General discussion

  • Creator
  • #2192575

    Idiotic ‘new member’ info-free bandwidth-wasting downloads


    by wayne t ·

    I got here because I joined zdnet to peruse some feeds, fool
    around in forums, and have a general look about… got
    sidetracked to techRepublic, it looked vaguely interesting &
    ‘professional’ and here I am.

    BUT, I passed thru a freebie page that gave me the option of 3
    ‘free downloads’. Minimal Application info, No info on sys
    requirements and a ‘dynamic’ buttton so I can’t see where hitting
    ‘download’ is going to take me but – perhaps foolishly – I
    assume that, in keeping with standard ‘professional’ practice
    across many sites it’s going to take me to a page that tells me
    what I’m about to download, what size it is, what platforms it
    does or does not run on … etc. etc. [Taking into account the
    fundamental truth of the huge diversity of the Net, its denizens,
    connections, locations, platforms…]


    It immediately triggers the download of a 10+ meg ZIP file which
    I immediately kill. Result: annoyance, wasted bandwidth and
    some rubbish on disk I’ve got to clean up.

    And on a site with the pretensions to The Professional of this

    What intellectually-challenged dweeb was responsible for that
    piece of nonsense ?

    Are there *still* people out there who think we’re *all* running
    XYZ Septiums with Windblows ’06, Outbreak express, Internet
    Exploder… and similar nonsense. Have these people learned
    nothing of the ‘Net ? The fundamental importance of Cross-
    Platform Standards, interoperability, Net courtesy… or even
    ‘Playing Nice with Others’ ?

    I’ve been doing this stuff for 35 years. The rate of change has
    always been exponential. The curve is getting steeper very
    rapidly now.

    *None* of us have time for this nonsense – in fact, the *only*
    legitimate claim to a justification for the existence of this site is
    to *save* us all time.

    If this site waste my time just once more, I’m gone – with
    hundreds of excellent alternatives waiting.

    Thank you for the experience.

All Comments

  • Author
    • #3107985

      It’s hard to read your post

      by stress junkie ·

      In reply to Idiotic ‘new member’ info-free bandwidth-wasting downloads

      The TR post editor doesn’t require you to put a carriage return at the end of each line. Obviously you did enter a carriage return whenever you thought you were at the end of a line. This, combined with the line breaks automatically added by the post editor, makes your post difficult to read. Of course tech savvy people are already used to using this kind of editor so our posts don’t look like yours.

      • #3107947

        I post therefore I am

        by wayne t ·

        In reply to It’s hard to read your post

        “…Did enter a carriage return whenever you thought you were at
        the end of a line…”

        No – I entered a carriage return whenever I wanted a para break.

        Sorry you found it hard to read – my apologies.

        • #3133972

          Now you made me feel bad

          by stress junkie ·

          In reply to I post therefore I am

          I thought we’d get into a little slap fest. Instead your response is reasonable and courteous. That’s no fun at all. 😀

          Actually I understand your complaints. You never know what you’re going to get into when you click on a TR link. I think they use a lot of server side Java junk or something. That tends to make cruising the site a bit unpredictable as far as starting some time consuming process. It’s not too bad if you have a high bandwidth connection to the Internet. I expect that it would be irritating if I used a 56K dial up connection.

        • #3134939

          yeah – sneaky, wasn’t it :)

          by wayne t ·

          In reply to Now you made me feel bad

          …It’s hard to be mean to someone who treats you with
          courtesy ..(fortunately you don’t get that much… :).

          It’s really just one of the Great Unwritten Rules of ‘Net courtesy,
          [or even UI design) isn’t it ? – The site should *always* ensure
          that the user/viewer/victim knows what will happen when they
          click on a thing, doubly so if it’s going to do something
          potentially time consuming, costly, high in potential nuisance
          value or unexpected – like initate the download of an
          executable – which is why we put stuff like (**NB: 300Meg PDF
          file Download) AFTER a link title like “Extremely dangerous new
          Security flaws in Windows exposed”…

          It’s arrogant to assume I want (or have the time) to run whatever
          piece of junk that page designer is foisting upon me (I hit the
          link because I wanted more info than the 2 lines that were
          there). It’s rude to initiate a download to my system without my
          consent and, particularly for a ‘Pro-Tech’ site interface, it’s
          incompetent not to even query the Browser or otherwise test for
          my OS environment, location & link speed to see whether the
          thing is practical, applicable – or even usable on my system
          when it’s usually trivial to do so.

