Ralph2 Posted April 4, 2003 Share Posted April 4, 2003 HelloIs there a setting someplace that will limit the line length of the messages. Scrolling horizontally is kind of a painfull.ThanksRalph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ComputerBob Posted April 4, 2003 Share Posted April 4, 2003 I believe that the forum software automatically breaks normal lines of text within messages to fit onto the screen without the need for scrolling. The problem of really wide messages (and the resulting need to scroll) occurs when someone posts one or more really long lines of code, a wide graphic image, or a long, unbroken string of characters that prevents the forum software from knowing where to to break the line. So, the long line, large graphic, or unbroken string of characters displays at its own width, which then causes the entire message thread to display at that same unusual width, forcing all of us to scroll back and forth.This is a known issue with this (and many other) forum software packages. There are currently several discussions about this topic on the Invision Power Board Support Forums. I hope that someone comes up with a solution that, at the very least, will isolate any "wide load" messages, to prevent them from causing all of the other messages in their thread from turning into "wide load" messages. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph2 Posted April 4, 2003 Author Share Posted April 4, 2003 Thanks for the response........ But in this thread there is "no" wide load that I created, yet your message without scrolling ends at message to fi......... This with Netscape 4.8 and a screen resolution of 800 x 600. Perhaps if I changed screen resolution I could see the whole message but the forum software should be smart enough to make the compensation (I wish)Ralph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LilBambi Posted April 4, 2003 Share Posted April 4, 2003 Ralph2 --I agree, the horizontal scrolling is a real pain!ComputerBob is right generally about forums ... although from what I have seen on this particular forum/board, it seems to be mainly due to very wide pics in some of the Topics.In your case though, since there are no wide pics in this Topic (as yet and hopefully there won't be!) and this Topic doesn't go wide on my 800x600 res computer (and it does with Topics that have wide pics), I am thinking it is a Netscrappy problem.Unfortunately, I can't help you there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scot Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Ralph2 and LilBambi, I have no horizontal scrolling at all in this forum software. If I did, I never would have picked this software! The ONLY time I have seen this problem is when someone posts a *very* big picture. I think I have only once seen that on the Scot's Newsletter Forums. So, because I suspect that you're seeing something different from anyone else, can you share with me some information:1. Browser version2. Screen resolution (that slider bar in Display Properties > Settings3. Size of your monitor4. Do you have any special font settings turned on in your browser or in Windows, such as large fonts?Even long URLs in this software are automatically abbreviated to avoid this problem. And I'm very concerned that both of you are confronted with it! -- Scot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LilBambi Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Scot --There are several Topics where I have seen this horizontal scrolling on this particular forum/board. For me it only happens due to wide pics in some of the Topics.This is because I need to use 800x600 for my screen res. as a eye comfort issue .. I pity anyone who has to use 640x480 due to real eye sight problems.This was the reason in this topic that I had suggested keeping the width of in-post pics for all forum topics to 460-480 wide. In the course of the topic discussion, Stryder and a few others mentioned the same annoyance factor with the horizontal scrolling problem in that Topic.My stats:1. Browser: IE 6 with all the latest security patches, hot fixes etc. Browser fonts set to medium - which I believe is stock2. Screen Re: 800x6003. monitor size: 17" CRT4. No special font settings at all in Win98se Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Jeff Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Scroll bars are placed by the browser, aren't they? I'm set for 1024 x 768 in IE6 and the only times I got the horizontal scroll bar was in the couple threads with the extra-wide images. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havnblast Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 800x600 on this paticular computer and have no scrolling except with the graphics as mentioned. Uses IE, Mozilla and Phoenix - latest versions of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Paracelsus Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Scroll bars are placed by the browser, aren't they?That's always been my understanding. At least with IE and AOL (no comments please... I'm stuck with it for the time being), scroll bars will appear as needed, according the screen res used.Haven't used NetScape since whatever version it was that took my old PC 15 minutes to load. (No Joke!