Re: BookMarks,,,,, hope this group is better than others. - Mozilla

This is a discussion on Re: BookMarks,,,,, hope this group is better than others. - Mozilla ; On Dec 20, 12:35*pm, Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote: > den wrote: > > hey all.... > > > i have f/f version *1.8.0.12 * (and plz dont tell me > > to update,, *i use this one as ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: Re: BookMarks,,,,, hope this group is better than others.

  1. Re: BookMarks,,,,, hope this group is better than others.

    On Dec 20, 12:35*pm, Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
    wrote:
    > den wrote:
    > > hey all....

    >
    > > i have f/f version *1.8.0.12 * (and plz dont tell me
    > > to update,, *i use this one as its latest that
    > > allows 'star-download' ...... * * * later ones are a
    > > mis-match,, * *got that outta the way first cos' i
    > > knew someone would ask when my version was noted;;
    > > and i dont want to lose star-downloader.)

    >
    > > now,, * heres my reason for being here,, * * *i have
    > > simply forgotton how to or/and what to do in order
    > > to back up my book-marks; * or 'bookmark folder',,
    > > whichever.

    >
    > > i got a feeling that my puter might go 'fweeeeeeet'
    > > real soon,, * *and i'd like to back up everything
    > > thats important in appropriate folders and burn them
    > > all to disk.. naturally, after, and if the puter
    > > dies, * i'd like to know how to put the jigsaw bits
    > > back together when new o/s is installed and after i
    > > put f/f on it.

    >
    > > anyone got a few mins to run me through it?

    >
    > > thanks.

    >
    > > (btw,, *what gives with some of the other f/f
    > > groups?? * i posted this msg into 3 a few days ago
    > > but havent seen any movement in group at all,,,
    > > 'cept for one that is full of Hendrix,, * whatever
    > > the heck thats all about.)

    >
    > interesting! *You've already asked this question 3 days
    > ago, gotten a few replies, but never bothered to reply
    > back. *Then you have the gall to say: "hope this group
    > is better than others". Thanks Alot!
    >

    Guess I should have read this before giving my advice in this thread.
    It simply mirrors the advice he was previously given by someone else
    in the other thread but does not appear to satisfy him (despite being
    the answer to his question).

    JB

  2. Re: BookMarks,,,,, hope this group is better than others.

    On Dec 22, 4:58*am, "den" wrote:
    > > interesting! You've already asked this question 3 days
    > > ago, gotten a few replies, but never bothered to reply
    > > back. Then you have the gall to say: "hope this group
    > > is better than others". Thanks Alot!

    >
    > Guess I should have read this before giving my advice in this thread.
    > It simply mirrors the advice he was previously given by someone else
    > in the other thread but does not appear to satisfy him (despite being
    > the answer to his question).
    >
    > JB
    >
    > oy vey,,, * * not sure what all that is about JB,, *but i did have a hard time with 3 other groups
    > on the mozilla server...... * * sorry if i put proverbial foot in mouth.
    > also,, * have had limited time on and off computer in last few days too..


    No problem. After being around newsgroups for a while (assuming you
    are new to them) you learn that most will be pretty direct in
    postings. Keeps things moving. When someone posts the same question
    in a few different threads they will be called on it by others -
    guaranteed. Unfortunately sometimes it's a simple oversight by
    someone new to newsgroups. Other times it's someone who likes to hear
    themselves complain with no real intention to listen to the advice
    given. Hence frustrating for those who took the time to answer it the
    first time around only to see the same person asking the same question
    in a new thread. Having a good newsreader application can help keep
    things organized. Personally I prefer to access this group through
    Google Groups as it keeps the threads very well organized.

    JB

  3. Re: BookMarks,,,,, hope this group is better than others.

    On Dec 22, 5:43*am, "David McRitchie" wrote:
    > "Fox on the run"
    >
    > > Unfortunately sometimes it's a simple oversight by
    > > someone new to newsgroups. *
    > > Personally I prefer to access this group through
    > > Google Groups as it keeps the threads very well organized.

