arachne-digest Sunday, March 12 2000 Volume 01 : Number 1034 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 13:38:3 +0800 From: J J Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Charset in insight > What I meant was since I, and probably a lot of others, don't know what > all the different character sets look like and since the names are mostly > meaningless, it would be nice if there was a graphic available somewhere > that showed all of the common sets on one page, each with their label. A good HTML reference (e.g. from O'Reilly publishers) should include an appendix of Character Entities. You'll get a table showing the Numeric Entities and their alternative Named Entities (not available for most symbols), as used to specify the symbols in webpages. Also included in the table will be the Symbols themselves, along with their Descriptions. Not all 256 characters in the ISO character set appear in the table. Missing ones are not recognized by browsers, and of those that are, some are not fully conformant. Arachne doesn't recognize as many as she should. I haven't found a table comparing the HTML Numeric Entities with ASCII, but the names and symbols _are_ included (which is what was asked for). Incidentally, Sam Heywood's original mail of 4th March has the ASCII and HTML entities exchanged e.g. ASCII ALT+168 = � = HTML ¿ or ¿ For your information, the � is the "general currency sign" HTML ¤ or ¤ > What do we call the French language character that looks like a C with a little curly thingy under it? - -- Capital C, cedilla HTML Ç or Ç - -- Small c, cedilla HTML ç or ç > One list member described a certain character as "the one used to start laws". > I think he was referring to a character typically used to signal the beginning of > a new paragraph. - -- Paragraph sign HTML ¶ or ¶ Guess who doesn't know the ASCII equivalents! Go get your fill of the HTML entities at http://utopia.knoware.nl/users/schluter/doc/tags/characters.html (Problem is that not all browsers will display the symbols, so ASK and I'll put up a screendump as a GIF.) Jake ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 11:28:24 EST From: Michael D Hildenbrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Arachne 1.61 problems I just loaded Arachne 1.6 and it *is* impressive as far as speed. The problem is that, using the same settings I used under 1.5, the urls and names of the web sites only show as white, that is they are unreadable as the text is the same color as the background. Also in the lines that are used for the setup of ppp do the same thing. When I reply to an email, the same thing happens in the return address line. However, when I click them and move the cursor by using the arrow keys, I can see what letters lay below the cursor, one letter at a time. Just as soon as I move the cursor with the arrow key, that letter dissappears into whiteness. Also as I compose a letter in Arachne, the email address and subject line are blank white and remain that way, even while I type. Everything seems to be fine within the body of the message. How can I fix this? Michael ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 11:10:01 +0000 From: "Michael L. Dawley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Arachne 1.61 problems On Sat, 11 Mar 2000 03:40:40 -0500, Clarence Verge wrote: > Hi Michael; > Could you tell us more about this Evergreen Upgrade ? Does it use > the original clock from the '486 or does it have it's own ? > What clock speed does the bios report on the boot screen ? > - Clarence Verge Clarence, The Evergreen Upgrade processor, http://www.evertech.com plugs into the upgrade socket next to the original 486 sx-25 on my PS/1. I had it in the Tandy at one time,and there it just goes into the socket in place of the original. On the box, they have: Uses 133 MHz 5x86 processor with internal clock tripling/ quadrupling, 16K of level one cache, and on-chip floating point math unit. Replaces 486SX,DX,SX2,DX2 or DX4/75 processor or plugs into the OverDrive socket. Supports both 168/169 pin 486 sockets and 237/238 pin OverDrive sockets. Also it has: Triples or quadruples existing clock speed. Installs in minutes (it does). They give you a nice installation guide, not needed, just plug it in and go. - ------ I have two other computers that would need this processor. I think it gives more performance increase for the $ than RAM as long as one has at least 8 mb<g>. It's about $60.00 after rebate and just plugs in as is and works perfectly. - ----- Their email is [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone Number (541)757-7341 (tech support) Also in the box you get a disk that allows you to perform performance benchmark tests before and after, it's really very nice, works on any computer and a useful addition to one's toolbox<g>. On my Tandy, I had 24,276 on the 486DX-50, prior to upgrade and 34,424 on the Evergreen after upgrade. By comparison, my Pentium 75 shows 58,806. The PS/1 with the Evergreen installed is 27,571 running in an overdrive socket. My Compudyne with an AMD DX4-100 gets 44,019. My PS/1 using the Evergreen runs at about 100 Mhz according to the disk's report. I checked with Micro Warehouse 1-800-397-8508 and they have it, part # EX6744. They have an online rebate