Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

A companion to the Homestar Runner Wiki
It is currently Wed Jul 30, 2014 9:03 am

All times are UTC




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 22 posts ] 

Should we list file sizes on toons and emails?
Yes 79%  79%  [ 33 ]
No 21%  21%  [ 9 ]
Total votes : 42
Author Message
 Post subject: File sizes
PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 9:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 11:24 pm
Posts: 572
Location: :uoıʇɐɔol
I think that each toon or e-mail should have a listing of the file size. Why? Because some people who have a slow connection (or just want to download something) could know how big it is and about how long it would take. What do you think?

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 10:03 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 12, 2004 4:50 am
Posts: 886
Location: somewhere in the crowd of people in stus backyard...
thats a good idea, specially because i had a slow computer and alot of things slowed it down.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 10:22 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2004 11:37 pm
Posts: 61
Location: Watching the cheat!
it would be helpful to those with slow puters, unlike myself :) but the toon is worth waiting for you know!!!! am i right? am i right? :p

_________________
Doo hoo hoo hoo hoo hoo...

He works alone, except for when he works with Rinaldo which is all the time, Dangeresque!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 10:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 6:40 pm
Posts: 273
Moved this to Wiki Decision polls. Oh, and I voted yes. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 11:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 10:36 pm
Posts: 4328
Location: The island. Where and when that is I cannot say...
Sure. I could have used it back when I was a 56k-er.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Jun 16, 2004 11:53 pm 
Offline
Wiki Proprietor
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 12:21 am
Posts: 499
Location: 14.7 miles South of Stu's backyard
This is just the kind of thing the site should have. Good work Kupo.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 17, 2004 3:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 11:24 pm
Posts: 572
Location: :uoıʇɐɔol
And, using some bogus theroum, we could estimate the time it would take to load on 56K, or something like that.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 17, 2004 2:24 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun May 09, 2004 3:23 am
Posts: 2562
Location: I seem to have...pooped......in my pants...
dang, which yutz voted no??

I might need the file sizes...I might be going back to modem...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 28, 2004 1:01 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2004 2:54 am
Posts: 271
Location: Wisconsin
This could cause problems, though, since PC file sizes are different than Mac file sizes. (1 PC megabyte is 1,000 kilobytes, 1 Mac megabyte is 1,024 kilobytes.) Maybe we should have both a PC file size and a Mac file size listed?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 6:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 5:07 pm
Posts: 890
Location: Royse City, TX
homsar999 wrote:
This could cause problems, though, since PC file sizes are different than Mac file sizes. (1 PC megabyte is 1,000 kilobytes, 1 Mac megabyte is 1,024 kilobytes.) Maybe we should have both a PC file size and a Mac file size listed?


With the file sizes used on H*R, I don't think it should cause much of a problem. I don't forsee anyone going I thought it was going to be 3.2 MB, not 3.3 MB!

And my understanding is that the 1000 Bytes = kilobyte is used when talking about bandwidth, and it is also used by hard disk manufacturers. The 1024 Bytes = KB is used by Windows and Macintosh and Unix, though individual utilities and programs running on those operating systems may differ.

However, since we are concerned with download time, if we want to be nit-picky, shouldn't the SI definition of MB (1000) be used, as it is the standard for networking and bandwidth?

Fun trivia: Since 1998, the standard is that MB = 1000 KB, and MiB = 1024 KiB, and so on. MiB is pronounced Mebibyte, KiB Kibibyte, etc.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 30, 2004 11:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 28, 2004 10:44 pm
Posts: 19
Location: Come over to my house and I'll tell you were I live. So come on over, I have cake and pie.=)
hi

_________________
"Hello! How do you like my egg, Mr. Strong Bad?"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 01, 2004 12:50 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri May 21, 2004 12:54 am
Posts: 718
Red stackled elbermung wrote:
hi


SPAM'D!

Anyway, We have car's and Dangereque 3's I guess we could put all the rests's

_________________
DO NOT ATTEMPT TO ADJUST THE JUMBOTRON, veterans, I'm really back.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 16, 2005 8:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2004 1:33 am
Posts: 444
Location: Broken Arrow, OK, USA, North America, Northern Hemisphere, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way, Universe
Yes, we should put file sizes on there. It will serve as a warning to those of you on slow connections.

w00t!
200 posts!
:-) :-D :mrgreen: :eekdance:

_________________
Image
How am I posting? Please call Homestar Runner Wiki Forum Guest Services at 1 (248) 434-5508 with comments or concerns regarding my posts. Have a nice day!


