Why there will be no resolution to the yEnc war.

I'm going to try to sum up what I've learned in the discussions (?) of
yEnc and in my reading.

Against yEnc:

After reading Jeremy Nixon's anti-yEnc arguments, I can see that the
real problem is not that yEnc isn't an improvement, but rather that it
was not enough of an improvement over UU and didn't even attempt to
solve some of its problems. Nixon was worried that it had already
become the new standard 5 years ago. I can see his point--sometimes
people settle for what is at best a partial fix to a given problem,
and then effort is diverted away from seeking a more thorough fix
(this is actually a common problem in the big organizations where I've
spent my career--people "settle")..

yEnc's improvement is big or small, depending on what you're posting.
For the relatively small jpegs posted here, a 30% reduction in size by
using yEnc doesn't amount to much in absolute terms. For an MP3 such
as I posted in multimedia aviation, 30% amounts to much more, and for
a big AVI, 30% would be quite a lot. That's why yEnc is dominant in
the multimedia and audio groups. But in a still photo group, the
pro-yEnc folks can't claim that yEnc has much practical superiority.

Of course, as some have noted, even a little means something to
somebody with dial-up, or download restrictions, and I don't want to
be the classicallyy arrogant American who ignores the fact that access
isn't the same everywhere. (As an aside, that makes me wonder how we
look to other countries such as Japan, that have MUCH faster
broadband--in terms of broadband, we stand about the same as we do in
rail passenger transportation--far, far from the leading nations.)

For yEnc:

Even though it is only a little improvement, yEnc is unquestionably an
improvement in terms of encoded file size. It costs little or nothing
to get yEnc decoding ability, it requires no technical expertise, and
it does not require a hardware upgrade of any kind. Consequently,
the price paid for a little improvement is a little price.

(By the way, if Nixon's arguments were taken seriously, what would
replace UU is something that would REALLY make the anti-yEnc crowd
shriek, although it would also represent much more of an improvement
over UU--her agrues for an upgraded version of MIME encoding.)

Finally, arguments that reference "the standard" or "guidelines" in an
unmoderated group lacking any charter will never gain any traction.
I've been on both sides of those kinds of arguments, and I can tell
you what happened in every last instance.

______________

So it comes down to this: one side says "why post in yEnc, the
improvement is not so great' while the other says "you're free to add
yEnc encoding, and the cost is little or nothing." Neither side has
anything even approaching a slam-dunk argument. yEnc is NOT so
clearly superior that everyone should get yEnc decoding ability.
Adding yEnc decoding ability is NOT so costly or difficult that it
unreasonably blocks people from viewing files.

That's why there will be no resolution--the arguments are weak on both
sides. That's why it can only remain a choice. Live and let live--
the lesson they have yet to learn in the Middle East.

That's my position. Don acknowledged that I never told anyone to
leave. In fact, I never told anyone to do anything (although a few
were pleased to tell me what to do). I'll tell you what you COULD do
if you CHOSE, but that's about it. In turn, if somebody chose a new
method of encoding, and I knew their pictures were worthwhile, I'd
expect to do a little work to get their pictures--it isn't up to them
to change to suit me. They already did the work of taking, editing,
and posting the pictures, so I'm not going to moan about having to do
something new to get them. I've had to learn lots of things in the
microcomputer age, but it is just the price of getting the goodies the
age has to offer so I am not complaining one bit. As a
very-near-geezer I'm still awestruck by such things as the fact that
I've seen thousands of cool aircraft photos FOR FREE, IN MY OWN HOME!
Wowee! Is that cool or what? How I wish all this stuff had been
available when I was a kid! Then maybe I wouldn't have painted my
Corsair model pink with yellow stripes! (Kidding!!!)

On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 16:24:45 -0500, Just Plane Noise
wrote:

In turn, if somebody chose a new
method of encoding, and I knew their pictures were worthwhile, I'd
expect to do a little work to get their pictures--it isn't up to them
to change to suit me.

Bravo. Well said. What people are missing by refusing to down-load
yenc software or getting a better newsreader are some wonderful
pictures taken by you. I for one do not care what format you post in,
but if you change to a different format, I will ensure that I *can*
down-load your pics, whatever it takes. Your work is very, very good.
Thanks.

