Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #90485 > unrolled thread
| Started by | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-08-25 04:41 +0000 |
| Last post | 2026-08-29 00:19 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 99 — 17 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-25 04:41 +0000
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-25 03:15 -0400
Re: Ancient History John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-08-25 08:19 -0700
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 19:57 +0100
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-26 04:25 -0400
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-26 09:33 +0100
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-26 18:20 +0000
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-26 21:27 +0100
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-27 01:13 +0000
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-27 03:24 -0400
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-27 20:03 +0000
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-27 23:47 -0400
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-28 06:54 +0000
Re: Ancient History John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-08-28 09:28 -0700
Re: Ancient History Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-28 18:53 +0100
Re: Ancient History Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-30 13:11 +0100
[OT] Re: Ancient History Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-30 13:20 +0100
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-28 20:58 +0000
Re: Ancient History John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-08-28 14:49 -0700
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-29 05:41 +0000
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-29 02:00 -0400
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-29 10:00 +0100
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-29 21:55 +0000
Re: Ancient History not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-08-30 09:02 +1000
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-30 06:28 +0000
Re: Ancient History Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-30 09:15 +0100
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-30 19:28 +0000
Re: Ancient History "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-30 13:56 +0200
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-30 19:10 +0000
Re: Ancient History "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-30 21:32 +0200
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-29 21:46 +0000
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-29 09:57 +0100
Re: Ancient History not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-08-30 09:17 +1000
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-28 12:11 +0100
Re: Ancient History "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-25 11:41 +0200
Re: Ancient History Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 11:53 +0100
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 12:54 +0100
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-25 19:25 +0000
Re: Ancient History "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-25 14:23 +0200
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-26 03:28 -0400
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-26 09:12 +0100
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-26 18:26 +0000
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-27 03:56 -0400
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-27 12:00 +0100
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-27 20:25 +0000
Re: Ancient History Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-27 21:48 +0000
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-28 00:26 -0400
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-28 06:59 +0000
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-28 12:05 +0100
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-28 21:02 +0000
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-29 10:03 +0100
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-29 22:33 +0000
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-30 17:58 +0100
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-28 12:03 +0100
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-28 00:06 -0400
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-28 12:08 +0100
Re: Ancient History "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-29 13:45 +0200
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-29 22:42 +0100
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-29 21:59 -0400
Re: Ancient History "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-08-30 14:15 +0200
Metformin (Re: Ancient History) Lars Poulsen <lars@beagle-ears.com> - 2026-08-30 09:37 -0700
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-28 12:03 +0100
Re: Ancient History Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-08-28 12:07 -0400
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-28 21:00 +0000
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-29 02:22 -0400
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-29 10:01 +0100
Re: Ancient History Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-08-29 10:01 -0400
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-29 22:02 +0000
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-26 18:23 +0000
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-26 21:29 +0100
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 12:31 +0100
Re: Ancient History Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> - 2026-08-25 07:53 -0400
Re: Ancient History Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-08-25 18:26 +0000
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-25 19:37 +0000
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-25 19:16 +0000
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 20:21 +0100
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-26 04:40 +0000
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-25 12:30 +0100
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-26 02:49 -0400
Re: Ancient History "Mr. Chang Man-wai" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2026-08-25 20:07 +0800
