Treebuzz slowing down???

[ QUOTE ]
Quick for me too for a pleasent change.

[/ QUOTE ]

Tell me about it. I was so tired of it after just one day that I talked about getting our own server.The cost is high though- $260/month more. I hope I fixed it without adding that to the expense list.
 
Things have been real slow the last few days, this site only. Anyone else having the same experience? Reminds me of why I got rid of dial-up.
 
Working very slow at the moment and TB often times out before pages open. Not complaining though as the price is right.
 
Slow here as well. I use several other boards on this same system and no problems there.

Mark, I do not know if this has been discussed B4 or not but what about a member subscription. Another board I am on has a subscription for $20 per year to help offset the cost. He gives supporting members privelages as in avatar, large file uploads and such. If it would help I would do it.

Comments:
 
I agree as well. It frustrates me like you wouldn't believe. I'm not sure as to why. I have asked and have been given not so good replies like "sometimes the internet gets loaded" and such. I believe it to be a server issue. I have asked, but it seems that they want us to go to a dedicated server for another $225 per month. Kind of seems like I'm being bullied. But, since I'm from Jersey I'm not worried! /forum/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

I am looking into other options as well. I will disclose them shortly. Sorry for the slowdown.
 
Absolutely business as usual as far as I can tell.

Please don't encourage large uploads until everyone at least has the opportunity for a broadband connection. It's been quite out of hand on the video thread. (I still say "shame on" any operating system which insists on hiding file information from its users and furthermore makes it difficult for them to discover it [and which doesn't provide decent tools for them to manipulate them])
 
[ QUOTE ]
Absolutely business as usual as far as I can tell.

Please don't encourage large uploads until everyone at least has the opportunity for a broadband connection. It's been quite out of hand on the video thread. (I still say "shame on" any operating system which insists on hiding file information from its users and furthermore makes it difficult for them to discover it [and which doesn't provide decent tools for them to manipulate them])

[/ QUOTE ]

Are yoy talking about Infopop?
 
Slow for me yesterday here on TB. I get the feeling that we will get a
'work slow down notice' from the server, unless it gets more money /forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Absolutely business as usual as far as I can tell.

Please don't encourage large uploads until everyone at least has the opportunity for a broadband connection. It's been quite out of hand on the video thread. (I still say "shame on" any operating system which insists on hiding file information from its users and furthermore makes it difficult for them to discover it [and which doesn't provide decent tools for them to manipulate them])

[/ QUOTE ]

Are yoy talking about Infopop?

[/ QUOTE ]
No, silly. I'm talking about MS. :)

My vague point was that users of Windows have to jump through hoops to be able to even know that the image they're viewing on their screen (and wish to upload here) is actually larger than what they're seeing; that they have to jump through hoops to discern what size it actually is in meaningful terms in any event; that they have to jump through hoops to even discern that the filename has an extension or what it might be; that they have no way of knowing (unless they install decent software which they'd never consider because they were "given" something far inferior but does 75% of what they need) that the images are of too high a quality factor or that they contain tens of kilobytes of profile data; and they have no "native" way of dealing with either of those last two items, much less merely resize them decently, unless they install decent software.

By the time one makes a Windows computer actually useful with quality software tools, they'd have saved tons of time and money just using something else to start with; not to mention it would be vastly more reliable and safer (for their and others' sakes) to stick onto a public network, and would suit multiple family/friend users much better, safer, and securer.

Everyone here should check out http://ubuntulinux.org who will send packages containing multiple pairs of installation and "live"-from-the-CD discs (5 sets is the minimum "standard" delivery package) at no cost whatsoever to the person making the request. I couldn't believe it. I figured I'd like to see what they had to offer and started the request process, only to be informed that it really costs no more to send multiple discs than to send one, "please take 5 minimum and pass them out to your friends". These are not burned CDs but are professionally pressed.

Also check out what they're doing with the project called "Edubuntu"!

A couple of quotes off the CD-pair folder:

"Ubuntu is easy to install, free of viruses, and perfect for laptops, desktops, and servers. The CD inside will install in a dozen languages; many more languages are available via download. Ubuntu is community developed, commercially supported, and offers free security updates for at least 18 months after release. A new version is released every six months."

"Ubuntu is Software Libre. You are legally entitled and encouraged to copy, share, and redistribute this CD for yourself and your friends. Share the spirit of Ubuntu!"

The base package is based on the GNOME desktop, of which I'm not necessarily a huge fan (it's generally too simplistic for my tastes) and the real reason I wanted the CDs was to see what the latest version of GNOME was like. I can see where someone who doesn't consider themself to be a "power user" would absolutely love it.

I'm not necessarily an Ubuntu "fanboy", but I am extremely impressed by their attitude and actions and want to encourage them and the use of their efforts.

Please consider it...
 

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom