Incompetent web authoring or much worse?

Discussion in 'HTML' started by dorayme, Aug 9, 2007.

  1. dorayme

    dorayme Guest

    dorayme, Aug 9, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. dorayme

    andrew Guest

    On 2007-08-08, dorayme <> wrote:
    > Notice that
    >
    ><http://www.virginbroadband.com.au/wirelessbroadband/broadband-at-
    > home.aspx>
    >
    > employs a picture that includes the "fine print" conditions for a
    > broadband plan. There is a question whether this was deliberate,
    > in respect to the fine print, to make it hard to read or just
    > incompetence?


    And in a slightly off-topic aside: what exactly is the man with the
    sunglasses doing?

    Andrew

    --
    'Name him not!' said Gandalf, and for a moment
    it seemed that a look of pain passed over his face,
    and he sat silent, looking old as death.
    andrew, Aug 9, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. andrew wrote:
    > On 2007-08-08, dorayme <> wrote:
    >> Notice that
    >>
    >><http://www.virginbroadband.com.au/wirelessbroadband/broadband-at-
    >> home.aspx>
    >>
    >> employs a picture that includes the "fine print" conditions for a
    >> broadband plan. There is a question whether this was deliberate,
    >> in respect to the fine print, to make it hard to read or just
    >> incompetence?

    >
    > And in a slightly off-topic aside: what exactly is the man with the
    > sunglasses doing?
    >
    > Andrew


    Looks like he's deodorizing his favorite red Speedos. :)


    --
    Blinky RLU 297263
    Killing all posts from Google Groups.
    Except in Thunderbird, which can't filter that well.
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
    Blinky the Shark, Aug 9, 2007
    #3
  4. dorayme

    cwdjrxyz Guest

    On Aug 8, 6:11 pm, dorayme <> wrote:
    > Notice that
    >
    > <http://www.virginbroadband.com.au/wirelessbroadband/broadband-at-
    > home.aspx>
    >
    > employs a picture that includes the "fine print" conditions for a
    > broadband plan. There is a question whether this was deliberate,
    > in respect to the fine print, to make it hard to read or just
    > incompetence?



    I don't know how things are done in Australia, but I would guess the
    fine print would be much more likely intentional for a US company, and
    there might be a page or two written in it in terms that lawyers best
    understand.

    We now have a lot of broadband competition in the US and prices have
    greatly dropped in the last two years. My telephone company ATT has
    teamed up with Yahoo to offer 1 dialup and 2 DSL plans. The standard
    price(not limited time sucker ad price) for the elite plan I have is
    now about US$ 35 per month if you use the ATT telephone service, and I
    am getting a measured download of about 5 Mbps and an upload of about
    650 kbps, if the server is not overloaded or there are not other
    problems on the web that slow everything down. Of course you have to
    live in a city fairly close to the telephone office to enroll in this
    top speed DSL plan. Download is not measured - I can download as much
    as I want without speed being reduced. Last night I downloaded a 1.9
    GB mpeg2 old classic movie in about 2 hours. Even considering that 1
    USD = about 1.2 AD, the Virgin plan seems very expensive for what you
    get - well under 1Mbps download and restrictions on download
    bandwidth. Of course conditions are quite different in the US and
    Australia. Perhaps Virgin needs a little more broadband competition to
    bring down prices. Well over half of US computer users(perhaps around
    70%) are on broadband of some sort now.
    cwdjrxyz, Aug 9, 2007
    #4
  5. dorayme

    Neredbojias Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Wed, 08 Aug 2007 23:11:42 GMT
    dorayme scribed:

    > Notice that
    >
    > <http://www.virginbroadband.com.au/wirelessbroadband/broadband-at-
    > home.aspx>
    >
    > employs a picture that includes the "fine print" conditions for a
    > broadband plan. There is a question whether this was deliberate,
    > in respect to the fine print, to make it hard to read or just
    > incompetence?


    I dunno, the text is pretty noticeable and even prominent; it's not like
    they're trying to hide it. Of course we all know your personal
    fussbudgetry index is hovering well above zero.