Re: Ancient History Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2026-08-25 11:20 -0400
Re: Ancient History Robert Riches <spamtrap42@jacob21819.net> - 2026-08-25 17:44 +0000
Re: Ancient History Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-25 21:55 +0000
Re: Ancient History not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-08-27 08:59 +1000
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-27 01:20 +0000
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-27 03:38 -0400
Re: Ancient History vallor <vallor@vallor.earth> - 2026-08-27 08:08 +0000
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-27 22:13 -0400
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-28 04:24 +0000
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-27 03:21 -0400
Re: Ancient History not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-08-28 08:58 +1000
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-28 00:36 -0400
Re: Ancient History rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-08-28 04:42 +0000
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-28 02:37 -0400
Re: Ancient History not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2026-08-29 07:40 +1000
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-29 02:03 -0400
Re: Ancient History The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-08-29 10:06 +0100
Re: Ancient History Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-08-28 08:59 +0100
Re: Ancient History c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-08-29 00:19 -0400
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-29 02:00 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <xcGcnV-bb91W6A_3nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #90793 |
On 8/29/26 01:41, rbowman wrote: > On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 14:49:26 -0700, John Ames wrote: > >> This is also not really true; it may or may not be harder to do without >> dynamically rendering the whole thing client-side, but it's certainly >> possible. Google Maps functioned that way for years. > https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/javascript/overview PREF the PHP approach - makes the SERVER do most of the work :-) > Google Maps used a JavaScript API for as long as I can remember. I had the > pleasure of talking to Google to try to determine the pricing for > commercial use. The answer was up the lines of 'how much money you got?'. > We used Esri's JavaScript API. No great solutions any more. Kinda SUCKS.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-29 10:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <116u737$3345j$2@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #90795 |
On 29/08/2026 07:00, c186282 wrote:
> On 8/29/26 01:41, rbowman wrote:
>> On Fri, 28 Aug 2026 14:49:26 -0700, John Ames wrote:
>>
>>> This is also not really true; it may or may not be harder to do without
>>> dynamically rendering the whole thing client-side, but it's certainly
>>> possible. Google Maps functioned that way for years.
>> https://developers.google.com/maps/documentation/javascript/overview
>
> PREF the PHP approach - makes the SERVER
> do most of the work :-)
>
A PHP page still has to be served.
If you make dynamic changes it has to be reloaded, wasting time and
bandwidth
JavaScript enables far less network activity to be used for far more
functionality.
Like any tool its a time saver or a danger to humanity, depending on how
its used
--
"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow witted
man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest
thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly
persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid
before him."
- Leo Tolstoy
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-29 21:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nfh2r3FprcuU60@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #90803 |
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 10:00:23 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > A PHP page still has to be served. > If you make dynamic changes it has to be reloaded, wasting time and > bandwidth I suppose it could be done if you're a masochist. Take a very basic operation, zooming in. You'd have to inform the PHP back end somehow. It would then have to request a new set of tiles from the tile server based on the Z level, render a complete new page, and serve it back to the browser. That would be smoother than a baby's ass. > JavaScript enables far less network activity to be used for far more > functionality. > Like any tool its a time saver or a danger to humanity, depending on how > its used With JavaScript the browser is making the calls for new tiles and rendering them. You can watch the calls in the developer's console of Chrome, Brave, or whatever. The browser also caches tiles to minimize web traffic if you're panning for example.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-30 09:02 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <6a9364fc@news.ausics.net> |
| In reply to | #90855 |
rbowman <bowman@montana.com> wrote: > On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 10:00:23 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: >> A PHP page still has to be served. >> If you make dynamic changes it has to be reloaded, wasting time and >> bandwidth > > I suppose it could be done if you're a masochist. Take a very basic > operation, zooming in. You'd have to inform the PHP back end somehow. It > would then have to request a new set of tiles from the tile server based > on the Z level, render a complete new page, and serve it back to the > browser. That would be smoother than a baby's ass. I'd use it. >> JavaScript enables far less network activity to be used for far more >> functionality. >> Like any tool its a time saver or a danger to humanity, depending on how >> its used > > With JavaScript the browser is making the calls for new tiles and > rendering them. You can watch the calls in the developer's console of > Chrome, Brave, or whatever. The browser also caches tiles to minimize web > traffic if you're panning for example. Browsers cache things sent to them without Javascript too, and in fact that works a lot better than JS-based map sites where you usually find they do stop scrolling back to parts you've already viewed when the internet connection drops out. I get to see a lot of Javascript going wrong on my dodgy internet connection, and it's a joke compared to how some browsers handle caching of plain HTML content. Anyway for maps I'd ideally have a separate program running locally and loading map data from an updatable local file, but last time I looked into that (a long time ago, I'll admit) the free options weren't very capable. I mainly still use paper maps. -- __ __ #_ < |\| |< _#