Last edited by woddfellow2 on Fri Jan 28, 2005 2:44 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 16, 2005 10:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:07 am
Posts: 414
Location: Middlesbrough, UK
homsar999 wrote:
This could cause problems, though, since PC file sizes are different than Mac file sizes. (1 PC megabyte is 1,000 kilobytes, 1 Mac megabyte is 1,024 kilobytes.) Maybe we should have both a PC file size and a Mac file size listed?


This is probably a bad idea but I just thought of it and it could be good:

Or (this is either a totally good idea or a totally bad idea) we could have a scale. Like on a page we describe what they mean. For example:

-Small: 0 - 250 KB (PC) 1 - 300 KB (MAC)

and so on (I know that the example didn't make any sense).
Then on the toon page we could have something like:

Code:
[[Link to page explaining sizes|Size]]: Small


This makes it easy. The bad part though is some one who doesn't know what they're doing could add that it is what they think is "big" without looking at the page that explains what small is defined as. The good part is that it is simple and that some people who don't understand megabytes and stuff would be able to see the size easily. What do you think?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Jan 17, 2005 6:52 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:33 am
Posts: 14286
Location: Wouldn't you like to know?
The file size thing makes food sense because I know it's hard for someone with dial-up to watch a toon. That way they will at least know how long it will take to load. Good thinking ~Kupo~.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: times
PostPosted: Mon Jan 17, 2005 6:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 1:00 am
Posts: 3849
Location: Best Coast
Each page should also have the time length (M:SS).

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: times
PostPosted: Mon Jan 17, 2005 6:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon May 10, 2004 6:05 am
Posts: 5636
Location: swirlee.org for great justice
I think separating them into "big" and "small" or any other artificial taxonomy is a terrible idea. Let people decide on their own what's big or small. (e.g. I have cable, so 1.5MB is still small.)

edsmilde wrote:
Each page should also have the time length (M:SS).


I would like to second this.

_________________
StrongCanada wrote:
Jordan, you are THE SUCK at kissing! YAY! Just thought you should know! Rainbows! Sunshine!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: times
PostPosted: Mon Jan 17, 2005 9:55 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 12:07 am
Posts: 414
Location: Middlesbrough, UK
InterruptorJones wrote:
I think separating them into "big" and "small" or any other artificial taxonomy is a terrible idea. Let people decide on their own what's big or small. (e.g. I have cable, so 1.5MB is still small.)


What I thought though, is like its just quick to look at. And some people don't know what it means. The length of the toons sounds good as well.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: times
PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2005 12:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 2:58 am
Posts: 1819
InterruptorJones wrote:
edsmilde wrote:
Each page should also have the time length (M:SS).


I would like to second this.


I would like to third this.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: times
PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 5:07 pm
Posts: 890
Location: Royse City, TX
Fire Bird wrote:
InterruptorJones wrote:
edsmilde wrote:
Each page should also have the time length (M:SS).


I would like to second this.


I would like to third this.


Sounds great in theory, but people will be arguing over true length as well.

Since there are easter eggs that can add time to the length of an e-mail (such as Homsar in dragon) those shouldn't be counted in the length of the e-mail.

And how do you count when it is done? For most e-mails, this can be straight forward, but for some (like theme park) the easter egg at the end happens only because you wait for long enough. Since the extra stuff is obviously not mainstream e-mail, it wouldn't normally count as part of the length. However, since there isn't a stopping point where it waits for you to click back or e-mail strong bad forever, it's difficult to assign a precise "end of e-mail" time to those ones.

But I like the idea. Lets do it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 20, 2005 10:54 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:33 am
Posts: 14286
Location: Wouldn't you like to know?
Then what you should do it have the time of the toon or what not without the eggs, then have the time of said toon/whatever with the eggs right next to it.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: times
PostPosted: Sun Jan 23, 2005 6:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 10, 2005 2:58 am
Posts: 1819
racerx_is_alive wrote:

And how do you count when it is done? For most e-mails, this can be straight forward, but for some (like theme park) the easter egg at the end happens only because you wait for long enough. Since the extra stuff is obviously not mainstream e-mail, it wouldn't normally count as part of the length. However, since there isn't a stopping point where it waits for you to click back or e-mail strong bad forever, it's difficult to assign a precise "end of e-mail" time to those ones.

But I like the idea. Lets do it.


Ugh. Forgot about that.

I say that if we do end up doing it (time), we should end the time when The Paper comes down (in Strong Bad Emails).

I can't think of anything to do with the toons, except for maybe when the
"back" button appears.

But yeah, I would really like it done. It'd be sweet.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 22 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group