coupon for $40.00 so the net price, without shipping added is $60.00. Evertech.com also has a list of retail stores on their website, and I notice that Office Depot in my town has this processor for sale. I've seen it there, along side the ones to upgrade Pentium 75's to 233mhz, etc. The part number on the box is: Evergreen Part# 131. - ----------- Hope this helps. - ----------- Michael L. Dawley Pearl, Mississippi - ---------- -- Compaq Deskpro 575 -- - -- Using Netdial 1.3 with Arachne 1.60b1 -- - -------------------------------------------- http://www.angelfire.com/ms/telegram/arachne.html - -- Arachne V1.60;b1, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 11:41:34 -0500 From: "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Charset in insight On Sat, 11 Mar 2000 13:38:3 +0800, J J Young wrote: > Go get your fill of the HTML entities at > http://utopia.knoware.nl/users/schluter/doc/tags/characters.html Thanks a lot, Jake. I really needed that. Here is the problem: With the American ISO that I am using, HTML entity values are not the same as ascii values. This means that if I were to send an email message written in the Spanish language to a person who uses Arachne Insight to read his mail, then the message would be perfectly intelligible to him provided I use the HTML entity values. If he reads his mail with a program such as Net-Tamer or Barebones DOS, then I would have to compose the message by use of the ascii values. If I were to set up my ISO within DOS to use Latin-1, would the ALT + NUM characters as viewed from the DOS console be seen the same as viewed from within Arachne Insight Mail? In order to achieve universal compatibility we will have to deconstruct this Tower of Babel. This does not mean that we should all learn to speak one universal language. Some concepts and thoughts and emotions are expressed and formulated better in some languages than in others, and vice-versa. I am merely suggesting that everybody should adopt one universal numbering scheme for all the characters used in all of the world's languages. Some persons might object to this proposal on the grounds that some cultures use different symbols to indicate the same numeric values; however, all computer keyboards that I know about are all set up for using either Arabic Decimal Numerals or Hexadecimal Numerals. So that should not create a problem, as these two numbering systems are very well known and are easily converted. Please examine the characters below from within Insight and also from within the DOS console. I think we all can agree that this is a big problem. ALT + NUM, Spanish language characters from table http://utopia.knoware.nl/users/schluter/doc/tags/characters.html These are rendered correctly in Arachne's Insight Mail, but are incorrect when viewed at the DOS console: 225 � Corresponds to ascii 160 in DOS 233 � Corresponds to ascii 130 in DOS 237 � Corresponds to ascii 161 in DOS 243 � Corresponds to ascii 162 in DOS 250 � Corresponds to ascii 163 in DOS 241 � Corresponds to ascii 164 in DOS 170 � Corresponds to ascii 166 in DOS 186 � Corresponds to ascii 167 in DOS 191 � Corresponds to ascii 168 in DOS 161 � Corresponds to ascii 173 in DOS ALT + NUM, Spanish language characters from ascii chart, the version normally used in the US. These are viewed correctly from the DOS console, but are incorrect when viewed in Arachne's Insight Mail. 160 � Corresponds to HTML entity 225 130 � Corresponds to HTML entity 233 161 � Corresponds to HTML entity 237 162 � Corresponds to HTML entity 243 163 � Corresponds to HTML entity 250 164 � Corresponds to HTML entity 241 166 � Corresponds to HTML entity 170 167 � Corresponds to HTML entity 186 168 � Corresponds to HTML entity 191 173 � Corresponds to HTML entity 161 - ------------ BTW, I would be curious to know how this message looks to someone who is reading it with Outlook or Eudora, or any other popular Winblows program. Sam Heywood - -- This mail was written by user of Arachne, the Ultimate Internet Client ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 19:26:19 +0100 From: "Willy & Danielle Hoogstraten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Arachne 1.61 problems On Sat, 11 Mar 2000 11:28:24 EST, Michael D Hildenbrand wrote: > I just loaded Arachne 1.6 and it *is* impressive as far as speed. The > problem is that, using the same settings I used under 1.5, the urls and > names of the web sites only show as white, that is they are unreadable as > the text is the same color as the background. Also in the lines that are > used for the setup of ppp do the same thing. When I reply to an email, > the same thing happens in the return address line. However, when I click > them and move the cursor by using the arrow keys, I can see what letters > lay below the cursor, one letter at a time. Just as soon as I move the > cursor with the arrow key, that letter dissappears into whiteness. Also > as I compose a letter in Arachne, the email address and subject line are > blank white and remain that way, even while I type. Everything seems to > be fine within the body of the message. How can I fix this? > Michael Hi, Why do new users never read old postings ? On Arachne Quick Chat I (and others) told several times to turn of fixed system fonts as well as turning of very large system fonts in the options/preferences 'panel'. This always worked! Michael P.