Dave

Dave LaCourse wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 16:24:45 -0500, Just Plane Noise
wrote:

In turn, if somebody chose a new
method of encoding, and I knew their pictures were worthwhile, I'd
expect to do a little work to get their pictures--it isn't up to them
to change to suit me.

Bravo. Well said. What people are missing by refusing to down-load
yenc software or getting a better newsreader are some wonderful
pictures taken by you. I for one do not care what format you post in,
but if you change to a different format, I will ensure that I *can*
down-load your pics, whatever it takes. Your work is very, very good.
Thanks.

Dave


I use xnews to download multiple files. It automatically decodes Yenc
with out doing a thing. I also use it to download other multiple files.
So there is no argument as far as I see it.

Don't want to download a Yenc file...simple don't

I don't post in Yenc, so no room for anyone to say I'm supporting it either.

But if you really want the files, then the writing is on the wall.

Simple.

On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 17:35:11 -0400, Dave LaCourse
wrote:

On Wed, 08 Aug 2007 16:24:45 -0500, Just Plane Noise
wrote:

In turn, if somebody chose a new
method of encoding, and I knew their pictures were worthwhile, I'd
expect to do a little work to get their pictures--it isn't up to them
to change to suit me.

Bravo. Well said. What people are missing by refusing to down-load
yenc software or getting a better newsreader are some wonderful
pictures taken by you. I for one do not care what format you post in,
but if you change to a different format, I will ensure that I *can*
down-load your pics, whatever it takes. Your work is very, very good.
Thanks.



Thanks! Someone (maybe you) said I was either a good pro or an
outstanding amateur. I'm sort of neither. I was the
paid photo editor of the school newspaper of a major (30,000 students)
university. I used a Nikon F, a Weston Ranger 9 meter, and developed
and printed all of my own work, so it was a different era, but I did
learn plenty about light and shadow as well as other basics of
photography. At about the same time I also worked for a wedding
photographer (back then it was very boring--much more creative these
days), shooting weddings without any assistance. I learned to be
resourceful, but above all I learned to react fast and to be ready to
react fast (candid photography teaches you that real quick!). I got
out of photography for awhile because of my heavy involvement in pro
audio, but what brought be back in was the fact that I married a woman
whose brother is a fairly noted fashion photographer. He always finds
fault with my pictures, but as a result I've learned one helluva lot,
especially about light. And since photography only involves two
things--light and pointing (oops--forgot luck!)-learning more about
light was very important.

Actually it is very simple. When this NG was established one of the "rules"
was no yenc,plain and simple. Either you choose to follow the rules or not,
no skin off my nose either way. I have downloaded two free yEnc decoders and
neither have worked worth a damn but at least I tried. As I have broadband,
downloading useless posts does not create a problem; for those for whom it
does they can just block your posts and problem solved.It is not that hard
to work it out either way.
FWIW
"Just Plane Noise" wrote in message
...
I'm going to try to sum up what I've learned in the discussions (?) of
yEnc and in my reading.

Against yEnc:

After reading Jeremy Nixon's anti-yEnc arguments, I can see that the
real problem is not that yEnc isn't an improvement, but rather that it
was not enough of an improvement over UU and didn't even attempt to
solve some of its problems. Nixon was worried that it had already
become the new standard 5 years ago. I can see his point--sometimes
people settle for what is at best a partial fix to a given problem,
and then effort is diverted away from seeking a more thorough fix
(this is actually a common problem in the big organizations where I've
spent my career--people "settle")..

yEnc's improvement is big or small, depending on what you're posting.
For the relatively small jpegs posted here, a 30% reduction in size by
using yEnc doesn't amount to much in absolute terms. For an MP3 such
as I posted in multimedia aviation, 30% amounts to much more, and for
a big AVI, 30% would be quite a lot. That's why yEnc is dominant in
the multimedia and audio groups. But in a still photo group, the
pro-yEnc folks can't claim that yEnc has much practical superiority.

Of course, as some have noted, even a little means something to
somebody with dial-up, or download restrictions, and I don't want to
be the classicallyy arrogant American who ignores the fact that access
isn't the same everywhere. (As an aside, that makes me wonder how we
look to other countries such as Japan, that have MUCH faster
broadband--in terms of broadband, we stand about the same as we do in
rail passenger transportation--far, far from the leading nations.)