          I’ve been to the sites of ppl who proclaim themselves ‘award
          winning cutting-edge brilliant designers of Real World user-
          friendly working-business Websites..” and other Blah! – you
          know, like the ones with the N meg self-canonising Flash supa-
          opener/Corporate intro (complete with sudden earsplitting
          audio) to find an utterly blank static empty (did I make ‘blank’
          clear ?) page. Nothing. Zilch. Wordless. Devoid of content. Not a
          sausage. (Is there a Norwegian Blue about ? :).

          You can guess why: the usual spectrum of stupid assumptions
          by a bunch of nice fresh newbie ‘experts’: “everyone out there is
          running a fast BB-equipped multimedia-capable late-model
          Wintel & OS using Internet Exploiter 9.93 with the latest Flash &
          all the other extensions…” and has yet to get to the ‘NOSCRIPT’
          bit in his copy of “HTML for Compleat Idiots”.

          Bah Humbug!

          [Yes, I run with scripting & all that other stuff OFF most of the
          time for pretty obvious reasons & just ‘Toggle modes’ when I
          want to…]

          Nice to meet you Stressed One.. 🙂 That day: I was rushed –
          furiously researching some new stuff, had 30 windows and a
          zillion Tabs loaded/loading at the time, other things running
          and it happens, didn’t want that particular (download target)
          drive written to at that particular moment. Not Good.

          Have a great weekend (“…yes, but the Dr. says if I keep taking
          the pills it’ll get stronger & smaller…” 🙂

    • #3107953

      Didn’t experience that

      by mjd420nova ·

      In reply to Idiotic ‘new member’ info-free bandwidth-wasting downloads

      I haven’t found any links like that but there maybe a few from another site that a link took
      you to. Also beware of some users of this site that they would rather fight over grammar and
      expose their own faults. Sometimes it can be
      fun and it has it’s own “neighborhood”
      feeling to it. Laughing can lead to better
      brain function, Contempt will close it down
      and increase your temperature. Stay cool

      • #3107946

        Thanks, MJD

        by wayne t ·

        In reply to Didn’t experience that

        “…I haven’t found any links like that but there maybe a few from
        another site that a link took
        you to….”

        Yes, when you sign for zdnet, the last step offers you
        techrepublic. Newsletters etc. If you select a TechRepublic
        newsletter and continue, you come in via that route and you get
        the page I spoke of.

        Thanks for the courteous advice … I’m not a ‘hard case’ but,
        after all these years of the Net you’d think major sites could get
        ‘the basics’ right. I guess such ‘time wasters’ are a Pet Peeve …

        (I actually have a great S.O.H. – Article ‘Headlines’ like “Bill Gates
        says the Internet can’t be censored” with 2006 datelines have me
        rolling on the floor … *grin*)

    • #3096990

      Web designers today

      by jdclyde ·

      In reply to Idiotic ‘new member’ info-free bandwidth-wasting downloads

      often forget that many of us don’t want to have every new web wiz/bang running on our screen all the time.

      In this daze of using gui tools to design sites, a lot of extra crap gets thrown into the code as well.

      If a page can’t load quickly using dial-up, it is a poorly designed page.

      As for your downloads, there ARE a few places that could use better labeling. I think the people that do it get so caught up in what they are doing that they forget the basics.

      Either way, all I can say is “you at least got your moneys worth!” 😀 But I find it hard to believe you will not fine a site that will from time to time waste your time? (lots of time there…)

      I have gotten a lot of the downloads from TR and MOST are pretty good.

      • #3096924

        Great point JD!

        by wayne t ·

        In reply to Web designers today

        [I wish this Box supported formatting/quoted text & similar so I
        could format this reply – maybe it does for that matter, but I
        don’t see a ‘howto’ button and I don’t have the time to go
        searching … so …]

        often forget that many of us don’t want to have every new web
        wiz/bang running on our screen all the time.
        Right. we want to get to the next link/article/comment/post/
        page – and it’s the ‘meat’ content we want *first* – not the Grand
        Design. I appreciate that sites need the structures they have for
        good commercial, advertising and other reasons – ‘Free’ to Air
        TV is the metaphor. BUT: that doesn’t mean that I want to wait
        for all this Dross to load and reload once I’m inside the site –
        particularly when I’m (deep?) inside Thread inside a section,
        perhaps following comments etc (Think : ‘Modal’ ). You want the
        next page to load instantly – the only necessary changes are a
        few K of text – there’s NO reason it should not be ‘Instant’
        except bad/lazy/sloppy design and/or arrogance/discourtesy
        towards the user/viewer. In either case, that’s a pretty serious
        reason to get it right in the first place: if you don’t, your best
        competitors *will* – sooner or later.

        In this daze of using gui tools to design sites, a lot of extra crap
        gets thrown into the code as well.

        Yeah, I understand and accept that – but it doesn’t change
        anything. The end result is what matters: if the thing doesn’t
        work or can’t be auto ‘cleaned-up’ afterwards to slim things
        down then you’re using the wrong tools.

        If a page can’t load quickly using dial-up, it is a poorly designed

        Hear ! Hear! (Picture: gentlemen in Parliament shouting hearty

        I think most of the site Designer/builder/Architects have
        forgotten that one – which is a pity because it is as true now as
        it ever was – and always will be. It’s simply rewording a simple
        rule: be as bandwidth-efficient as possible and ensure that ‘the
        important stuff’ loads and displays first, no matter what –
        because there will always be ‘low bandwidth situations’ ranging
        from faults, interference, gear failure, load
        imbalances..temporary ‘busy’ conditions etc. Like all software/
        hardware/important systems web structures/services should
        ‘degrade/Fail softly, gracefully’… – or in other words: slap up the
        few boxes with text and live links in them that your reader is
        actually interested in immediately *then* build the rest of the
        page around *that*… bandwidth troubles may come and go but
        your user is going to be a happy, fast, efficient user.

        He’s also going to come to *your* site by preference if ‘the Web’s
        a bit slow’….
        etc etc..

        I have no ‘beef’ with TR at all – [I’m interested in what I’ve seen
        so far – and I’ve seen some great ideas…] If anything, I’m
        actually trying to *help*: If you think about it, if all the
        brainpower, knowledge and experience that visits this place
        can’t provide the answers necessary to turn the thing into the
        best of its kind on the ‘Net, there’s no chance for anyone. What
        about, TR ? How ’bout a contest or similar to make things
        interesting ? DO you want to make this place the best of its kind

        I haven’t done any web stuff since Adam was a pup but I’d bet
        you a $Thousand I could make this place faster, better & more
        efficient in an Outback Minute. *grin*

        Best Wishes,

        Wayne T

    • #3093523

      Feedback appreciated

      by debuggist ·

      In reply to Idiotic ‘new member’ info-free bandwidth-wasting downloads

      I can pass that feedback along to the appropriate people.

      FWIW, the size of those downloads is 185KB, 191KB, 129KB and 91KB respectively.

      • #3093417

        Courtesy appreciated

        by wayne t ·

        In reply to Feedback appreciated

        – particularly when it was in response to a post I wrote when I was
        a little ‘hot under the collar’ – Thanks Doug, :- The response of a

        Re File sizes – my browser DL window may have got it wrong, I
        may have misread it, the files may have changed since… in any
        event it’s not really pertinent.

        If I got that wrong: my mistake & my apologies.

Viewing 3 reply threads