(xChaos): other defaults maybe ? - - Best regards, - - Willy J. Hoogstraten. - - End of message - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 19:26:19 +0100 From: "Willy & Danielle Hoogstraten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Registering Hi, Can anyone tell me how to register Arachne ? I wrote two times to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and even send some cash money (30 USD) to the address mentioned in register.htm. But I never got any reply! I should still like to register, but how can I achieve this ? - - Best regards, - - Willy J. Hoogstraten. - - End of message - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 12:43:29 From: "Dale Mentzer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Arachne 1.61 problems On 11 Mar 00 at 11:28, Michael D Hildenbrand wrote: >>I just loaded Arachne 1.6 and it *is* impressive as far as speed. The >>problem is that, using the same settings I used under 1.5, the urls and >>names of the web sites only show as white, that is they are unreadable as >>the text is the same color as the background. Also in the lines that are >>used for the setup of ppp do the same thing. When I reply to an email, the >>same thing happens in the return address line. However, when I click them >>and move the cursor by using the arrow keys, I can see what letters lay >>below the cursor, one letter at a time. Just as soon as I move the cursor >>with the arrow key, that letter dissappears into whiteness. Also as I >>compose a letter in Arachne, the email address and subject line are blank >>white and remain that way, even while I type. Everything seems to be fine >>within the body of the message. How can I fix this? It sounds to me like you simply have a bad color configuration in the Options setup. Try going to OPTIONS and see what colors are selected and then try some different combinations, till you find that which pleases your eye most. HTH. Regards, Dale Mentzer Cleavage (n): something you can approve of and look down on at the same time. -- W. Garnett. This mail written by a user of Arachne, the DOS Internet Client WWWWW World Wide Web Without Windows http://home.arachne.cz Arachne DOS Browser Home Page ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 21:05:54 +0100 (CET) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Richard Menedetter) Subject: Charset in insight Hi "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: SH> With the American ISO that I am using, HTML entity values are not the SH> same as ascii values. Sorry ... but I'm not able to understand this sentence ... :) First of all there is no american ISO ... ISO stands for _INTERNATIONAL_ Standards Organization HTML Entities are such things like ä -> parsed as � SH> This means that if I were to send an email SH> message written in the Spanish language to a person who uses Arachne SH> Insight to read his mail, then the message would be perfectly SH> intelligible to him provided I use the HTML entity values. ??? If you write the mail in a correctly configured insight, than it should be readable. If you write it in plain DOS, with the standard codepage 437, it will only be readable by people who also use plain DOS with cp 437 ... This is NOT what you want. If you install the stuff that I zipped up, you will end up with a iso latin1 in DOS. So if you can read it in DOS, and send it away with the correct charset header it should be readable to anybody with an average mail reader (or a good one :) SH> If he reads his mail with a program such as Net-Tamer or Barebones SH> DOS, then I would have to compose the message by use of the ascii SH> values. You can't use ascii values for 'special' characters, because there ARE NO ascii values for these characters !!! SH> If I were to set up my ISO within DOS to use Latin-1, would the ALT + SH> NUM characters as viewed from the DOS console be seen the same as SH> viewed from within Arachne Insight Mail? it should IMHO ... SH> In order to achieve universal compatibility we will have to SH> deconstruct this Tower of Babel. And if you are dead than you feel no pain .... sorry :))) but this is impossible ... SH> I am merely suggesting that everybody should adopt one universal SH> numbering scheme for all the characters used in all of the world's SH> languages. There IS such a scheme ... as I and many others have already written here ... goto http://www.unicode.org SH> Please examine the characters below from within Insight and also from SH> within the DOS console. I think we all can agree that this is a big SH> problem. Not really ... this is like I put my tape into the cd-player and I couldn't hear anything. SH> ALT + NUM, Spanish language characters SH> from table SH> http://utopia.knoware.nl/users/schluter/doc/tags/characters.html These SH> are rendered correctly in Arachne's Insight Mail, but are SH> incorrect when viewed at the DOS console: SH> 225 � Corresponds to ascii 160 in DOS SH> 233 � Corresponds to ascii 130 in DOS SH> 237 � Corresponds to ascii 161 in DOS SH> 243 � Corresponds to ascii 162 in DOS SH> 250 � Corresponds to ascii 163 in DOS SH> 241 � Corresponds to ascii 164 in DOS SH> 170 � Corresponds to ascii 166 in DOS SH> 186 � Corresponds to ascii 167 in DOS SH> 191 � Corresponds to ascii 168 in DOS SH> 161 � Corresponds to ascii 173 in DOS OK ... again there is NO ASCII 160 !!!! (ASCII is 0-127) But these seem to be correct ISO Latin-1 codes. At least they display correctly here. 