For yEnc:

Even though it is only a little improvement, yEnc is unquestionably an
improvement in terms of encoded file size. It costs little or nothing
to get yEnc decoding ability, it requires no technical expertise, and
it does not require a hardware upgrade of any kind. Consequently,
the price paid for a little improvement is a little price.

(By the way, if Nixon's arguments were taken seriously, what would
replace UU is something that would REALLY make the anti-yEnc crowd
shriek, although it would also represent much more of an improvement
over UU--her agrues for an upgraded version of MIME encoding.)

Finally, arguments that reference "the standard" or "guidelines" in an
unmoderated group lacking any charter will never gain any traction.
I've been on both sides of those kinds of arguments, and I can tell
you what happened in every last instance.

______________

So it comes down to this: one side says "why post in yEnc, the
improvement is not so great' while the other says "you're free to add
yEnc encoding, and the cost is little or nothing." Neither side has
anything even approaching a slam-dunk argument. yEnc is NOT so
clearly superior that everyone should get yEnc decoding ability.
Adding yEnc decoding ability is NOT so costly or difficult that it
unreasonably blocks people from viewing files.

That's why there will be no resolution--the arguments are weak on both
sides. That's why it can only remain a choice. Live and let live--
the lesson they have yet to learn in the Middle East.

That's my position. Don acknowledged that I never told anyone to
leave. In fact, I never told anyone to do anything (although a few
were pleased to tell me what to do). I'll tell you what you COULD do
if you CHOSE, but that's about it. In turn, if somebody chose a new
method of encoding, and I knew their pictures were worthwhile, I'd
expect to do a little work to get their pictures--it isn't up to them
to change to suit me. They already did the work of taking, editing,
and posting the pictures, so I'm not going to moan about having to do
something new to get them. I've had to learn lots of things in the
microcomputer age, but it is just the price of getting the goodies the
age has to offer so I am not complaining one bit. As a
very-near-geezer I'm still awestruck by such things as the fact that
I've seen thousands of cool aircraft photos FOR FREE, IN MY OWN HOME!
Wowee! Is that cool or what? How I wish all this stuff had been
available when I was a kid! Then maybe I wouldn't have painted my
Corsair model pink with yellow stripes! (Kidding!!!)

Major snippage


Very well said!

--
Cheers,

Bert-Jan

On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 18:34:46 -0400, "Hub Plott III"
wrote:

When this NG was established one of the "rules"
was no yenc,plain and simple.

This is a non-moderated newsgroup. You can make "suggestions", but
not rules. It's usenet, not YOURnet.

Dave

"Just Plane Noise" wrote in message
...
I'm going to try to sum up what I've learned in the discussions (?) of
yEnc and in my reading.

Against yEnc:

After reading Jeremy Nixon's anti-yEnc arguments, I can see that the
real problem is not that yEnc isn't an improvement, but rather that it
was not enough of an improvement over UU and didn't even attempt to
solve some of its problems. Nixon was worried that it had already
become the new standard 5 years ago. I can see his point--sometimes
people settle for what is at best a partial fix to a given problem,
and then effort is diverted away from seeking a more thorough fix
(this is actually a common problem in the big organizations where I've
spent my career--people "settle")..

yEnc's improvement is big or small, depending on what you're posting.
For the relatively small jpegs posted here, a 30% reduction in size by
using yEnc doesn't amount to much in absolute terms. For an MP3 such
as I posted in multimedia aviation, 30% amounts to much more, and for
a big AVI, 30% would be quite a lot. That's why yEnc is dominant in
the multimedia and audio groups. But in a still photo group, the
pro-yEnc folks can't claim that yEnc has much practical superiority.

Of course, as some have noted, even a little means something to
somebody with dial-up, or download restrictions, and I don't want to
be the classicallyy arrogant American who ignores the fact that access
isn't the same everywhere. (As an aside, that makes me wonder how we
look to other countries such as Japan, that have MUCH faster
broadband--in terms of broadband, we stand about the same as we do in
rail passenger transportation--far, far from the leading nations.)