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-30 06:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nfi0riFprcuU69@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #90869 |
On 30 Aug 2026 09:02:20 +1000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote: > Anyway for maps I'd ideally have a separate program running locally and > loading map data from an updatable local file, but last time I looked > into that (a long time ago, I'll admit) the free options weren't very > capable. I mainly still use paper maps. Paper maps are fine as far as they go. We used the map to show the location of ongoing incidents and the location of fire, ems, and law enforcement resources. You could get more information by clicking on the icon. Multiple layers allowed turning on various classes of landmarks, showing jurisdictional boundaries, and so forth. Entering a street address would zoom to the location. You're not going to do that with paper or PHP serving up static pages. Another use for crime analysis. What crimes occurred in a given time period? What were the patterns for specific crimes? How about a heat map or other graphic representation?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-30 09:15 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1170oqd$3ssek$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #90883 |
On 2026-08-30, rbowman wrote: > On 30 Aug 2026 09:02:20 +1000, Computer Nerd Kev wrote: > >> Anyway for maps I'd ideally have a separate program running locally and >> loading map data from an updatable local file, but last time I looked >> into that (a long time ago, I'll admit) the free options weren't very >> capable. I mainly still use paper maps. > > Paper maps are fine as far as they go. We used the map to show the > location of ongoing incidents and the location of fire, ems, and law > enforcement resources. You could get more information by clicking on the > icon. Multiple layers allowed turning on various classes of landmarks, > showing jurisdictional boundaries, and so forth. Entering a street address > would zoom to the location. You're not going to do that with paper or PHP > serving up static pages. There's a trade-off but it's definitely not impossible, it can be done. Another concern here could be a light enough version so that it would work well even with degraded network conditions or on less performant hardware (the kind of stuff you need to take into accout for bigger emergencies?). > Another use for crime analysis. What crimes occurred in a given time > period? What were the patterns for specific crimes? How about a heat map > or other graphic representation? Idem, some of this could be offered statically. But you're possibly nearing a good example of something that needs an interactive interface, because you easily end up with a large amount of variables you can't cover at the server side, or if you can it significantly increases processing and reduces the amount that can be cached? Not because of a map/visualization, but because of trying several representations (which I'm assuming will also involve mixing parameters and representations?). I'm reminded of HSL's old journey planner. I may be misremembering, but I think it was static or at least offered a static or light enough interface, yet it worked quite well as a journey planner. -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-30 19:28 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nfjeikFprcuU77@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #90887 |
On Sun, 30 Aug 2026 09:15:09 +0100, Nuno Silva wrote: > Idem, some of this could be offered statically. But you're possibly > nearing a good example of something that needs an interactive interface, > because you easily end up with a large amount of variables you can't > cover at the server side, or if you can it significantly increases > processing and reduces the amount that can be cached? Not because of a > map/visualization, but because of trying several representations (which > I'm assuming will also involve mixing parameters and representations?). Eye candy, aka visualization, is a selling point. Oooh pretty! How useful it really is is another question. I had access to the St. Louis Country data that I used for demos. 'Look! Ferguson is red on the heat map. That must be a high crime area.' No shit. 'Business intelligence' is the buzzword. Dry old text reports are out. To give them their due, Microsoft's Power BI is the only one that you might be able to hand to a middle manager and they could achieve some level of competency. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Power_BI I used Charts.js to enhance our text based reports with some success. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chart.js That's definitely not something a manger is going to pull off on his own, which is the holy grail of BI. Maybe Claude could help.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-30 13:56 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nfik2mF3glU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #90855 |
On 2026-08-29 23:55, rbowman wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 10:00:23 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> A PHP page still has to be served.
>> If you make dynamic changes it has to be reloaded, wasting time and
>> bandwidth
>
> I suppose it could be done if you're a masochist. Take a very basic
> operation, zooming in. You'd have to inform the PHP back end somehow. It
> would then have to request a new set of tiles from the tile server based
> on the Z level, render a complete new page, and serve it back to the
> browser. That would be smoother than a baby's ass.
>
>> JavaScript enables far less network activity to be used for far more
>> functionality.