'a,'e, .... SH> ALT + NUM, Spanish language characters SH> from ascii chart, the version normally used in the US. SH> These are viewed correctly from the DOS console, but are incorrect SH> when viewed in Arachne's Insight Mail. SH> 160 � Corresponds to HTML entity 225 SH> 130 � Corresponds to HTML entity 233 SH> 161 � Corresponds to HTML entity 237 SH> 162 � Corresponds to HTML entity 243 SH> 163 � Corresponds to HTML entity 250 SH> 164 Corresponds to HTML entity 241 SH> 166 | Corresponds to HTML entity 170 SH> 167 Corresponds to HTML entity 186 SH> 168 " Corresponds to HTML entity 191 SH> 173 - Corresponds to HTML entity 161 Does HTML entity mean codepage 437 to you ??? (The standard codepage for DOS) PS: These are displayed as garbage. Sure ... because your message haeder states that you used iso latin 1 ... but this lines were written with cp437 !!!!!! It can't be displayed correctly this way! SH> BTW, I would be curious to know how this message looks to someone who SH> is reading it with Outlook or Eudora, or any other popular Winblows SH> program. OK here the facts: You state in your header that you used iso latin1. So every sane Email program (including windows, nextstep, amiga ...) will display it using an iso latin1 font. So the 1. part is displayed correctly .... (in every sane mail program) and the 2. part (written with the standard DOS codepage 437, but wrongly assumed to be latin1) is displayed incorrectly. This is not the fault of any mail reader, but a misconfiguration made by you. (stating you use iso latin1 but you really used cp437 in that part of the mail) SH> Sam Heywood CU, Ricsi - -- Richard Menedetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [ICQ: 7659421] {RSA-PGP Key avail.} - -=> Rainy days and automatic weapons get me down... <=- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 16:22:44 -0500 From: Clarence Verge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Registering Willy & Danielle Hoogstraten wrote: > > Hi, > > Can anyone tell me how to register Arachne ? I wrote two times to > [EMAIL PROTECTED] and even send some cash money (30 USD) to the address > mentioned in register.htm. But I never got any reply! > > I should still like to register, but how can I achieve this ? Hi Willy; I had a similar problem more than a year ago. Just keep bugging them. About once a week should do it. <G> - - Clarence Verge - -- - - Help stamp out FATWARE. As a start visit: http://home.arachne.cz/ - -- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 16:18:34 -0500 From: Clarence Verge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Arachne speeds (Was Re: Arachne 1.61 problems ) Gregory J. Feig wrote: > > Michael .......my preferred machine is a 486DLC40, with 32Mb RAM, > and 160B1 is MUCH faster and performs smoother on it than 150src. Michael Dawley wrote: > > The Evergreen Upgrade processor, http://www.evertech.com plugs into > the upgrade socket next to the original 486 sx-25 on my PS/1. > <>--- > On my Tandy, I had 24,276 on the 486DX-50, prior to upgrade > and 34,424 on the Evergreen after upgrade. > <>--- > The PS/1 with the Evergreen installed is 27,571 running in an > overdrive socket. Hi Michael, Gregy; Michael, that LOOKS like it says the PS1 is now running about 13-14% faster than the 486DX-50. (27,571 / 24,276) That is not the kind of difference I expected you had between your systems. Gregy, I also prefer my '486 - although it is only a 33Mhz machine. Your computer should be fairly close in capability to mine, but I find no LARGE difference with Arachne 1.6b1. Beginning with version 1.50src, Michael has provided us with an easy method of making these comparsons valid across versions, systems, and setups. Instead of using adjectives, we can use the altM popup to give us an number for the page load time. Unfortunately, he does not provide time to tenths of seconds, so on fast computers you can't get numbers between 0 and 1 second. My numerical fixation drives me to provide the following, mostly from my altM popup. The slowest simple local operation that takes enough time to measure reasonably on my '486 is the loading of preferences from the options page - so I ran the test 4 times each way, "O" hotkey -> "Preferences" -> "O" and recorded the time shown in altM after each step. Michael's race from Home to Desktop takes less than 1 second on my '486. Version "O"-----> "Preferences" -----> "O" A1.6b1 4,3,4,4 1,1,1,1 A1.50src 5,4,4,4 1,1,1,1 A1.50b2 4,4,4,4 1,1,1,1 For 1.50b2 I just synchronized the test to the clock on the status bar. For another comparison I tested 1.6b1 on my P90: A1.6b1(P90) 2,2,1,1 0,1,1,0 Please do the same test with your computers and post the results. Thanks. - - Clarence Verge - -- - - Help stamp out FATWARE. As a start visit: http://home.arachne.cz/ - -- ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 23:07:43 +0100 (MET) From: Bernie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Can't read HTM attachment Roger wrote: >No problem with 1.6b1 either. Neither for me (same version). I have however had problems with HTML files containing <style> statments earlier. For instance removing the <style> part on the price list from my favorite computer shop makes it possible for me to view it - otherwise it just turns up blank in Arachne. ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 17:35:54 -0500 From: "Glenn McCorkle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Can't read HTM attachment On Sat, 11 Mar 2000 23:07:43 +0100 (MET), Bernie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Roger wrote: >> No problem with 1.6b1 either. > Neither for me (same version). I have however had problems with HTML files > containing <style> statments earlier. > For instance removing the <style> part on the price list from my favorite > computer shop makes it possible for me to view it - otherwise it just turns > up blank in Arachne. I wonder if it's the same problem we've seen with JS. (the < symbols are seen by Arachne as the beginning of an HTML tag) Try inserting a > symbol just before the </style> tag. - -- Glenn McCorkle [EMAIL PROTECTED] North Jackson, Ohio, USA DOS prog. for QV cameras http://www.angelfire.com/id/glenndoom/qvplay.html Other stuff http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ Arachne, The Web Browser for DOS Open the 'DOOR' to the WWW. Keep the 'windows' closed. http://arachne.browser.org/ http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 18:03:42 -0500 (EST) From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric S. Emerson) Subject: Re: Arachne 1.61 problems Willy J. Hoogstraten wrote: > <snip> >Why do new users never read old postings ? On Arachne Quick Chat I (and >others) told several times to turn of fixed system fonts as well as turning >of very large system fonts in the options/preferences 'panel'. This always >worked! > >- Willy J. Hoogstraten. > Hi Willy, Probably because "new users" don't know about old postings of Arachne Quick Chat! How do "new users" get such postings? Eric - -- __________ | Ayrx |__\_ Eric S. Emerson | :~_: ! [EMAIL PROTECTED] `~(*)~~~~(*)~' ````````````````````````` ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 19:49:34 EST From: Michael D Hildenbrand <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Arachne 1.61 problems Thanks for the hint. It was the fixed systems fonts. I *had* already messed around with all of the colors and nothing seemed to be controlling that part of the image. BTW, our server was down for about a week, so my subscription was canceled (I assume because of too many refused emails). I was not able to visit the Arachne web site, so I didn't even know a new version had come out. BTW: what is Arachne Quick Chat? I have not heard of this before. Michael On Sat, 11 Mar 2000 19:26:19 +0100 "Willy & Danielle Hoogstraten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >On Sat, 11 Mar 2000 11:28:24 EST, Michael D Hildenbrand wrote: > >> I just loaded Arachne 1.6 and it *is* impressive as far as speed. >The >> problem is that, using the same settings I used under 1.5, the urls >and >> names of the web sites only show as white, that is they are >unreadable as >> the text is the same color as the background. Also in the lines >that are >> used for the setup of ppp do the same thing. When I reply to an >email, >> the same thing happens in the return address line. However, when I >click >> them and move the cursor by using the arrow keys, I can see what >letters >> lay below the cursor, one letter at a time. Just as soon as I move >the >> cursor with the arrow key, that letter dissappears into whiteness. >Also >> as I compose a letter in Arachne, the email address and subject line >are >> blank white and remain that way, even while I type. Everything >seems to >> be fine within the body of the message. How can I fix this? > >> Michael > >Hi, > >Why do new users never read old postings ? On Arachne Quick Chat I >(and >others) told several times to turn of fixed system fonts as well as >turning >of very large system fonts in the options/preferences 'panel'. This >always >worked! > >Michael P.(xChaos): other defaults maybe ? > > >- Best regards, > >- Willy J. Hoogstraten. > >- End of message - > ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 01:49:26 +0100 From: "Willy & Danielle Hoogstraten" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Arachne 1.61 problems On Sat, 11 Mar 2000 18:03:42 -0500 (EST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Eric S. Emerson) wrote: > Willy J. Hoogstraten wrote: >> <snip> >> Why do new users never read old postings ? On Arachne Quick Chat I (and >> others) told several times to turn of fixed system fonts as well as turning >> of very large system fonts in the options/preferences 'panel'. This always >> worked! > Hi Willy, > Probably because "new users" don't know about old postings > of Arachne Quick Chat! How do "new users" get such postings? Try these addresses (beware: the Chat is more a message board than a chat), and... "older users" are welcome too: <A HREF="http://chat.arachne.cz/#end"> Arachne Quick Chat.</A> <A HREF="http://www.wymondhamleics.free-online.co.uk/nerd/arachne.htm"> Arachne Quick Chat and Mail Archive.</A> <A HREF="http://arachne.virtualave.net/chat.arachne.cz/"> Hoody's archive of Arachne Quick Chat.