For yEnc:

Even though it is only a little improvement, yEnc is unquestionably an
improvement in terms of encoded file size. It costs little or nothing
to get yEnc decoding ability, it requires no technical expertise, and
it does not require a hardware upgrade of any kind. Consequently,
the price paid for a little improvement is a little price.

(By the way, if Nixon's arguments were taken seriously, what would
replace UU is something that would REALLY make the anti-yEnc crowd
shriek, although it would also represent much more of an improvement
over UU--her agrues for an upgraded version of MIME encoding.)

Finally, arguments that reference "the standard" or "guidelines" in an
unmoderated group lacking any charter will never gain any traction.
I've been on both sides of those kinds of arguments, and I can tell
you what happened in every last instance.

______________

So it comes down to this: one side says "why post in yEnc, the
improvement is not so great' while the other says "you're free to add
yEnc encoding, and the cost is little or nothing." Neither side has
anything even approaching a slam-dunk argument. yEnc is NOT so
clearly superior that everyone should get yEnc decoding ability.
Adding yEnc decoding ability is NOT so costly or difficult that it
unreasonably blocks people from viewing files.

That's why there will be no resolution--the arguments are weak on both
sides. That's why it can only remain a choice. Live and let live--
the lesson they have yet to learn in the Middle East.

That's my position. Don acknowledged that I never told anyone to
leave. In fact, I never told anyone to do anything (although a few
were pleased to tell me what to do). I'll tell you what you COULD do
if you CHOSE, but that's about it. In turn, if somebody chose a new
method of encoding, and I knew their pictures were worthwhile, I'd
expect to do a little work to get their pictures--it isn't up to them
to change to suit me. They already did the work of taking, editing,
and posting the pictures, so I'm not going to moan about having to do
something new to get them. I've had to learn lots of things in the
microcomputer age, but it is just the price of getting the goodies the
age has to offer so I am not complaining one bit. As a
very-near-geezer I'm still awestruck by such things as the fact that
I've seen thousands of cool aircraft photos FOR FREE, IN MY OWN HOME!
Wowee! Is that cool or what? How I wish all this stuff had been
available when I was a kid! Then maybe I wouldn't have painted my
Corsair model pink with yellow stripes! (Kidding!!!)


Noise, it really is refreshing to see an objective discourse from you - keep
it up!

But I've said before this is not a technical issue, it's a social issue.
All the harangue is what happens when a bunch of old geezers start behaving
a bunch of old coots.

gdp

Hence the "" around the word rules! Read the post,understand the post, don't
knee jerk to the post! no complaints just info! No one said it was YOURnet
or my net! And any assumptions by you ,me or anyone else to that point are
crap. JPN said it well, it does suck for those with limited download
allowances and such but it is just as easy to get a decoder( one that works
with outlook express would be nice) or simply block those senders who post
in yEnc if you don't want those posts downloaded rather than launce into a
huge name calling bitch fight on both sides of the issue. JPN posted a well
thought and written discussion but it really over complicates the matter. I
was attempting to cut it down to the simple
"Dave LaCourse" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 8 Aug 2007 18:34:46 -0400, "Hub Plott III"
wrote:

When this NG was established one of the "rules"
was no yenc,plain and simple.

This is a non-moderated newsgroup. You can make "suggestions", but
not rules. It's usenet, not YOURnet.

Dave

No, just a way to cut out the bitchin'! If you don't like yEnc posts then
just block those guys that post in that format aand your problem is solved.
It is much simpler and better that everyone taking sides and rantng the pros
and cons! Like I said the format does not bother me if it opens; great! If
not I move on to the next post.One day I will find some freeware that works
well with Outlook express then I can enjoy JPN and others postings!
"Clark" wrote in message
...
"Hub Plott III" wrote in
:

Actually it is very simple. When this NG was established one of the
"rules" was no yenc,plain and simple. Either you choose to follow the
rules or not, no skin off my nose either way. I have downloaded two free
yEnc decoders and neither have worked worth a damn but at least I tried.
As I have broadband, downloading useless posts does not create a
problem; for those for whom it does they can just block your posts and
problem solved.It is not that hard to work it out either way.
FWIW


Progress should be avoided at all costs...

--
---
there should be a "sig" here