    I agree with cyw-whatever, though, that it's not a good deal, -at least in
    the US. Furthermore, 512 kbps isn't particularly "hi-speed" for hi-speed
    connections, anyway. I'd hold out for something better.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.
    Neredbojias, Aug 9, 2007
    #5
  6. andrew wrote:
    > On 2007-08-08, dorayme <> wrote:
    >> Notice that
    >>
    >><http://www.virginbroadband.com.au/wirelessbroadband/broadband-at-
    >>home.aspx>
    >>
    >> employs a picture that includes the "fine print" conditions for a
    >> broadband plan. There is a question whether this was deliberate, in
    >> respect to the fine print, to make it hard to read or just
    >> incompetence?

    >
    > And in a slightly off-topic aside: what exactly is the man with the
    > sunglasses doing?


    SECOND RESPONSE:

    WAIT! I didn't know that there were rotating images there. All I (and
    apparently you) saw was the spraying-his-red-speedos image. Now I see
    that in the next one he's a hairdresser working on a chick who's wearing
    a red headband thingmy. I *did* think "hairdresser" when I was looking
    at the original spraying-his-shorts image, but there wasn't anything
    else there to pull that idea together. And "broadband" doesn't exactly
    conjure up a normal connection with "hairdresser" -- at least not with
    me. :)


    --
    Blinky RLU 297263
    Killing all posts from Google Groups.
    Except in Thunderbird, which can't filter that well.
    The Usenet Improvement Project: http://blinkynet.net/comp/uip5.html
    Blinky the Shark, Aug 9, 2007
    #6
  7. dorayme

    dorayme Guest

    In article
    <>,
    cwdjrxyz <> wrote:

    > On Aug 8, 6:11 pm, dorayme <> wrote:
    > > Notice that
    > >
    > > <http://www.virginbroadband.com.au/wirelessbroadband/broadband-at-
    > > home.aspx>
    > >
    > > employs a picture that includes the "fine print" conditions for a
    > > broadband plan. There is a question whether this was deliberate,
    > > in respect to the fine print, to make it hard to read or just
    > > incompetence?

    >
    >
    > I don't know how things are done in Australia, but I would guess the
    > fine print would be much more likely intentional for a US company, and
    > there might be a page or two written in it in terms that lawyers best
    > understand.
    >
    > We now have a lot of broadband competition in the US and prices have
    > greatly dropped in the last two years. My telephone company ATT has
    > teamed up with Yahoo to offer 1 dialup and 2 DSL plans. The standard
    > price(not limited time sucker ad price) for the elite plan I have is
    > now about US$ 35 per month if you use the ATT telephone service, and I
    > am getting a measured download of about 5 Mbps and an upload of about
    > 650 kbps, if the server is not overloaded or there are not other
    > problems on the web that slow everything down. Of course you have to
    > live in a city fairly close to the telephone office to enroll in this
    > top speed DSL plan. Download is not measured - I can download as much
    > as I want without speed being reduced. Last night I downloaded a 1.9
    > GB mpeg2 old classic movie in about 2 hours. Even considering that 1
    > USD = about 1.2 AD, the Virgin plan seems very expensive for what you
    > get - well under 1Mbps download and restrictions on download
    > bandwidth. Of course conditions are quite different in the US and
    > Australia. Perhaps Virgin needs a little more broadband competition to
    > bring down prices. Well over half of US computer users(perhaps around
    > 70%) are on broadband of some sort now.


    I think what attracted my daughter and her husband to this plan
    was the telephone part of the plan... the dorayme half of that
    happy union likes to gab a lot on the phone. They use a dial up
    service for internet at the moment.

    I agree, it looks a bit expensive for the speed. Here you can
    generally get between 1 and 4GB download limit for a month at
    reasonable enough speeds (between 1.5 and 6.5 Mbps) for between
    $30 and $40 Aust.

    --
    dorayme
    dorayme, Aug 9, 2007
    #7
  8. dorayme

    dorayme Guest

    In article
    <Xns9986C785F4690nanopandaneredbojias@198.186.190.161>,
    Neredbojias <> wrote:

    > I dunno, the text is pretty noticeable and even prominent;


    Of course you would think so. Anything that is really idiotic
    attracts you. Text that is small point on web pages that does not
    resize and every other goddamn thing that is crazy. You never did
    slip into that nice comfortable thing for me did you? I meant the
    sort of coma that would stop you saying so much that is false for
    a long time.

