View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Moonbase
Joined: 03 Feb 2003 Posts: 1 Location: Toronto area
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2003 3:57 pm Post subject: Re: Nag list -- questions |
|
|
hi!
i usually have "Recovery" on and set to 1% (default). it that enough? should i be setting thet %age higher? what about using recovery volumes? (i never have as i set parity archives 25%-30% of the rar files.) what is this "Store"?
(inc) wrote: | 05 :: Turn on *Recover* when RARing posts (and think about *Store* while you're at it).
14 :: Don't nym-shift. |
what if i change my mind about the name? i'm so indecisive.
cheers,
feye |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Gorunova
Joined: 10 Feb 2002 Posts: 318 Location: Burnaby, B.C., Canada
|
Posted: Wed Mar 05, 2003 6:35 pm Post subject: Re: Nag list -- questions |
|
|
Moonbase wrote: | i usually have "Recovery" on and set to 1% (default). it that enough? should i be setting thet %age higher? |
I usually set mine at 3%. Somewhere I got the impression that most people use 2%. More is better, but obviously you don't want to bloat the files too much.
Moonbase wrote: | what about using recovery volumes? (i never have as i set parity archives 25%-30% of the rar files.) |
Use either PARs or REVs but not both. I prefer PARs because they were developed independently of WinRAR. 25% is usually sufficient, but I always make a few more to keep in reserve in case someone needs them.
Moonbase wrote: | what is this "Store"? |
WinRAR has multiple compression level settings, allowing you to trade off between faster archiving and smaller file size. However, multimedia never compresses very well, so it's best to use the "store" (no compression) setting so that the files archive and extract fastest. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
LaughnCynic
Joined: 16 Jul 2002 Posts: 105
|
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2003 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Keikai wrote: | I don't know what email client you use, but I use Outlook and using certain configuration settings it converts HTML emails to text before processing them in any other way. |
To each his own way... I have never used Outlook myself. Just not my cup of tea asside from all the historic trouble with it. Sadly I think Netscape's mail client also defaults to html mail composition (but it's been ages since I looked so I could be wrong).
I guess most folks with broadband don't care since they'd never notice the size issue with a fat pipe. When you get a lot of mail on a dialup connection you notice. I'll be bitching more vocally about it again soon since I'll be going from cable to ISDN shortly (ISDN just got hooked up at new house yesterday.)
I'm currently mucking along with the mail client in Mozilla 1.2.1 under windows. I get by with it but I don't do the 'power' mailing I used to do when I was subscribed to a dozen pretty high traffic mailing lists and such.
When I was doing that kind of traffic (1000+ mails a day) I was running Mutt in linux. Damn sweet little super configurable, standards compliant, pgp/gpg (PGP/MIME) capable mail client. I miss it and linux a lot. I've been running winblows only for a year+ now for lack of hd space (damn anime takes up so much space). I seriously need to build a new box and get back to linux (and perhaps other OS'... been meaning to try out FreeBSD and QNX for a long time). Oh well... My anime days will be effectively over with ISDN so I'll have more space soon.
Did they ever fix that old bug in Outlook that would crash it upon receipt of an email with a PGP/MIME formatted attachment?
BTW: Waiting eagerly to paruse the new FAQ. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Keikai
Joined: 18 Feb 2002 Posts: 178 Location: Miami, FL
|
Posted: Thu Mar 06, 2003 11:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
LaughnCynic wrote: | To each his own way... | That's for sure. Honestly, I was hesitant to even mention that I use Outlook since it's much maligned amongst power users. Not one of my friends use it (they mostly use Pegasus and The Bat!). I just find it works best as a PIM and I like the ability to customize it any way I like with VBA scripting.
LaughnCynic wrote: | Did they ever fix that old bug in Outlook that would crash it upon receipt of an email with a PGP/MIME formatted attachment? | Never ran into it. Outlook has been drastically improved over the years. 98->2000 was quite a big improvement and unlike much of the Office XP suite, Outlook XP was a radical improvement over Outlook 2000, IMO. It's rare for me to applaud Microsoft for anything, so it must be true.
LaughnCynic wrote: | BTW: Waiting eagerly to paruse the new FAQ. | Well, I was waiting for a friend of mine to help me do a final proof, but I haven't heard from him. So the final will be going to xo in the next day or two for final publication. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|