</A> - - Best regards, - - Willy J. Hoogstraten. - - End of message - ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 20:09:39 +0000 From: "Michael L. Dawley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Arachne speeds (Was Re: Arachne 1.61 problems ) On Sat, 11 Mar 2000 16:18:34 -0500, Clarence Verge wrote: Michael Dawley wrote: > On my Tandy, I had 24,276 on the 486DX-50, prior to upgrade > and 34,424 on the Evergreen after upgrade. > <>--- > The PS/1 with the Evergreen installed is 27,571 running in an > overdrive socket. > Hi Michael, Gregy; > Michael, that LOOKS like it says the PS1 is now running about 13-14% faster > than the 486DX-50. (27,571 / 24,276) > That is not the kind of difference I expected you had between your systems. Clarence, Yes, that Tandy is fairly fast, probably due to bus speed differences. I didn't record PS/1 speeds prior to upgrade, but it did make a nice improvement to install the Evergreen in it. > Gregy, I also prefer my '486 - although it is only a 33Mhz machine. > Your computer should be fairly close in capability to mine, but I find no > LARGE difference with Arachne 1.6b1. > Beginning with version 1.50src, Michael has provided us with an easy method > of making these comparsons valid across versions, systems, and setups. > Instead of using adjectives, we can use the altM popup to give us an number > for the page load time. Unfortunately, he does not provide time to tenths of > seconds, so on fast computers you can't get numbers between 0 and 1 second. > My numerical fixation drives me to provide the following, mostly from my > altM popup. The slowest simple local operation that takes enough time to > measure reasonably on my '486 is the loading of preferences from the options > page - so I ran the test 4 times each way, "O" hotkey -> "Preferences" -> "O" > and recorded the time shown in altM after each step. > Michael's race from Home to Desktop takes less than 1 second on my '486. > Version "O"-----> "Preferences" -----> "O" > A1.6b1 4,3,4,4 1,1,1,1 > A1.50src 5,4,4,4 1,1,1,1 > A1.50b2 4,4,4,4 1,1,1,1 > For 1.50b2 I just synchronized the test to the clock on the status bar. > For another comparison I tested 1.6b1 on my P90: > A1.6b1(P90) 2,2,1,1 0,1,1,0 > Please do the same test with your computers and post the results. - -------------------- Wow, your P90 really scoots<g>. Here's what I got using 1.60b1: - ---- Compaq P75 800x600 24 mb: 4,4,3,4 2,1,1,1 IBM PS/1 586 640x480 32 mb 4,3,4,3 1,1,1,1 Tandy 486DX-50 640x480 8mb 4,4,4,4 1,1,1,1 Compudyne AMD DX4-100 640x480 16mb 6,6,6,5 2,2,2,1 As a result of this, I might need to check into the virtual screens settings on the Compudyne, as it seems a little slow compared to the others. That might make some difference. OT: My other project is a set of .bat files to allow Bobcat and Arachne to share the same connection, and have them "take turns" on it. On some websites, notably http://www.newsday.com, Bobcat can get the news stories fairly quickly, and is interesting to play around with. Arachne 1.60b1 most likely can do just as well, even with the few images they have there. Mostly I'm having fun with the "menu" .bat files, etc. with this project. When I get the setup polished somewhat, I'll have to stick these files, readme's, etc. up on Angelfire like Glenn does, and make a post to the list about it. - ----------- Michael L. Dawley Pearl, Mississippi - ---------- -- Compaq Deskpro 575 -- - -- Using Netdial 1.3 with Arachne 1.60b1 -- - -------------------------------------------- http://www.angelfire.com/ms/telegram/arachne.html - -- Arachne V1.60;b1, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2000 20:43:06 +0000 From: "Michael L. Dawley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Arachne speeds (Was Re: Arachne 1.61 problems ) Hello Clarence, All: Correction: The newsday.com link should have been: http://www.newsday.com/ap/topnewsx.htm This link is their "text only" version, and loads fast in Bobcat and Arachne. I gave http://www.newsday.com in my post, which is their full site, works very well in Arachne 1.60b1, however. Thanks, - ----------- Michael L. Dawley Pearl, Mississippi - ---------- -- Compaq Deskpro 575 -- - -- Using Netdial 1.3 with Arachne 1.60b1 -- - -------------------------------------------- http://www.angelfire.com/ms/telegram/arachne.html - -- Arachne V1.60;b1, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/ ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2000 00:16:59 -0500 From: "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Charset in insight On Sat, 11 Mar 2000 21:05:54 +0100 (CET), Richard Menedetter wrote: > Hi > "Samuel W. Heywood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > SH> With the American ISO that I am using, HTML entity values are not the > SH> same as ascii values. > Sorry ... but I'm not able to understand this sentence ... :) By HTML entity values I am speaking of the ALT + NUMs as referenced in the table found at the URL: http://utopia.knoware.nl/users/schluter/doc/tags/characters.html By the American ISO I mean the DOS system default. It doesn't matter what I call it as long as you know what I'm talking about. I interpret the meaning of the term "entity values" from context only. Perhaps my interpretation is wrong, but at least you now know what I am talking about because I have defined it as the ALT + NUMs in the table. It doesn't matter if you disagree with the definition I have inferred. As long as you understand what I have inferred, then you should be able to understand me, even if my definitions are not agreed upon by the experts in this matter. It is not my purpose to argue over the definitions of the terms. I am only trying to explain what I'm talking about. > First of all there is no american ISO ... > ISO stands for _INTERNATIONAL_ Standards Organization > HTML Entities are such things like ä -> parsed as � OK, OK. Now I understand what you are talking about. I am talking about the ALT + NUMs. I don't know the technical term for the ALT + NUMs. > SH> This means that if I were to send an email > SH> message written in the Spanish language to a person who uses Arachne > SH> Insight to read his mail, then the message would be perfectly > SH> intelligible to him provided I use the HTML entity values. > ??? Meaning the ALT + NUMs as indicated in the table referenced in the URL. > If you write the mail in a correctly configured insight, than it should be > readable. I have found that as long as I use the ALT + NUMs as provided in the referenced table, the characters will be viewed correctly within Insight regardless of what character set I specify in my Arachne setup. If, however, I should use the ALT + NUMs provided in the "standard" ascii table, to include the "standard extended ascii table", then the characters will not be readable within Insight. > If you write it in plain DOS, with the standard codepage 437, it will only > be readable by people who also use plain DOS with cp 437 ... > This is NOT what you want. You are right about that. > If you install the stuff that I zipped up, you will end up with a iso > latin1 in DOS. > So if you can read it in DOS, and send it away with the correct charset > header it should be readable to anybody with an average mail reader (or a > good one :) But this would seem to work out only if my correspondent had his code page set up the same as mine. I don't want to have to change my DOS setup and my code pages and my keyboard maps every time I alternate beween reading or writing in one language and another. I don't know how you and the other folks on this list who do your emails in various languages can deal with the problem. If I use the ALT + NUMs provided in the table referenced by the URL, then the message will be readable within Insight, but it would not be readable with Net-Tamer, which is also considered a very good mail reader. In order to read the message correctly with Net-Tamer I would have to use the extended ascii characters found in the "standard" table rather than the table provided by the URL. The "standard" table is the one provided by popular text editors such as PEDIT and QEDIT and found in US textbooks. Whether that table should be referred to as the "standard" one is another question altogether. Conclusion: The table provided by the URL works for Insight, but not for Net-Tamer. The "standard" table works for Net-Tamer, but not for Insight. It would be nice to be able to use a single table to be universally compatible with all good email readers. <snip> > You can't use ascii values for 'special' characters, because there ARE NO > ascii values for these characters !!! I meant of course "extended ascii values" as given in the "standard" table. > SH> If I were to set up my ISO within DOS to use Latin-1, would the ALT + > SH> NUM characters as viewed from the DOS console be seen the same as > SH> viewed from within Arachne Insight Mail? > it should IMHO ... > SH> In order to achieve universal compatibility we will have to > SH> deconstruct this Tower of Babel. > And if you are dead than you feel no pain .... sorry :))) > but this is impossible ... > SH> I am merely suggesting that everybody should adopt one universal > SH> numbering scheme for all the characters used in all of the world's > SH> languages. > There IS such a scheme ... as I and many others have already written here > .... goto http://www.unicode.org Yes, I've looked into that. It sure would be good if they could develop Unicode for DOS. Some list members think it is possible. > SH> Please examine the characters below from within Insight and also from > SH> within the DOS console. I think we all can agree that this is a big > SH> problem. > Not really ... this is like I put my tape into the cd-player and I couldn't > hear anything. Bad analogy. Tape players and cd players are different types of machines, data is recorded on different types of media, the tape player uses analog technology and the CD player digital technology. Your computer and my computer are similar machines. I can send a MIDI from my machine to your machine. If we assume that we both have normal hearing, you can play it on your machine and you will hear it the same way I hear it, even if you identify the tune by a different name by which I know it. Assuming we both have normal vision, if I should send a string of characters from my machine to your machine, you should be able to load those characters on your display and see them the same as I do. The physical perceptions should