>> Like any tool its a time saver or a danger to humanity, depending on how
>> its used
>
> With JavaScript the browser is making the calls for new tiles and
> rendering them. You can watch the calls in the developer's console of
> Chrome, Brave, or whatever. The browser also caches tiles to minimize web
> traffic if you're panning for example.
Years ago, I figured the naming of the tiles, so that I scripted
downloading them for my area, and then stitching them together in a huge
graphic or map. Gimp had trouble loading it, not enough ram.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-30 19:10 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nfjdgrFprcuU76@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #90896 |
On Sun, 30 Aug 2026 13:56:05 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > Years ago, I figured the naming of the tiles, so that I scripted > downloading them for my area, and then stitching them together in a huge > graphic or map. Gimp had trouble loading it, not enough ram. It gets intense. I've set up a tile server for a specific county and it took quite a bit of storage. Raster tiles are typically 256x256 pixel pngs. The problem is each zoom level requires a set. When you're building the server you select how many zoom levels you want to support. Vector tiles are lighter but all rendering is done client side, usually a browser. The advantage is you can do the styling on the fly rather than using pre-rendered tiles. Also vector tiles contain the geometries; raster tiles are only pretty pictures.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-30 21:32 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <nfjeqoF3giU11@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #90920 |
On 2026-08-30 21:10, rbowman wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Aug 2026 13:56:05 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
>> Years ago, I figured the naming of the tiles, so that I scripted
>> downloading them for my area, and then stitching them together in a huge
>> graphic or map. Gimp had trouble loading it, not enough ram.
(I should have said those were google maps tiles)
> It gets intense. I've set up a tile server for a specific county and it
> took quite a bit of storage. Raster tiles are typically 256x256 pixel
> pngs. The problem is each zoom level requires a set. When you're building
> the server you select how many zoom levels you want to support.
>
> Vector tiles are lighter but all rendering is done client side, usually a
> browser. The advantage is you can do the styling on the fly rather than
> using pre-rendered tiles. Also vector tiles contain the geometries; raster
> tiles are only pretty pictures.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-29 21:46 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nfh2a5FprcuU59@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #90795 |
On Sat, 29 Aug 2026 02:00:31 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> PREF the PHP approach - makes the SERVER do most of the work
I don't know PHP but what I find are sites like
https://www.sourcecodester.com/php/17354/interactive-map-markers-using-
php-and-mysql-source-code.html
https://nomadphp.com/video/232/building-interactive-maps-with-php-and-
javascript
https://www.phpclasses.org/blog/post/284-Create-a-Google-Maps-alternative-
with-PHP-and-MySQL-using-the-Leaflet-library.html
https://developers.google.com/gdata/articles/php_maps_spreadsheets
Once you say 'leaflet' you're into JavaScript.
https://leafletjs.com/
Sure, you can use PHP to serve up a HTML page, extract data from a SQL
database, and so forth. I prefer Node.js for the back end since I'd rather
work with JS on both ends.