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LilBambi Posted April 5, 2003 Share Posted April 5, 2003 Paracelsus --Yes, you exactly right about the scroll bars.At 800x600 when even one wide picture is on a Topic thread page, the entire page goes wide. You have scrollbars for both vertical and horizontal. The text then goes the full width of the picture so you have to scroll the whole width (back and forth) for each line to read a post. And as I mentioned earlier, it is even worse for 640x480 users. And we haven't even talked about load time for the page over a dialup connection RE: AOL -- Hey, don't feel bad, I have friends with computers that are so slow and with so little memory that it takes several minutes to load AOL just to find out they don't have any mail!And I do remember those good ole days of Netscape which I was so glad to get after initially using Mosaic, which had previously appeared to be a wonder when I first saw it. At that time, Netscape was the best out there and it was a slow loader on my very old computer too .... boy how things change! ... Recently I saw Mosaic on a site that showed how old browsers show websites today ... boy are we spoiled! I had somehow forgotten how lame it all was when it started! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph2 Posted April 9, 2003 Author Share Posted April 9, 2003 The horizontal scrolling (in my case) seems directly related to using Nescape 4.8 When I open this thread in Netscape 7.02 it is formatted as one would expect. The same holds true when I open the thread in IE 6.0.2600Thanks for all the feed-back..... time to dump 4.8 Ralph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GolfProRM Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 The horizontal scrolling (in my case) seems directly related to using Nescape 4.8 When I open this thread in Netscape 7.02 it is formatted as one would expect. The same holds true when I open the thread in IE 6.0.2600Thanks for all the feed-back..... time to dump 4.8 RalphJust curious, but what's kept you using Netscape 4.8 up until now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ComputerBob Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 Thanks for all the feed-back..... time to dump 4.8 That sounds like a wise decision. More and more software developers are dropping backwards compatibility with old browsers as they develop newer versions of their software. If I remember correctly, I believe that the creators of this forum software have stated publicly that they are going to concentrate on adding needed functionality to their software, which may result in some loss of functionality for users of old browsers.I guess sometimes, the only way to continue to move into the future is to leave behind a heavy weight that you've been carrying from the past. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LilBambi Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 Very good point ... when it starts to drag you down ... it's a sure sign! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havnblast Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 I remember when Netscape was the best broswer and enjoyed using it, but if it can't keep up than it's time to change. It was hard to change browsers, but I always keep up to date broswers installed. Living with old software when it comes to internet stuff - no thanksI also remember how the web looked and how much it has improved, can't imagin going back to that style. Yuck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scot Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 Just for clarification, I'm pretty sure he means Netscape Navigator 4.08, which was a verison of the software I recommended for a long time. It was a slimmed down version with a lot of the other B.S. But it dates back to about '98 I think. Way out of date now.I would highly recommend Mozilla.org's Phoenix browser to any ex-Netscape user, especially an ex-Netscape 4.08 user. I think you will feel comfortable with it. The aesthetic is similar. Not actual look and feel, but the the underlying concept.LilBambi, ok, the 800 x 600 size is your issue. I can understand that. Perhaps we should limit screenshot size (as a policy) to 460 or 480? And ... just curious, would a 19-inch or 21-inch monitor at 1024 x 768 monitor work for you, do you think?-- Scot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LilBambi Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 Ah, yeah ... sure would .... but .....By the way, Stryder and quite a few others would need one too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ComputerBob Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 Ah, yeah ... sure would .... but .....By the way, Stryder and quite a few others would need one too I've had my eye on a 19" no-name monitor at Sam's Club for about $179. I keep hesitating, because it just doesn't seem significantly bigger than my current 17" monitor. I'll probably have to spend big $$$ on a 21" monitor one of these days. Such are the hidden costs of age. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LilBambi Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 Well, you have to understand ... last year my old 17" monitor died (right at the end of its warranty, of course)...so I bought a new 17" monitor ... I really don't think there is a 19" - 21" monitor in my near future It would of course work very well at 1024x768 on a 19"-21" monitor as Scot said.But I am sure there are many of us that find a 17" monitor at 800x600 does the trick in most cases.I don't think I am going to be able to justify another monitor expense until the R&D has been paid for on the LCD monitors and they get it a bit fine tuned a bit more (so I can afford to get one).My desk just couldn't take a monitor that large! And I'd break my back (or Jim's) just trying to get it up the stairs to the second floor to my computer area! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stryder Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 All my PC's have 19" monitors. Once you have 19" you can't go back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ThunderRiver Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 I only have a 15" LCD display with 1024x768 resolution for my desktop, which works great with the site.My laptop is 14" with 1400x1050 resolution, so it works fine as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LilBambi Posted April 11, 2003 Share Posted April 11, 2003 Stryder -- All my PC's have 19" monitors. Once you have 19" you can't go back.Wow, 1024x768 may not work for me either at 19" since you are using 800x500 ThunderRiver --Ah, to have fresh, young, 20/20 eyes again ... wait a minute! I never had 20/20 vision! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ComputerBob Posted April 13, 2003 Share Posted April 13, 2003 Ah, to have fresh, young, 20/20 eyes again ... wait a minute! I never had 20/20 vision! Once again, you posted EXACTLY what I was thinking! I still remember the first time I tried on my new glasses in 5th grade. It suddenly dawned on me that everyone but me had always been able to see individual leaves on trees from 20 feet away, and read street signs from inside the car! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LilBambi Posted April 13, 2003 Share Posted April 13, 2003 ComputerBob --I hear ya! I had no idea that I was missing so much till I got my glasses! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph2 Posted April 14, 2003 Author Share Posted April 14, 2003 Just curious, but what's kept you using Netscape 4.8 up until now?When the WWW was new I upgraded with every beta that any browser developer offered. Then I had the computer to myself and if I screwed up something, so what. Tried them all and settled with the best on Netscape. Now, my wife is hooked and does not adapt well to change. Netscape 4.8 has an excellent mail system (in my opinion) and up to now the odd page that would not render correctly in the browser was worth the price. Alas, things are ever moving forward and finally the benifits of the mail system are no longer worth the slow death of the 4.8 browser.Evidently the Netscape suite is soon to be discontinued and I will have to find an alternate mail / news program. P.S. The horizontal scrolling problem is fixed with upgrading to NS7CheersRalph Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GolfProRM Posted April 16, 2003 Share Posted April 16, 2003 Ralph... thanks for the response/info... I'm always curious to hear why people use what they do... everybody had their own ideas, and as someone who would eventually like to get into software development, user opinions are important. Sorry to hear that 4.8 isn't working for you, and as far as Netscape goes, 4.8 was probably better than any of the newer versions (6.x-7.x and so on)... the changes they made weren't always for the better (possibly leading to their demise). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest LilBambi Posted April 16, 2003 Share Posted April 16, 2003 Ralph... thanks for the response/info... I'm always curious to hear why people use what they do... everybody had their own ideas, and as someone who would eventually like to get into software development, user opinions are important. Sorry to hear that 4.8 isn't working for you, and as far as Netscape goes, 4.8 was probably better than any of the newer versions (6.x-7.x and so on)... the changes they made weren't always for the better (possibly leading to their demise).GolfProRM --Actually, I often think it was 4.8 itself, and the HUGE interval between 4.8 and 6.0 which turned out to be a total bust that actually did in Netscape.The Internet just seemed to pass them by and they couldn't catch up somehow.Mozilla was based on the same engine without the neutering and it was a much better browser than Netscape in later years. And now Phoenix, errr, Firebird is gonna take a flying leap ahead!But like everything else ... these things are always a matter of opinion Darn shame too ... Netscape was great for many years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.