b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » Message 5972235 (Thread)

# I used to come here on a dialup many moons ago
are there many that still use them? and is there a big 'thing' about making modem friendly images because it is good practice?

Or is it just something for bored people to twat on about to new board members?
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:31, archived)
# the latter
nobody could realy give a fuck
and by nobody, i mean me
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:33, archived)
# crivens, how dull of them.
is there an agreed maximum amount of text in total on the page?

Too many vowels!
Somebody post something in Polish!
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:37, archived)
# zrob mi loda
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 19:07, archived)
# people on limited download broadband still care
i don't want to have to pay extra to read my e-mails becasue some flange can't read the bloody FAQ.
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:35, archived)
# You'd have to spend some serious time on here for that to be the case!
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:46, archived)
# feel for us capped
all i can afford is teh 2gb cap and on b3ta i wank it up the wall (especially on the links board)
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 19:12, archived)
# it has something to do with appreciating broadbean bandwidth restrictions as well
some people on broadbeans only get 1-2Gb bandwidth transfer allowance per month
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:35, archived)
# how ironic.
that now that you have broadband, you have a limit placed on how much you can come to b3ta, before facing a cost?

Whereas when we were all on modems, we were happy to pay money just to be able to come here at all.
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:39, archived)
# I also wonder how much extra all the "OMG! MASSIVE IMAGE" images add.
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:43, archived)
# haha
absolutely. good point.
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:45, archived)
# ha
pwned.
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:45, archived)
# hahaha
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 19:05, archived)
# still, that's 4000-8000 250Kb images a month.
if you're looking at b3ta THAT much, you're on the wrong flipping broadband package.

rules is rules, and that's fine - using download caps as an excuse is a bit thin considering you're browsing what is essentially a relatively high bandwidth site.
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:42, archived)
# not me guv, I got huge allowances with plusnet...
however, Flowerpot, for instance, is out in south africa, gets 1gb per month transfer allowances and has to pay a small fortune for the privelege

add up toal usage for b3ta and all other sites that one may visit in the course of a normal
day,
plus any downloading, it soon adds up
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:45, archived)
# just as well its an english speaking site then eh
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:48, archived)
# well that's the risk you run.
Proactive steps to bandwidth harmony:
Switch off images from places like MSN where it's more likely a new member may host images.
Switch off BMP downloads
Get a compression proxy (Like ONSPEED for £25) - compresses web pages and images (although images get quite artefacted)
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:51, archived)
# alternatively, just read the faq...
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 19:10, archived)
# a better excuse is the good practice of reasonable-sized pics
After all, there has to be a limit somewhere. However, I reckon this should be a little less rigorously enforced. But the nazis will have their way no doubt.
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:49, archived)
# yeah.
I once browsed b3ta image board on my phone using Opera Mini.
Not wanting to be o2's mobile phone bill bitch, I switched images off.

It was like looking at the /talk board, only it made sense.
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:53, archived)
# hah
it is strange there.
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:55, archived)
# We shall fight them on the grey bars,
we shall fight them on the slightly lighter grey bars, and in the slightly darker grey bars of Quick Reply. We shall never surrender!
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:54, archived)
# I agree that there is much to be gained from learning to make appropriately sized files.
however this behaviour is unfluffy.

*waves hand and covers the board in dew and crystals*
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:54, archived)
# gah!
my eyes! it BURNS, burns like johnsons baby shampoo.

No more tears? No more fucking tears? You 'avin a larf?

*rages*
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:56, archived)
# oh
that was Denim aftershave, sorry.
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 18:59, archived)
# oh lord
*singe*
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 19:00, archived)
# Peronally...
...although I like to see pictures well optimised, I don't see the problem with a 60KB image here and there.

The 50KB mentioned in the FAQ is really a guide, not an absolute limit. No mod is going to link a picture for being 60KB. A guide of 200KB for animations is a resonable target size I think, with 250KB being a cut off point.

If your animation is too big or complex to fit into 250KB, it's probably better off being kept as a movie file/flash animation and linked to.

The majority of the board may have broadband, but if image size imits were taken away and everybody posted 1MB gifs (with a dozen 500KB woo yay reply animations for each) it would make even the faster broadband connections creak and groan like dial-up.
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 19:26, archived)
# A+
(, Wed 31 May 2006, 19:31, archived)