If you like Python you can use Folium to create a web page and serve it
however you want. The HTML document will start with
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" />
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/leaflet@1.9.3/dist/
leaflet.js"></script>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-29 09:57 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <116u6ud$3345j$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #90793 |
On 29/08/2026 06:41, rbowman wrote: > JavaScript is used by 98.7% of all websites as of 2023" > > I see that 98.x % on so many sites I'm a little suspicious. Some sites may > use the <noscript/> tag to provide alternate functionality but speaking as > someone who has done so web development, ain't gonna happen. HTML was never designed for an interactive experience. E.g. Reloading a whole page explicitly after making a single change to an option is massively slow and clunky. Using AJAX is seamless and invisible. Example. I have a web page where configurations are updated. You select the values and... ...that's it. There is no update or submit button at all. If you selected it, it's updated. And that is the point. Properly used JavaScript or equivalent is a huge improvement. The problem is its misuse to obfuscate or to insert content you did not request or want -- "The great thing about Glasgow is that if there's a nuclear attack it'll look exactly the same afterwards." Billy Connolly
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-30 09:17 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <6a936880@news.ausics.net> |
| In reply to | #90802 |
The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> wrote: > On 29/08/2026 06:41, rbowman wrote: >> JavaScript is used by 98.7% of all websites as of 2023" >> >> I see that 98.x % on so many sites I'm a little suspicious. Some sites may >> use the <noscript/> tag to provide alternate functionality but speaking as >> someone who has done so web development, ain't gonna happen. > > HTML was never designed for an interactive experience. Yes, so I wish people would stop trying to make webpages interactive when they don't need to be. > E.g. Reloading a whole page explicitly after making a single change to > an option is massively slow and clunky. Using AJAX is seamless and > invisible. > Example. I have a web page where configurations are updated. You select > the values and... > > ...that's it. There is no update or submit button at all. If you > selected it, it's updated. Yeah, and I hate those because when it fails they usually make it look like it worked anyway, so you don't know unless you manually reload the page, which takes an age because it's 3MB of Javascript and locally-processed data that has to be redownloaded and inefficiently processed to show what could have been in 20KB of plain HTML in a simple webpage sent back in the blink of an eye. Or of course you reload and it resets back to a different view entirely. If you're running it on a LAN or localhost, like CUPS (though I avoid that too), fine, otherwise give me back my submit button! > And that is the point. Properly used JavaScript or equivalent is a huge > improvement. > The problem is its misuse to obfuscate or to insert content you did not > request or want No, that's just the start of the problems. -- __ __ #_ < |\| |< _#
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-28 12:11 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <116rqdo$28guo$7@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #90720 |
On 28/08/2026 04:47, c186282 wrote: > I just skipped Java and especially JS ... bad > to write, slow to run, just not something I > would like. Tossed all my Java/JS books when > I retired. Sadly I need JavaScript - I write a lot of web controlled stuff for my home systems It is horrible. But mostly it works Likewise PHP. -- To ban Christmas, simply give turkeys the vote.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-25 11:41 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <qi40mmx4l5.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #90485 |
On 2026-08-25 06:41, rbowman wrote: > In my OCD quest to rejuvenate old machines I finally dug out the tower > buried under other junk out in the shed. Turns out it's a Compaq Presario > 4550. It has a 233 MHz AMD K6 that was AMDs challenge to the Pentium II. > It was pin compatible and could be used in a Socket 7 board. It has 48 MB > of RAM (no, that's not a typo) and a 4 GB HDD. For your computing > convenient, it has a 56K modem. There are 2 USB ports although I think it > expects the mouse and keyboard to be plugged into the PS2 ports. > > Two distros that claim to run in 48 MB are Tiny Core and Slax. slax > specifies text only unless you have more RAM. Tiny Core isn't very > specific. > > I think I'll let that sleeping dog slumber on