SR new forums

[Handruin]

Looks like SR switched their forum software to invision boards. I noticed last night that the forums were down and it only gave a message saying beta.storagereview.com

I tried that forum software a few months back as a demo here, but I didn't really like the conversion from phpbb to ib. Oh well, whatever floats their boat.

 

[blakerwry]

i don't like it at all... i want my themes... i want options...

 

[P5-133XL]

I haven't yet had a problem with it. I liked the old theme better, but I'll get used to the new one. My requirements for options are limited: It'll do at least untill I can't do something that I want to do and I don't know what that problem will be yet. The vast majority of stuff I do is basic text with nothing fancy short of adding a URL occasionally.

"Whatever floats their boat" is a fine sentiment and right now describes my feelings about the change quite well.

 

[timwhit]

It seems a lot faster, but that may be more due to the change in hardware than the forum software.

 

[CityK]

It does seem faster....Not sure if I like it - IMO, its hard on my eyes (maybe the screen is too "busy"?...also, it kinda reminds me of XP's Luna blue - which I'm not to fond of (like many others))...but I admit that I'm starting to get used to it already.

 

[mubs]

Blech. Please, leave this one the way it is.

 

[CougTek]

The light blue found everywhere the new forum look is too pastel to my taste. It's...quétaine.

 

[Mickey]

It *does* look rather XP-ish, doesn't it? I agree that it seems to move faster, be it due to the interface or hardware upgrades.

This might be heresy to say here, but I actually like the forum software over at Ars best. Infopop, I think it is. Maybe I'm just most comfortable with it because I visit it the most.

 

[NRG = mc²]

I think it looks good...

 

[Mercutio]

Bleh. I'm not into the XP-lookin' skin.

 

[honold]

i don't like the look/feel

 

[Handruin]

I didn't really like the invisonboards when I tested them here about 6-8 months ago. They feel bulky and busy. I know I'm used to phpbb, so it's not a fair judgment. I wonder why they changed forums...

In respect to changing forums, phpbb 2.2 is over 50% complete. I'll be anxious to see the software once it gets closer to the end. I'll have to do some extensive testing before implementing a drastic change like that here. (Including everyone's input on it) That'll be many months away, so there is no point in starting now. I wouldn't be surprised if it isn't ready until this time next year.

If anyone is interested, you can see their milestone map here. If you are wondering where they are in development, they say:
"We are currently heading towards M-2."

Here is the current running alpha version: (don't judge it too hard, it's far from complete.)
http://area51.phpbb.com/phpBB22/index.php

 

[CityK]

The look lacks "professionalism" in my opinion. I find it harder to scan the board and to pick out information. It feels cluttered and less inviting. Quotes, links etc are a pain in the ass.

I'm wondering how I feel in about it after a weeks time with it....I'm also wondering if SR's going to lose some traffic because of it.

We shall see...

 

[Mercutio]

I didn't much like SR when it first went to phpBB, either. I didn't like the buttons or color scheme. I got over it.

I don't think anyone will even notice in a month.

I'm still waiting for someone to give me a monochrome green on black theme with a nice monospace font. That's what I really want. It'd match my windowmaker theme!

 

[Handruin]

Merc, can you find anything like you mentioned in here:

http://www.phpbb.com/styles/styles_demo/

If you find one you like, let me know and I'll add it to the site.

 

[e_dawg]

I'm still waiting for someone to give me a monochrome green on black theme with a nice monospace font. That's what I really want. It'd match my windowmaker theme!

You mean like the old Apple II and IBM PC jr. green monochrome displays?

 

[e_dawg]

subSilver, Classic, and phpXP2 are the most legible, usable, and aesthetically pleasing themes IMO on the phpBB Styles Demo site. Fortunately, subSilver is already present on SF. Good choice, Doug!

 

[Tea]

Difference, schmifference. Whatever ... er ... whatever it is that someone said above. Oils their wheels or cracks their nuts or zomething.