    --
    dorayme
    dorayme, Aug 9, 2007
    #8
  9. dorayme

    William Gill Guest

    > I agree with cyw-whatever, though, that it's not a good deal, -at least in
    > the US. Furthermore, 512 kbps isn't particularly "hi-speed" for hi-speed
    > connections, anyway. I'd hold out for something better.
    >

    "hi-speed" is relative. When I first started engineering data circuits
    anything above 1200 baud was considered "hi-speed." I know some folks
    in the podunks that would love to get 512 kbps.
    William Gill, Aug 9, 2007
    #9
  10. dorayme

    Neredbojias Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 09 Aug 2007 03:12:04 GMT
    dorayme scribed:

    > In article
    > <Xns9986C785F4690nanopandaneredbojias@198.186.190.161>,
    > Neredbojias <> wrote:
    >
    >> I dunno, the text is pretty noticeable and even prominent;

    >
    > Of course you would think so. Anything that is really idiotic
    > attracts you. Text that is small point on web pages that does not
    > resize and every other goddamn thing that is crazy. You never did
    > slip into that nice comfortable thing for me did you? I meant the
    > sort of coma that would stop you saying so much that is false for
    > a long time.


    Er, is it that time of the month again? I will have to adjust my
    calendar...

    --
    Neredbojias
    Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.
    Neredbojias, Aug 9, 2007
    #10
  11. dorayme

    Neredbojias Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 09 Aug 2007 04:31:57
    GMT William Gill scribed:

    >> I agree with cyw-whatever, though, that it's not a good deal, -at
    >> least in the US. Furthermore, 512 kbps isn't particularly "hi-speed"
    >> for hi-speed connections, anyway. I'd hold out for something better.
    >>

    > "hi-speed" is relative. When I first started engineering data
    > circuits anything above 1200 baud was considered "hi-speed." I know
    > some folks in the podunks that would love to get 512 kbps.


    Hi, Bill Gill,

    I, too, remember when 1200 baud was "fast" -compared to the prevailing 300
    baud rate then prevalent. But today's cable speeds are typically like 1+,
    2, 4 and even 7 mbps, and some connections are even higher. 512k is very
    much at the lo end of the hi-speed spectrum. Sure, if your location limits
    you to dsl, go for it, but $60 bucks for a phone and 512k is more than I
    pay for a phone with unlimited calling and national coverage _and_ 2+ mbps
    internet connection.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.
    Neredbojias, Aug 9, 2007
    #11
  12. dorayme

    dorayme Guest

    In article
    <Xns9986F12C95663nanopandaneredbojias@198.186.190.165>,
    Neredbojias <> wrote:

    > Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 09 Aug 2007 03:12:04 GMT
    > dorayme scribed:
    >
    > > In article
    > > <Xns9986C785F4690nanopandaneredbojias@198.186.190.161>,
    > > Neredbojias <> wrote:
    > >
    > >> I dunno, the text is pretty noticeable and even prominent;

    > >
    > > Of course you would think so. Anything that is really idiotic
    > > attracts you. Text that is small point on web pages that does not
    > > resize and every other goddamn thing that is crazy. You never did
    > > slip into that nice comfortable thing for me did you? I meant the
    > > sort of coma that would stop you saying so much that is false for
    > > a long time.

    >
    > Er, is it that time of the month again? I will have to adjust my
    > calendar...



    Naturally, you will do anything to avoid the substantial point
    that anyone who thinks it is ok to put in important legal
    conditions in God knows how small a point size with no means to
    enlarge it is not doing something that is at all good. You prefer
    to concentrate as usual on seeing what you can _fish_ from that
    gutter which you call your mind and throw it my way.

    --
    dorayme
    dorayme, Aug 9, 2007
    #12
  13. dorayme

    Neredbojias Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 09 Aug 2007 07:56:58
    GMT dorayme scribed:

    >> >> I dunno, the text is pretty noticeable and even prominent;
    >> >
    >> > Of course you would think so. Anything that is really idiotic
    >> > attracts you. Text that is small point on web pages that does not
    >> > resize and every other goddamn thing that is crazy. You never did
    >> > slip into that nice comfortable thing for me did you? I meant the
    >> > sort of coma that would stop you saying so much that is false for
    >> > a long time.