although I might see if it > boots at all. > > Now for the real puzzle. I was a fairly decent machine in 1997 and came > with Windows 95. Windows 95 claimed a minimum of 4 MB, recommended 8 MB, > and if you had 16 MB or more didn't bother creating a swap file. What the > flaming hell has happened to us? Even by Windows 98 24 MB was > recommended. Now you can barely run a pared down Linux in 48 MB and I > doubt it's a very appealing UX. > Back then, my machine that would happily run Win 98 had trouble running SuSE Linux. Linux wanted as much ram as possible. -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Nuno Silva <nunojsilva@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-25 11:53 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <116js7i$3l8e9$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #90507 |
On 2026-08-25, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2026-08-25 06:41, rbowman wrote: >> In my OCD quest to rejuvenate old machines I finally dug out the tower >> buried under other junk out in the shed. Turns out it's a Compaq Presario >> 4550. It has a 233 MHz AMD K6 that was AMDs challenge to the Pentium II. >> It was pin compatible and could be used in a Socket 7 board. It has 48 MB >> of RAM (no, that's not a typo) and a 4 GB HDD. For your computing >> convenient, it has a 56K modem. There are 2 USB ports although I think it >> expects the mouse and keyboard to be plugged into the PS2 ports. >> >> Two distros that claim to run in 48 MB are Tiny Core and Slax. slax >> specifies text only unless you have more RAM. Tiny Core isn't very >> specific. >> >> I think I'll let that sleeping dog slumber on although I might see if it >> boots at all. >> >> Now for the real puzzle. I was a fairly decent machine in 1997 and came >> with Windows 95. Windows 95 claimed a minimum of 4 MB, recommended 8 MB, >> and if you had 16 MB or more didn't bother creating a swap file. What the >> flaming hell has happened to us? Even by Windows 98 24 MB was >> recommended. Now you can barely run a pared down Linux in 48 MB and I >> doubt it's a very appealing UX. >> > > Back then, my machine that would happily run Win 98 had trouble > running SuSE Linux. Linux wanted as much ram as possible. I used the same machine for Windows 98 and GNU/Linux. Granted, it started with 64 MiB and was at some point upgraded to at least 256 MiB (and later a bit more). That Pentium II Slot 1 machine was in use as the main desktop until 2008 (by then running Debian for 1-2 years, IIRC), while I at some point used KDE 3, it was happy with that amount of memory (and could also run e.g. OOo; a laptop with 64 MiB was a bit of a different story), and life became easier as at some point I moved away from DEs. But this is already more than 48 MiB, and probably at a sweet point where it was enough memory for the kernel, X11 and applications. The biggest challenge was updating (compiling, Gentoo) GCC because of insn_attrtab.c [1] :-D Other challenges IIRC included Firefox coping with a larger amount of open tabs (although it still behaved much better than nowadays), and in one specific use case, Egacs, er, Emacs. Overall, Windows 98 was, even considering its issues, a nice system, a nice interface usually with light resource requirements. I think the only slowdown I remember was browsing DVD media in the Windows Explorer, and I have no idea if that was a Windows issue in itself or something with that specific optical drive. It's no Windows NT, but there's probably a reason it tends to be fondly remembered, even with MICROS~1 being MICROS~1 (they've, for example, IIRC not released the fix for KB312108 (NDIS "Protection Error" on fast enough CPUs [2]), instead making it available on request through their support channels... (I have no idea if this was on ftp.microsoft.com, I suppose it's possible it was there despite this?)). [1] <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29442> (behind Anubis) [2] <http://web.archive.org/web/20040513001718/http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=312108> -- Nuno Silva
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-25 12:54 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <116jvos$3l7js$21@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #90514 |
On 25/08/2026 11:53, Nuno Silva wrote: > Overall, Windows 98 was, even considering its issues, a nice system, a > nice interface usually with light resource requirements. Yes. I knew people who ran that - I was on it until I got XP - and yes, it blue screened and crashed and locked up but when it worked it was sorta OK. Needed 16MB of RAM. And a 466 or Pentium, Think I had an AMD I cant remember how big my first *desktop* linux machine was - I'd deployed it on a NAS already - but 256MB rings a bell. -- Climate Change: Socialism wearing a lab coat.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-25 19:25 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <nf68hjF5rktU53@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #90530 |
