Mailing List

[dbolgheroni]

Hi,

are there any way to access this forum as a "mailing list", subscribing my e-mail? Actually, I don't like the forum approach and often I'm using computers without GUIs.

Thank you.

[Brynet-Inc]

I don't believe so, there is a Usenet group though..

alt.os.development [Google] - Not as active as this place though, hasn't been a post since the 11th..

You could technically view this site using a text browser, like lynx or links...

[JackScott]

There also used to be an RSS feed, but it didn't work too well. I'm not sure where it's gone either, there used to be a link on the main page.

[JJeronimo]

You could technically view this site using a text browser, like lynx or links...

Sorry for being direct, but this is just too TIRESOME for me to let so much stupid crappy-web-2.0 approaches without some serious, honest and direct comment.

Honestly speaking, web forums SUCK. Let's see the many ways they suck:
- Discussion about general interests is subject to the rules imposed by the forum owner.
- You have to stick to some particular interface that you did NOT chose, and thus you cannot change freely.
- You have to write your messages in a small text container that in most browsers shows horrible performance when has too much text. It's also horrible to navigate through your posts even when they work at full-speed.
- It's much more complicated to quote text. You have to surround it with BBcode.
- Lacks threaded discussion.
- Caching (both client-side and server-side) is much more difficult, cause the HTML that composes forum pages is generated on-demand by CGI scripts, which by design are unable to easily take advantage of caching.
- The need for server-side scripts executed each time someone clicks in any link makes everything much slow too.
- Forums are usually bloated by advertisements and "modern" features alike, such as animations and such, and information that isn't shown if you don't have a GUI (case of the OP).
- If the hosting server falls, you cannot access the forum before it comes up again. If it falls forever, you'll never be able to access the old contents.

For this, I think all the idiots that have designed the first web forum should beg pardon for creating such a ****. And from those who still want to use a clearly inferior system, I request some respect by providing a NNTP or mailing-list gateway.

That's all,
JJ

[JJeronimo]

And from those who still want to use a clearly inferior system, I request some respect by providing a NNTP or mailing-list gateway.

Just a note: I don't deny that the News aren't wonderful, and in some aspects they lack some important features that are available in web forums. However, my experience with both tells me the trade of isn't favorable to the forums at all.

JJ

[kmcguire]

I do like the more detailed threaded approach myself, and I wish that a alternative method existed such as having the RSS working again or something different. I do find it much easier and more efficient than manually going to the forums. However, at some times I like going to the forums such as when I am making posts.

I think the forum is great though, but I do too wish I had an alternative means such as an RSS feed.

[JackScott]

I find the biggest problem with Usenet is the amount of spam floating about on it. It just makes it hard to crawl through. Then, after you make a post on Usenet, you get tonnes of spam to your email address!

And I don't like spam.

[JJeronimo]

I find the biggest problem with Usenet is the amount of spam floating about on it. It just makes it hard to crawl through.

There's moderation in Usenet, you know? Clax86 desn't have spam cause it has human moderation.
Of course, you don't have after-post moderation, which somewhat delays posts. However, the problem is not inerent to the Usenet: it's a correctable fault.

Then, after you make a post on Usenet, you get tonnes of spam to your email address!

And I don't like spam.

Can you please tell me what stops you from providing a false email address, or adding a "nospam DOT" before the actual server name?

JJ

[JackScott]

A domain catch all.

[Solar]

Hmm.

I've had my NNTP times, too. But let's stay serious here: Thread support on a forum is much better than on NNTP (where the threaded view is effectively up to the client). It requires an open port 119 or 563, which can be hard to get behind e.g. a corporate firewall. You might dislike BBCode, but I don't think that quoting is any easier on NNTP. The osdev.org server has excellent availability and is quite up to the task performance-wise, and if your system has problems updating the textbox in your browser fast enough you must be running on a PII or older. Full-text search in NNTP archives is a PITA, although I admit phpBB isn't Google either.

[JJeronimo]

Hmm.

I've had my NNTP times, too. But let's stay serious here: Thread support on a forum is much better than on NNTP

AHAHA! I repeat: forums lack thread support. I've never seen any web forum with thread support.

(where the threaded view is effectively up to the client).

What's the problem? If thread support in NNTP is up to the client, thread "support" in forums is up to the forum owner (i.e. you don't have it).

It requires an open port 119 or 563, which can be hard to get behind e.g. a corporate firewall.

Here, the problem is in the firewall, not in NNTP itself. And in that case (if you are at work behind a firewall), you have always Google Groups.

You might dislike BBCode,

I do. BBCode is hard to use.
Or better: It might not be a bad approach if:
- it was abstracted by the user interface (for example, automatically replacing word surrounded by asterisks by the correct BBCode, or a more WYSIWYGish approach)
- it was not used for quoting (or it could be used only when someone wanted to quote something that came from outside, for example, some paragraph found in another thread)

but I don't think that quoting is any easier on NNTP.