be the same for me as for you, whether we are exchanging literary works or works of music. Only the meanings derived from our perceptions could be expected to be different. Our interpretations will vary largely upon how we are schooled in the culture. The problem with email programs is that the physical perception of the text is not the same for the receiver as for the sender. > SH> ALT + NUM, Spanish language characters > SH> from table > SH> http://utopia.knoware.nl/users/schluter/doc/tags/characters.html These > SH> are rendered correctly in Arachne's Insight Mail, but are > SH> incorrect when viewed at the DOS console: > SH> 225 � Corresponds to ascii 160 in DOS > SH> 233 � Corresponds to ascii 130 in DOS > SH> 237 � Corresponds to ascii 161 in DOS > SH> 243 � Corresponds to ascii 162 in DOS > SH> 250 � Corresponds to ascii 163 in DOS > SH> 241 � Corresponds to ascii 164 in DOS > SH> 170 � Corresponds to ascii 166 in DOS > SH> 186 � Corresponds to ascii 167 in DOS > SH> 191 � Corresponds to ascii 168 in DOS > SH> 161 � Corresponds to ascii 173 in DOS > OK ... again there is NO ASCII 160 !!!! (ASCII is 0-127) > But these seem to be correct ISO Latin-1 codes. > At least they display correctly here. > 'a,'e, .... > SH> ALT + NUM, Spanish language characters > SH> from ascii chart, the version normally used in the US. > SH> These are viewed correctly from the DOS console, but are incorrect > SH> when viewed in Arachne's Insight Mail. > SH> 160 � Corresponds to HTML entity 225 > SH> 130 � Corresponds to HTML entity 233 > SH> 161 � Corresponds to HTML entity 237 > SH> 162 � Corresponds to HTML entity 243 > SH> 163 � Corresponds to HTML entity 250 > SH> 164 Corresponds to HTML entity 241 > SH> 166 | Corresponds to HTML entity 170 > SH> 167 Corresponds to HTML entity 186 > SH> 168 " Corresponds to HTML entity 191 > SH> 173 - Corresponds to HTML entity 161 > Does HTML entity mean codepage 437 to you ??? > (The standard codepage for DOS) No, I meant the ALT + NUM characters provided in the URL > PS: These are displayed as garbage. > Sure ... because your message haeder states that you used iso latin 1 ... > but this lines were written with cp437 !!!!!! > It can't be displayed correctly this way! I had changed my Arachne setup for ISO Latin 1, but I did not change my DOS setup. > SH> BTW, I would be curious to know how this message looks to someone who > SH> is reading it with Outlook or Eudora, or any other popular Winblows > SH> program. > OK here the facts: > You state in your header that you used iso latin1. > So every sane Email program (including windows, nextstep, amiga ...) > will display it using an iso latin1 font. This is not the case. Some email readers such as Net-Tamer, Barebones DOS, and NetMail DOS don't care what the header says. The message would be displayed as though it were seen from the DOS console. You are saying that good email readers actually read the header and display the message in accordance with what the header says. Arachne doesn't care what the header says. If I should send the same message with the default ISO header instead of with the Latin-1 header, the message would still be viewed the same from within Insight. I know. I've conducted the experiment. Perhaps if I changed my DOS setup and my code pages and did all that stuff, then Insight might behave differently. > So the 1. part is displayed correctly .... (in every sane mail program) Part 1 is displayed correctly by Insight, but incorrectly by email programs that display text the same as the DOS console. > and the 2. part (written with the standard DOS codepage 437, but wrongly > assumed to be latin1) is displayed incorrectly. The DOS console doesn't assume anything. It doesn't convert anything. It only shows you what can be seen from its own vantage point. DOS applications can be written to read headers and convert characters, but the DOS console doesn't see anything beyond its own vantage point. If you have a code page loaded, then you are probably running some kind of application to change the way DOS displays text. Am I right? > This is not the fault of any mail reader, but a misconfiguration made by > you. (stating you use iso latin1 but you really used cp437 in that part of > the mail) I did not know at the time that I needed to change my code page. I don't even understand why code pages are needed to deal with any situation that does not involve encryption. The only types of machines in which you might want to send a character that is different from the key you press would be an encryption machine such as the Enigma, for example. In a "normal" machine, the keys you press, or the key combinations you press will create their corresponding characters in the message. These characters should correspond to the way the keys are labeled or to a universal standard set of numeric designators to which they are assigned. Characters sent should be the same as characters received and displayed. Why do we need code pages when no encryption or conversion is being made? The exchanging of words ought to be made as easy as the exchanging of music. Sam Heywood - -- This mail was written by user of Arachne, the Ultimate Internet Client ------------------------------ End of arachne-digest V1 #1034 ******************************