On Tue, 25 Aug 2026 12:54:04 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote: > On 25/08/2026 11:53, Nuno Silva wrote: >> Overall, Windows 98 was, even considering its issues, a nice system, a >> nice interface usually with light resource requirements. > > Yes. I knew people who ran that - I was on it until I got XP - and yes, > it blue screened and crashed and locked up but when it worked it was > sorta OK. Needed 16MB of RAM. And a 466 or Pentium, Think I had an AMD > > I cant remember how big my first *desktop* linux machine was - I'd > deployed it on a NAS already - but 256MB rings a bell. I installed Slackware from floppies on something. but I can't remember what. I also installed Mandrake from the shrik wrapped box set but it certainly wasn't on the Compaq. https://www.linuxjournal.com/article/4801 That recommends 128 or preferably 256 MB. KDE was fat by 2001.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-25 14:23 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s3e0mmxtnt.ln2@Telcontar.valinor> |
| In reply to | #90514 |
On 2026-08-25 12:53, Nuno Silva wrote: > On 2026-08-25, Carlos E.R. wrote: > >> On 2026-08-25 06:41, rbowman wrote: >>> In my OCD quest to rejuvenate old machines I finally dug out the tower >>> buried under other junk out in the shed. Turns out it's a Compaq Presario >>> 4550. It has a 233 MHz AMD K6 that was AMDs challenge to the Pentium II. >>> It was pin compatible and could be used in a Socket 7 board. It has 48 MB >>> of RAM (no, that's not a typo) and a 4 GB HDD. For your computing >>> convenient, it has a 56K modem. There are 2 USB ports although I think it >>> expects the mouse and keyboard to be plugged into the PS2 ports. >>> >>> Two distros that claim to run in 48 MB are Tiny Core and Slax. slax >>> specifies text only unless you have more RAM. Tiny Core isn't very >>> specific. >>> >>> I think I'll let that sleeping dog slumber on although I might see if it >>> boots at all. >>> >>> Now for the real puzzle. I was a fairly decent machine in 1997 and came >>> with Windows 95. Windows 95 claimed a minimum of 4 MB, recommended 8 MB, >>> and if you had 16 MB or more didn't bother creating a swap file. What the >>> flaming hell has happened to us? Even by Windows 98 24 MB was >>> recommended. Now you can barely run a pared down Linux in 48 MB and I >>> doubt it's a very appealing UX. >>> >> >> Back then, my machine that would happily run Win 98 had trouble >> running SuSE Linux. Linux wanted as much ram as possible. > > I used the same machine for Windows 98 and GNU/Linux. Granted, it > started with 64 MiB and was at some point upgraded to at least 256 MiB The machine I was talking above had much less than that. I think one machine had 5 MiB, later had another with maybe 8 or 16. I don't remember for sure. Not 98, after 95 I had Me. > (and later a bit more). That Pentium II Slot 1 machine was in use as the > main desktop until 2008 (by then running Debian for 1-2 years, IIRC), > while I at some point used KDE 3, it was happy with that amount of > memory (and could also run e.g. OOo; a laptop with 64 MiB was a bit of a > different story), and life became easier as at some point I moved away > from DEs. > > But this is already more than 48 MiB, and probably at a sweet point > where it was enough memory for the kernel, X11 and applications. > > The biggest challenge was updating (compiling, Gentoo) GCC because of > insn_attrtab.c [1] :-D > > Other challenges IIRC included Firefox coping with a larger amount of > open tabs (although it still behaved much better than nowadays), and in > one specific use case, Egacs, er, Emacs. FFx caused trashing. > Overall, Windows 98 was, even considering its issues, a nice system, a > nice interface usually with light resource requirements. I think the > only slowdown I remember was browsing DVD media in the Windows Explorer, > and I have no idea if that was a Windows issue in itself or something > with that specific optical drive. It's no Windows NT, but there's > probably a reason it tends to be fondly remembered, even with MICROS~1 > being MICROS~1 (they've, for example, IIRC not released the fix for > KB312108 (NDIS "Protection Error" on fast enough CPUs [2]), instead > making it available on request through their support channels... (I have > no idea if this was on ftp.microsoft.com, I suppose it's possible it was > there despite this?)). > > [1] <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29442> (behind Anubis) > [2] <http://web.archive.org/web/20040513001718/http://support.microsoft.com/?kbid=312108> > -- Cheers, Carlos. ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-08-26 03:28 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <ZfqcnW1t_dR9CBP3nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #90534 |
