Re: Headers (sorry)
« Reply #7 on: June 08, 2008, 09:27:11 AM »
1. Nope, read my post: NZBIndex is a free indexing site.  The results were visible 'at a glance' by browsing.  I wasn't browsing.

2. That's an argument for Alt.Binz to better support handling of pics.  Headers don't even come into it.

3. The point ... well, you know.

4. This simply doesn't correspond with any reality I can actually recognise.  Have you even tried using Alt.Binz for searching and browsing?  If so, you'll know that you can search ALL the groups indexed by the sites with one button press.  Not only that, but with Alt.Binz global search you can run the query in more than one engine at the same time.  So you can go from a new installation to searching up to 200 days of retention across 99% of binary groups in exactly 10.34 seconds :P.  Try that with a new installation of a proggy that needs to download all the headers first.  A week later ... dying hardrive, no doubt corrupt cache if Newsleecher is in any way involved, so you'd have to start again anyway.

5. Bandwidth, time, drive space & cpu cycles are not free.  Nor is the cost to the NSP's of serving up terabytes of perfectly useless and redundant data to those who still haven't moved on from the past.  We would all be better off if that wasted bandwidth could be dedicated to actually, you know, downloading stuff.

6. We'll have to agree to disagree, then.  ;)
« Last Edit: June 08, 2008, 10:19:43 AM by Hecks »

Daedalus21

  • Guest
Re: Headers (sorry)
« Reply #8 on: June 08, 2008, 11:17:21 AM »
1. I'm not sure that changes anything though. The global search is nice but if, for the sake of browsing,  you have to tab from one engine to another to find something that should be possible 'at a glance' then I would contend that is less convenient.

2. Are you sure? To be honest, I am not a picture buff myself but I have spoken to several who are. I've heard it mentioned in passing that nzb sites are not preferred for whatever reason. Are all picture groups even indexed on all sites?

3. Yeah, I know. I just reject the analogy to a certain extent.

4. I'm really just focusing on browsing for this discussion. I'm willing to defer. Help me on this one Hecks. How do you browse, not search, multiple related groups simultaneously with a single click. I would like to scan one list not tab from one engine to another. 

5. I'm not sure what to think of that. I guess it depends on your definition of free. The load to the NSP is another discussion. It is one I'm happy to have with you but I'd rather stay in this discussion for now.

6. I have no problem with that.


Offline Hecks

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 2011
  • naughty cop
Re: Headers (sorry)
« Reply #9 on: June 08, 2008, 11:43:39 AM »

1. OK. I would contend that the smidgen extra inconvenience pales into insignificance when compared with the time & hassle involved in actually getting header-only proggies to the point of actually being able to do as you describe.  Added to the list of things we agree to disagree about.

2. This is one for the request list, I think.  Alt.Binz already has an Open command for NLSS.  It's just the same old BODY <messageID> command after all, the rest is just trimmings.  There are certainly better readers for picture groups.

3. OK.

4. Well you're right, that precise type of browsing isn't possible with Alt.Binz, or any other reader that doesn't have virtual groups or the like.  But again, my point in 1. about cost vs. benefit stands.

5. This is a nub of the issue for me: client-side header handling is an out-moded technology that's forcing Usenet development to follow the speed of the slowest movers.  It's absolutely part of this discussion.

6. OK.

And it's Sunday, so my day of rest beckons. :)

Offline Mystic2010

  • Contributor
  • ***
  • Posts: 165
Re: Headers (sorry)
« Reply #10 on: June 08, 2008, 12:35:45 PM »
Sorry to interrupt your discussion :-X
There's just one thing I wanted to respond to, the rest you guys can continue to discuss about..

Quote
4. I'm really just focusing on browsing for this discussion. I'm willing to defer. Help me on this one Hecks. How do you browse, not search, multiple related groups simultaneously with a single click. I would like to scan one list not tab from one engine to another.
That might not be possible, but looking at the speed it happens at, browsing using the search engines is much faster, less cpu usage is needed, etc., no?
As for the part about tabbing from one engine to another, that isn't necessary, since you usually just need one search engine tab. It would just be a little more clicking, but beats waiting imo. And as stated earlier, alt.binz is more a binary nzb reader, but you'll have to excuse me for not going in too deep on that. I'll leave that to Hecks :)

Daedalus21

  • Guest
Re: Headers (sorry)
« Reply #11 on: June 08, 2008, 04:08:01 PM »
1. It probably depends on the implementation. I've never had any trouble that I can recall.

2. Perhaps, but if it requires purchasing a NLSS license then it won't help a number of people.

4. I'm assuming headers are being auto updated so no, it is not really slower. And by the time you get around to viewing the headers, the CPU is through working. If you want to do a manual update, it goes pretty quick because there isn't much to update.

5. The NNTP protocol is quite old. I have no objection to it myself as long as it works.

I consider this a general usenet discussion. I'm not really making a request for myself. I use a program which works for me that I'm happy with so I'll continue to use that. What it doesn't do, AltBinz fills in nicely. I didn't mention all the things I like about AltBinz because it wasn't relevant to this topic and it would be like preaching to the choir. At any rate, thanks for kicking the idea around with me.