On 10/24/2007 12:35 AM, Patrick Shanahan wrote: > * David Bolt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [10-23-07 12:27]: > > I noticed. Interestingly enough, I notice that the message with the > > 846KiB uncompressed tiff as an attachment also has that same header. As > > to why the poster couldn't have used compression, I don't know. Saving > > it with Gimp as a PNG reduced it to 22KiB. A later post, also contained > > image attachments of 216KiB and 375KiB. These reduced to 17Kib and > > 25KiB. > > I noticed that but didn't comment. You *are* correct that graphics > should have been presented in the least imposing popular format. The > presenter is/was being quite presumptious and inconsiderate. There > are *still* list members on dial-up and/or measured service. > Sorry, I hadn't made it to the thread with (obvious to me now) the mentioned picture. My comment earlier was misinformed. I thought it was another "big" attachment. You guys are correct on this one. Sorry for the misinformed post. -- Joe Morris Registered Linux user 231871 running openSUSE 10.3 x86_64
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