 

[Tea]

Floatz their boat. I knew it was zomething like that. I think it's great that Eugene and Davin are still interested enough in the place to take the time to do this stuff.

 

[Mercutio]

You mean like the old Apple II and IBM PC jr. green monochrome displays?

I have fond memories of my MGA display.

 

[Tannin]

<nitpick>MGA was the adaptor. </nitpick>

 

[Mercutio]

In common usage, we talk about "VGA displays" often enough. I reject your nitpicking.

Doug, all the themes on that site are ugly. None of them are mono green on black with monospaced fonts.

 

[e_dawg]

I take it the orange and yellow monochrome displays did nothing for you?

 

[blakerwry]

In common usage, we talk about "VGA displays" often enough. I reject your nitpicking.

Doug, all the themes on that site are ugly. None of them are mono green on black with monospaced fonts.

Isn't VGA and MGA and MCGA, etc etc. a standard?

For instance to meet the VGA standard a vid card would have to be able to output 640x480@16 colors @60Hz analog. And for a monitor to be considered VGA capable it would have to be able to display this correctly.

Same applies to XGA, MGA, MCGA, CGA, EGA...

So in my eyes it is neither the monitor or the adapter, it is a standard that both of them use.

 

[Buck]

You are correct Blakerboy. VGA stands for Video Graphics Array and displays at 640x480 with a 1.33:1 aspect ratio. MGA stands for Monochrome Graphics Adapter.

 

[NRG = mc²]

Matrox made some cards called MGA, though they were not monochrome... they had dual ports (Mac/PC) IIRC.

 

[blakerwry]

i think matrox uses the letters MGA as the prefix for their gfx chips... the Matrox millenium / millenium II I know used the MGA prefix (my millenium II PCI has DVI and VGA if that's what you mean by dual port)

and I'm pretty sure all of these cards have chips that start with the MGA prefix:

Mystique
Mystique 220
Millennium
Millennium II
G100
G200
G400

Im not sure if Matrox caried over the prefix in the name sof the newer chipsets that it makes...

One can only assume that MGA stands for Matrox Graphics Adapter or some other nonsense.

 

[Howell]

One can only assume that MGA stands for Matrox Graphics Adapter or some other nonsense.

Much too bland for marketing. How about Matrox Graphics Accelerator? It's loads faster now. Just look at the name.

 

[Mercutio]

Real MGA was also called "Hercules" graphics. It was great technology; it took VGA for MGA to finally be exceeded in resolution.

 

[NRG = mc²]

(my millenium II PCI has DVI and VGA if that's what you mean by dual port)

Nope, this one was a Millenium MGA which had a port for Mac displays, still a 15pin but larger, like a game port on a soundcard as well as usual PC D15.

 

[Tannin]

<slightly larger nitpick>
Nope. MGA, as Buck points out, was the Monochrome Graphics Adaptor. If I recall correctly, the moniter had a different name: just plain "Monochrome Display" perhaps. I have one in my collection somewhere. Maybe I can dig it out.

Hercules didn't make MGA adaptors, they made an enhanced but backwards compatible one. The original IBM MGA card was a very primitive thing indeed. I forget the details now, but it couldn't do anything much at all by way of graphica. The great thing about the Hercules card (and its mighty leigon of imitators) was that you could vastly improve your screen resolution with it and still use your existing IBM monitor.
</slightly larger nitpick>

 

[Tannin]

Oh. I forgot to say that, before too long, you really struggled to buy an MGA card from anyone. (Except IBM, who kept them on sale at 5 times the sesnsible price, long after they were functionally obsolete, just because they were IBM and IBM are like that.) In reality, 90-something percent of monochrome PCs shipped with Hercs or Herc clones, mostly clones. I think I can only remember ever seeing a real MGA card (i.e., a crippled non-Hercules compatible one) once or perhaps twice. They were useless.

 

[blakerwry]

Along the same lines I was looking for an IBM NIC... for a ps/2. Of course the PS/2 used the microchannel bus (MCA). IBM would gladly sell me a 10baseT MCA NIC for a mere $100 new.