Yes, it is. You didn't explain why you think that. However, I think quoting is easier on Usenet because it facilitates splitting your quoted text into logical parts, to which you can answer separately. If you really wish to answer everything at once, no one forbids you from doing so.

The osdev.org server has excellent availability and is quite up to the task performance-wise, and if your system has problems updating the textbox in your browser fast enough you must be running on a PII or older.

No. I'm running on a Pentium III.
Anyway, the main problem is not the performance of the text box:

- You have to write your messages in a small text container that in most browsers shows horrible performance when has too much text. It's also horrible to navigate through your posts even when they work at full-speed.

It's much better having the text box with the size you want, with a wide view of what you're writing.
Also, forum's edit interfaces are flawed because you cannot enter tabs. Browsers typically catch tabs and interpret them as a key for switching the currently selected object. Now, I here you asking: "how many times have you needed to enter a tab in a forum?". My answer is: few. But when I do, this fact doesn't make it less irritating (in fact, I tend to use many tabs while writing source code in this forum).

Also, about the quotes once more, one proof about BBCode being a bad idea for quoting is this screenshot of the edit window I'm writing on:

Screenshot of this edit window.

Looking at that text, I have *no* idea about the appearance the text will have in the final, formatted form. I only know it because I was forced to do many previews to the post.

Full-text search in NNTP archives is a PITA, although I admit phpBB isn't Google either.

I'm sorry to disappoint you, but Google has never entirely pruned my entire search query, effectively disallowing me to search for anything in the news.
It may not be the best search engine Google has ever conceived, but at least it's by far more flexible than any forum's I've ever seen.

JJ

[JJeronimo]

A domain catch all.

You mean a domain wildcard? Ok, so, scramble the address even more (for example, something after the top-level domain), but still readable.
Or better, use a false address.
What stops you from providing a false email address? I know what were the inconvenients of providing a false address in the pt.* hierarchy (Portugal): auto-moderation wouldn't be able to inform me about rejected posts. However, many international groups are human moderated, many are not moderated at all, and after all, experienced users have other ways of knowing their posts were rejected.

Still, I've appended .nospam to my e-mail username and I don't receive much spam. I have *some*, but nothing compared to "tonnes of spam".

JJ

[Combuster]

The point is, you can't easily get into that world if you weren't from ancient times. Forums require a browser. Any self respectable user has one. Mailing lists require that you can manage the administration. phpBB provides the necessary continuity in subject. the mail I get from some mailing lists require that I manually gather the mails on the same topic manually, and read them in order to avoid getting nuts altogether.

And usenet is like programming in binary. Once you can do it, its no problem, but getting started is like going through hell. And even then, the location you want to be, alt.os.development, is unmoderated, flooded with spam, and all other badness. Basically, Usenet is like phpBB where the users run the PHP scripts by hand.

I'll stick with a place that keeps me sane.

[JJeronimo]

The point is, you can't easily get into that world if you weren't from ancient times.

I'm not from ancient times. In fact, I'm 19 years old and I use newsgroups since I was 14.

Forums require a browser. Any self respectable user has one. Mailing lists require that you can manage the administration. phpBB provides the necessary continuity in subject. the mail I get from some mailing lists require that I manually gather the mails on the same topic manually, and read them in order to avoid getting nuts altogether.

Mail clients are supposed to support grouping of messages according to the In-Reply-To header. At least Seamonkey does (and I guess Thunderbird does too).

And usenet is like programming in binary.

Never noticed... It's no harder than using a forum, apart from the need to find a decent server.

Once you can do it, its no problem, but getting started is like going through hell.

Can you give an example?

And even then, the location you want to be, alt.os.development, is unmoderated, flooded with spam, and all other badness. Basically, Usenet is like phpBB where the users run the PHP scripts by hand.

Once again, not a problem with the technology itself. Does not invalidate that the Usenet paradigm is better.
Nevertheless, it's true. Yesterday, I looked into comp.os.minix, and there was so much spam that looked like it was completely abandoned.

I'll stick with a place that keeps me sane.

Usenet doesn't make me insane. It never made.
If your ISP has it's own server, you just need to configure your newsreader and perhaps enter your username and password, and subscribe the groups you want. Where's the insaneness?
Also, in NGs with a considerable traffic level you don't even notice the spam.

JJ

[Combuster]

If its so easy, I invite you to teach my grandma.


Apart from that,
1: You know nothing better than to use usenet, so yes, you used it in ancient times.
2: Many people have hotmail or other web-only mail.
3: Usenet comes without FAQ.