    >
    > A new poster ignoring something is also *due *to incorrectly
    > assuming that they just need to read the last posting rather than
    > all of the replies. * *Things that seem alike may have completely
    > different causes, *and answers are just guesses at a solution
    > or a means to get more information to help poster solve their
    > problem. * *Then there are few who expect to receive an email
    > reply, which if it were done would deprive everyone else of
    > answers to be found in newsgroup archives.
    >
    > I personally would * use Google Groups if there is a missing
    > reply not for posting questions or general newsgroup reading.
    > Use if for what *it *always was searching for archived postings.


    I appreciate that there are different strokes for different folks. Is
    there any potential pitfall to using Google groups rather than a news
    reader for posting? It's the only way I've ever posted to
    newsgroups. I've never used a news reader beyond testing out
    subscribing to a group a few times but I prefer the aesthetics of how
    Google Groups organizes the threads vs my email/news reader client.
    Being a gmail user it provides me with a consistent look & feel even
    though one has nothing to do with the other.

    Just want to make sure I'm not being cheated out of some content
    because I'm accessing it this way vs a news reader.

    JB

  4. Re: BookMarks,,,,, hope this group is better than others.

    On Dec 22, 7:59*am, squaredancer wrote:
    > On 22.12.2008 12:56, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused *Fox on the run
    > to generate the following:? :
    >
    > > On Dec 22, 5:43 am, "David McRitchie" wrote:

    >
    > >> "Fox on the run"

    >
    > >>> Unfortunately sometimes it's a simple oversight by
    > >>> someone new to newsgroups. *
    > >>> Personally I prefer to access this group through
    > >>> Google Groups as it keeps the threads very well organized.

    >
    > >> A new poster ignoring something is also *due *to incorrectly
    > >> assuming that they just need to read the last posting rather than
    > >> all of the replies. * *Things that seem alike may have completely
    > >> different causes, *and answers are just guesses at a solution
    > >> or a means to get more information to help poster solve their
    > >> problem. * *Then there are few who expect to receive an email
    > >> reply, which if it were done would deprive everyone else of
    > >> answers to be found in newsgroup archives.

    >
    > >> I personally would * use Google Groups if there is a missing
    > >> reply not for posting questions or general newsgroup reading.
    > >> Use if for what *it *always was searching for archived postings.

    >
    > > I appreciate that there are different strokes for different folks. *Is
    > > there any potential pitfall to using Google groups rather than a news
    > > reader for posting? *It's the only way I've ever posted to
    > > newsgroups. *I've never used a news reader beyond testing out
    > > subscribing to a group a few times but I prefer the aesthetics of how
    > > Google Groups organizes the threads vs my email/news reader client.
    > > Being a gmail user it provides me with a consistent look & feel even
    > > though one has nothing to do with the other.

    >
    > > Just want to make sure I'm not being cheated out of some content
    > > because I'm accessing it this way vs a news reader.

    >
    > > JB

    >
    > why use a (mostly antiquated) newsreader when you can use TB ??
    >
    > reg


    What antiquated newsreader? I'm using groups.google.com. I'm not
    using a newsreader at all. Accessing them via the web. I could use
    Thunderbird. But as I stated previously, I have developed a level of
    comfort with how well Google threads the discussions (same as gmail
    threads discussions). I've seen postings from people where it is
    fairly obvious that they missed some of the postings in the middle.
    Whereas I scroll down the page and can read all the postings in order
    avoiding embarrassing or needless postings. Sure I could do the same
    with TB. But I can access them from any number of PCs (home or work)
    regardless of the OS. I seldom access them from one PC. So the PC
    configured with TB as a news reader would download countless newsgroup
    postings to my local machine whereas accessing them via Google groups
    leaves the storage of the newsgroup postings to Google. I can search
    through them using Google's search engine rather than the filtering
    system in TB. I can jump over into other newsgroups or check a
    person's profile and their other postings if necessary. Personally I
    find it very convenient. If the only difference with using a news
    reader such as TB is a different end user experience then I'm not
    interested. I am pleased with the end user experience I currently
    have so why change for the sake of changing. But if using Google
    groups negatively impacted my ability to use newsgroups then I would
    switch to something else. But short of that I have no desire to
    change.

    So, am I being cheated out of some of the content of newsgroups by
    using Google groups vs a news reader? If so what?

    By the way my apologies to den for hijacking the thread. I saw that
    he had the answer he was seeking and the thread lended itself to go
    there so I did.

    Thanks,

    JB

+ Reply to Thread