    >>
    >> Er, is it that time of the month again? I will have to adjust my
    >> calendar...

    >
    >
    > Naturally, you will do anything to avoid the substantial point
    > that anyone who thinks it is ok to put in important legal
    > conditions in God knows how small a point size with no means to
    > enlarge it is not doing something that is at all good. You prefer
    > to concentrate as usual on seeing what you can _fish_ from that
    > gutter which you call your mind and throw it my way.


    Honest, the text looked pretty big and apparent to me. Maybe you have a
    small screen; I have a 20 inch one. If that text were html test on my
    screen, it would have about a 20-24px font size.

    I understand what you're saying about enlarging it, but one could always
    use Opera to do that if one could think clearly in the face of one's
    irritability.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.
    Neredbojias, Aug 9, 2007
    #13
  14. Scripsit Neredbojias:

    > I, too, remember when 1200 baud was "fast" -compared to the
    > prevailing 300 baud rate then prevalent.


    Oh, what a luxury. My first experience about using a network connection at
    home was with terminal that that had a manual switch for selecting between
    110 and 300 bit/s.

    For comparison, people are _still_ using the Internet over 9600 bit/s GSM
    connections. Faster wireless connections are becoming affordable, but 9600
    bit/s is really sufficient for purposes like normal (no attachments, please)
    e-mail and much of surfing on no-nonsense web pages.

    > But today's cable speeds
    > are typically like 1+, 2, 4 and even 7 mbps, and some connections are
    > even higher.


    That's nominal maximum speed. The real speed is something different and
    varies. And a connection between a client and a server is usually not faster
    than the slowest part of the data path, and a fast connection does not make
    an overloaded server any faster.

    Well, this was just to put all these speed things into perspecive. Whatever
    the technical status of connection speed is, it'll always be better to spend
    less bytes in data transfer. I'm pretty sure that when they finally find out
    a way to connect my brain directly to the Internet, the speed will first
    (for the pioneering phase that might last years) be something lousy, by
    today's standards.

    --
    Jukka K. Korpela ("Yucca")
    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
    Jukka K. Korpela, Aug 9, 2007
    #14
  15. dorayme

    dorayme Guest

    In article
    <Xns998720618AA77nanopandaneredbojias@198.186.190.161>,
    Neredbojias <> wrote:

    > Honest, the text looked pretty big and apparent to me. Maybe you have a
    > small screen; I have a 20 inch one. If that text were html test on my
    > screen, it would have about a 20-24px font size.
    >
    > I understand what you're saying about enlarging it, but one could always
    > use Opera to do that if one could think clearly in the face of one's
    > irritability.


    You seem to have - as usual - no idea what is being referred to.
    Take another look and just try not to look at the html text. Try.
    You might actually get lucky and see the small print pic of the
    fine details.

    --
    dorayme
    dorayme, Aug 9, 2007
    #15
  16. dorayme

    John Clayton Guest

    "dorayme" <> wrote;-
    > Notice that
    >
    > <http://www.virginbroadband.com.au/wirelessbroadband/broadband-at-
    > home.aspx>
    >
    > employs a picture that includes the "fine print" conditions for a
    > broadband plan. There is a question whether this was deliberate,
    > in respect to the fine print, to make it hard to read or just
    > incompetence?



    Better still, this page now seems to be unavailable.
    John
    John Clayton, Aug 9, 2007
    #16
  17. dorayme

    mbstevens Guest

    andrew wrote:
    > On 2007-08-08, dorayme <> wrote:
    >> Notice that
    >>
    >> <http://www.virginbroadband.com.au/wirelessbroadband/broadband-at-
    >> home.aspx>
    >>
    >> employs a picture that includes the "fine print" conditions for a
    >> broadband plan. There is a question whether this was deliberate,
    >> in respect to the fine print, to make it hard to read or just
    >> incompetence?