On 8/25/26 08:23, Carlos E.R. wrote: > On 2026-08-25 12:53, Nuno Silva wrote: >> On 2026-08-25, Carlos E.R. wrote: >> >>> On 2026-08-25 06:41, rbowman wrote: >>>> In my OCD quest to rejuvenate old machines I finally dug out the tower >>>> buried under other junk out in the shed. Turns out it's a Compaq >>>> Presario >>>> 4550. It has a 233 MHz AMD K6 that was AMDs challenge to the Pentium >>>> II. >>>> It was pin compatible and could be used in a Socket 7 board. It has >>>> 48 MB >>>> of RAM (no, that's not a typo) and a 4 GB HDD. For your computing >>>> convenient, it has a 56K modem. There are 2 USB ports although I >>>> think it >>>> expects the mouse and keyboard to be plugged into the PS2 ports. >>>> >>>> Two distros that claim to run in 48 MB are Tiny Core and Slax. slax >>>> specifies text only unless you have more RAM. Tiny Core isn't very >>>> specific. >>>> >>>> I think I'll let that sleeping dog slumber on although I might see >>>> if it >>>> boots at all. >>>> >>>> Now for the real puzzle. I was a fairly decent machine in 1997 and came >>>> with Windows 95. Windows 95 claimed a minimum of 4 MB, recommended 8 >>>> MB, >>>> and if you had 16 MB or more didn't bother creating a swap file. >>>> What the >>>> flaming hell has happened to us? Even by Windows 98 24 MB was >>>> recommended. Now you can barely run a pared down Linux in 48 MB and I >>>> doubt it's a very appealing UX. >>>> >>> >>> Back then, my machine that would happily run Win 98 had trouble >>> running SuSE Linux. Linux wanted as much ram as possible. >> >> I used the same machine for Windows 98 and GNU/Linux. Granted, it >> started with 64 MiB and was at some point upgraded to at least 256 MiB > > The machine I was talking above had much less than that. I think one > machine had 5 MiB, later had another with maybe 8 or 16. I don't > remember for sure. > > Not 98, after 95 I had Me. > >> (and later a bit more). That Pentium II Slot 1 machine was in use as the >> main desktop until 2008 (by then running Debian for 1-2 years, IIRC), >> while I at some point used KDE 3, it was happy with that amount of >> memory (and could also run e.g. OOo; a laptop with 64 MiB was a bit of a >> different story), and life became easier as at some point I moved away >> from DEs. >> >> But this is already more than 48 MiB, and probably at a sweet point >> where it was enough memory for the kernel, X11 and applications. >> >> The biggest challenge was updating (compiling, Gentoo) GCC because of >> insn_attrtab.c [1] :-D >> >> Other challenges IIRC included Firefox coping with a larger amount of >> open tabs (although it still behaved much better than nowadays), and in >> one specific use case, Egacs, er, Emacs. > > FFx caused trashing. > > >> Overall, Windows 98 was, even considering its issues, a nice system, a >> nice interface usually with light resource requirements. I think the >> only slowdown I remember was browsing DVD media in the Windows Explorer, >> and I have no idea if that was a Windows issue in itself or something >> with that specific optical drive. It's no Windows NT, but there's >> probably a reason it tends to be fondly remembered, even with MICROS~1 >> being MICROS~1 (they've, for example, IIRC not released the fix for >> KB312108 (NDIS "Protection Error" on fast enough CPUs [2]), instead >> making it available on request through their support channels... (I have >> no idea if this was on ftp.microsoft.com, I suppose it's possible it was >> there despite this?)). >> >> [1] <https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29442> (behind Anubis) >> [2] <http://web.archive.org/web/20040513001718/http:// >> support.microsoft.com/?kbid=312108> Heh ... had one client, a doctor, who would go looking for garage sales with like ancient Packard Bell computers. Then I was supposed to make them work with his other office stuff - networking, accounting apps, medical database stuff. Remember "LANtastic" ? WAY smaller/cheaper than Novell networking. Amazing how Win95/98 WOULD work with WAY too little RAM. Just, well, kinda SLOW. DID boost the accountants box, added a whole two megabytes of RAM I found somewhere. DID quad the speed of his accounting app. He was very happy. That's "MEGAbytes", not "GIGAbytes". Doc was a fun guy, rarely took any money for it. Got a few perks too, esp during 'epidemics'. He once sneaked-up behind me with a flu shot, said I was an 'invaluable worker'. Much of the general pubic didn't get vax that year, for some reason it was reserved for 'high-risk' people. Spent a lot of time in his ceiling space running wires .... much younger then. Would not dare do anything like that now. Don't even like step-ladders. As Mick said, "What a drag it is getting old" ...
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web