3com had the same NIC for about 1/3rd the price... unfortunately I trashed the PC and a few days later found the 3com NIC for $1 at a garage sale.


The PS/2 had 2 SCSI drives totaling about 500MB-1GB of HDD space and had the 486 upgrade. It would have replaced my compaq presario 486 server if I would have found a NIC.

 

[Tea]

Replacing a Compaq with a microchannel PS/2? Blake, my friend, it's no wonder your avatar pictures you holding your head in pain, suffering and anguizh! Er .. if you don't mind a perzonal queztion ... do you enjoy pain?

 

[blakerwry]

Replacing a Compaq with a microchannel PS/2? Blake, my friend, it's no wonder your avatar pictures you holding your head in pain, suffering and anguizh! Er .. if you don't mind a perzonal queztion ... do you enjoy pain?

Tea, I have the only 2 good compaqs made me thinks....


They are both Compaq presario 860's (one's a CDS: mening it has a SB16 SCSI and 2x SCSI CD-ROM drive)

One has an intel 66 DX2 and the other a Cyrix 66 DX2. One collects dust while the other... well.. im only keeping it up because I wnat to see how long it takes to crash... the one operating has 40MB of fast page across 4 SIMMS and one SIMM basically soldered to the board and the dust bin has 32MB of fast page with the same setup... The one that's running is using an HP ethertwist 10baseT NIC... no other ISA cards and no PCI/VLB slots.. no CD.. no floppy... a 3GB seagate IDE from a newer compaq.. winNT4 w/ SP 4


it's not a pain at all...



current status is:

PsInfo 1.34 - local and remote system information viewer
Copyright (C) 2001-2002 Mark Russinovich
Sysinternals - [url]www.sysinternals.com[/url]

System information for \\PAPILLION:
Uptime:                    110 days, 0 hours, 2 minutes, 54 seconds
Kernel version:            Microsoft Windows NT, Uniprocessor Free
Product type:              Server
Product version:           4.0
Service pack:              4
Kernel build number:       1381
Registered organization:
Registered owner:          Papillion
Install date:              6/9/02, 4:23:43 AM
IE version:                Unknown
System root:               D:\WIN-NT
Processors:                1
Processor speed:           0 MHz
Processor type:            Intel 80486
Physical memory:           40 MB

I replaced it with my SB51G.

 

[e_dawg]

Gunning for my 192 days of uptime, blake?

 

[honold]

i had a job once writing standardized training/certification curriculums for linux and everybody there was a fresh zealot. they complained about their unstable nt4 boxes at every opportunity.

so i loaded the system myself and never rebooted or crashed the whole time i was there. it was at least 3-4 months. i did manage to make the cdrom drive unusable because vmware screwed up though, so i couldn't eject it with the button or through windows. when i left i rebooted and it worked.

i'm not a fan of uptime in general because it's usually a metric of insecurity. but...i do have an openbsd 2.9 firewall running on a 32mb flashdisk on a soekris net4501 that's just about to hit a year:

# uptime
4:22AM up 352 days, 1:42, 1 user, load averages: 0.16, 0.11, 0.09
# uname -a
OpenBSD 4501 2.9 SBC4501#1 i386

 

[blakerwry]

Gunning for my 192 days of uptime, blake?

gunning? pfft! I'm gonna beat it!


too bad I don't have a UPS... there have been several times that the power has flickered and my other computers have turned off while the lil compaq chugs away. I'll assume that's a sign of a good PSU and a low power drawing system.

 

[Mercutio]

I built a Linux box that runs a POS (point of sale) app and a bunch of serial terminals for a local chain of tire stores that's been running constantly for about four years now.

No, it's not connected to the internet.

And of course, if that's impressive, I've seen Netware 3 machines working on 4000 days of continuous uptime.

 

[e_dawg]

Anybody using Opera 7.1 on SF? If so, is everything centered as opposed to left justified? SR and most other websites work fine; SF is one of the few that seems to have this alignment problem.