    >
    > And in a slightly off-topic aside: what exactly is the man with the
    > sunglasses doing?
    >
    > Andrew
    >

    Also slightly off-topic: I moused over the left side navigation
    in Firefox and it's text disappeared in a way I can't get it back,
    even with a shift-reload. It is amazing the lengths people will go
    to to make their page visitor-proof.
    --
    mbstevens
    http://www.mbstevens.com
    mbstevens, Aug 9, 2007
    #17
  18. dorayme

    Neredbojias Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 09 Aug 2007 10:50:10
    GMT dorayme scribed:

    > In article
    > <Xns998720618AA77nanopandaneredbojias@198.186.190.161>,
    > Neredbojias <> wrote:
    >
    >> Honest, the text looked pretty big and apparent to me. Maybe you
    >> have a small screen; I have a 20 inch one. If that text were html
    >> test on my screen, it would have about a 20-24px font size.
    >>
    >> I understand what you're saying about enlarging it, but one could
    >> always use Opera to do that if one could think clearly in the face of
    >> one's irritability.

    >
    > You seem to have - as usual - no idea what is being referred to.
    > Take another look and just try not to look at the html text. Try.
    > You might actually get lucky and see the small print pic of the
    > fine details.


    Oh, _that_ text! Well why didn't you say so?

    --
    Neredbojias
    Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.
    Neredbojias, Aug 9, 2007
    #18
  19. dorayme

    Neredbojias Guest

    Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 09 Aug 2007 10:22:13
    GMT Jukka K. Korpela scribed:

    > Scripsit Neredbojias:
    >
    >> I, too, remember when 1200 baud was "fast" -compared to the
    >> prevailing 300 baud rate then prevalent.

    >
    > Oh, what a luxury. My first experience about using a network
    > connection at home was with terminal that that had a manual switch for
    > selecting between 110 and 300 bit/s.


    Teletype speed. Luckily, 300 baud pretty much held sway for connecting
    to bbses when I started "surfing".

    > For comparison, people are _still_ using the Internet over 9600 bit/s
    > GSM connections. Faster wireless connections are becoming affordable,
    > but 9600 bit/s is really sufficient for purposes like normal (no
    > attachments, please) e-mail and much of surfing on no-nonsense web
    > pages.
    >
    >> But today's cable speeds
    >> are typically like 1+, 2, 4 and even 7 mbps, and some connections are
    >> even higher.

    >
    > That's nominal maximum speed. The real speed is something different
    > and varies. And a connection between a client and a server is usually
    > not faster than the slowest part of the data path, and a fast
    > connection does not make an overloaded server any faster.


    Nope. I still see images load a fraction at a time when the server's
    choked.

    > Well, this was just to put all these speed things into perspecive.
    > Whatever the technical status of connection speed is, it'll always be
    > better to spend less bytes in data transfer. I'm pretty sure that when
    > they finally find out a way to connect my brain directly to the
    > Internet, the speed will first (for the pioneering phase that might
    > last years) be something lousy, by today's standards.


    I recently heard they were doing some experimental bio-digital direct-
    connects in Sweden, but, unfortunately, all the volunteers are ending up
    permanently wired.

    --
    Neredbojias
    Half lies are worth twice as much as whole lies.
    Neredbojias, Aug 9, 2007
    #19
  20. John Clayton wrote:

    >
    > "dorayme" <> wrote;-
    > > Notice that
    > >
    > > <http://www.virginbroadband.com.au/wirelessbroadband/broadband-at-
    > > home.aspx>
    > >
    > > employs a picture that includes the "fine print" conditions for a
    > > broadband plan. There is a question whether this was deliberate,
    > > in respect to the fine print, to make it hard to read or just
    > > incompetence?

    >
    > Better still, this page now seems to be unavailable.
    > John


    Did you just click the broken link, or did you join it together with
    the dash and the second line? (It came up broken in two at my end, btw.)

    Here's an un-broken version of the above:
    http://tinyurl.com/25lh2n

    --
    Kim André Akerø
    -
    (remove NOSPAM to contact me directly)
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Kim_Andr=E9_Aker=F8?=, Aug 9, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. cpp4ever
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    359
    Francesco
    Sep 8, 2009
  2. Raymond Schanks
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    500
    Raymond Schanks
    Apr 11, 2010
  3. Vince C.
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    96
    Vince C.
    Sep 5, 2003
  4. Replies:
    1
    Views:
    101
  5. David Mark

    New Dojo Site--Most incompetent ever?

    David Mark, Mar 8, 2010, in forum: Javascript
    Replies:
    49
    Views:
    477
    David Mark
    Mar 20, 2010
Loading...

Share This Page