F1 Racing Championship press release, looks great!!

http://www.the-unofficial.com/ rms [email hidden]

Stephen Ferguson wrote... > You swing to the other extreme in your opinion of GP3. > Fine. Everyone has different tastes. Huh? -Read my post again and note I didn't express an opinion with regard to GP3 whatsoever. My opinion of GP3 hasn't changed, I don't like it so I got rid of it. I do not actively discourage anyone from buying it if they think they will like it, in fact, I'm trying to use whatever limited experience I had to help others (V2 issue). I do argument against what I can only describe as a "Crammond cult", as, IMO, there is plenty to indicate he underachieved mightily with this title and therefore is cheating everyone of us, even those who do like the game. > Know what? I also like GPL. It doesn't mean I'm best > buddies with David Kaemmer. Neither am I, however it wasn't him I questioned your attitude towards. > Know something else? It's 25 degrees in Bern today. No shit, here too. > You insulted me with your comment. Well, I didn't like your comment on my favourite modern F1 sim either, but I guess you noticed that. You hurt me, I hurt you, that's how it goes. > I feel a certain desire to offer my rebuttal, but somehow > I think you would just pick up on the "butt" part. Hahaha, very good. You might have lasted more than five minutes on the Vegeserver (in-joke, sorry). > Some of us like the "look" and "feel" of GP3. Guess what? > It's subjective. I do not question the looks either, but I expect increased performance from 3D *accelerated* graphics. > Some of us like jazz, some of us like speed metal. I don't > worship Miles Davis, but I like his music. Likewise, I > don't worship Crammond, I just like his products. I'm happy for you like what he likes in a racing sim, because that's all you'll ever going get from Crammond. A harsh comment, sure, but like I said, the man has "fallen from my grace". It will take a lot to restore my confidence in him. > If you like, go read what I've written in the last few > days about GP3. I've highlighted the faults, as I see > them, but also what I like about it. Balanced opinions don't make for good arguments. > I'm not going to bury GP3 just because I saw a few screenshots > of an empty Monaco (with real balconies!). I wouldn't expect you to. I sort of expected you to dismiss it because you don't like it's predecessors as well, so no surprise there. I just took exception to your comment on the RS2 driving model. Tauting Gp3's as superior because it's easier to use would be valid only if the underlying mechanics were equally competent, which is not the case here. > Could you possibly be a little less obnoxious? Oh, alright, I'll make an effort. -Jeez, you're no fun! ;-) Jan. =---

Jan, You swing to the other extreme in your opinion of GP3. Fine. Everyone has different tastes. Know what? I also like GPL. It doesn't mean I'm best buddies with David Kaemmer. Know something else? It's 25 degrees in Bern today. You insulted me with your comment. I feel a certain desire to offer my rebuttal, but somehow I think you would just pick up on the "butt" part. Some of us like the "look" and "feel" of GP3. Guess what? It's subjective. Some of us like jazz, some of us like speed metal. I don't worship Miles Davis, but I like his music. Likewise, I don't worship Crammond, I just like his products. If you like, go read what I've written in the last few days about GP3. I've highlighted the faults, as I see them, but also what I like about it. I'm not going to bury GP3 just because I saw a few screenshots of an empty Monaco (with real balconies!). Could you possibly be a little less obnoxious? Stephen "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > You're so far up Crammond's arse, even the brightest shaft of light won't > reach you. > > Not being able to lean on the car (at least not with total confidence) isa > fair criticism of RS1 and RS2, but otherwise I disagree vehemently (butyou

Quoted text (20 lines)

> already knew that ;-)). > > Jan. > =--- > Stephen Ferguson wrote... > > Hype hype hype... if it doesn't offer the same weather > > conditions as GP3, and if the graphics don't have the > > same "feel" as GP3 (see the thread on the "Hidden Beauty > > of GP3") then I certainly won't put GP3 on the shelf. > > If I can't really "lean" on the car the way I can in GP3, > > then I won't be interested. RS1 and RS2 were supposed to > > also offer "revolutionary" driving models and "breathtaking > > graphical realism". In my opinion, they provided cartoony > > (but crisp, no doubt) graphics, and a soap-bar car sitting > > on a pin, driven by a sewing machine motor with a 2gram > > flywheel. > > > > Stephen > >

In article <c_Zj5.10666$[email hidden]>, "Roger Squires" <[email hidden]> wrote: > http://www.the-unofficial.com/ > > rms > [email hidden] > > Hmmm... Seeing as how GPS is only accurate to within a metre or two (with SA turned off), it's hard to see how it was very useful for modeling tracks to "within a centimetre". To give them a break, I would guess that GPS was used for the rough outline modeling of the circuits, and the rest of the claims are due to the marketing hypesters that don't understand the technology. In any case, a sim that can accurately reproduce the famed bumpiness of some of the circuits should be a lot of fun to drive! Doug Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.

Hype hype hype... if it doesn't offer the same weather conditions as GP3, and if the graphics don't have the same "feel" as GP3 (see the thread on the "Hidden Beauty of GP3") then I certainly won't put GP3 on the shelf. If I can't really "lean" on the car the way I can in GP3, then I won't be interested. RS1 and RS2 were supposed to also offer "revolutionary" driving models and "breathtaking graphical realism". In my opinion, they provided cartoony (but crisp, no doubt) graphics, and a soap-bar car sitting on a pin, driven by a sewing machine motor with a 2gram flywheel. Stephen "Vintook" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:ZVak5.38042$t%[email hidden]... > when it comes out GP3 will be shelved > > "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:644k5.572$[email hidden]... > > Check out the alpha screen shots at 640x480 and compare to GP3. Theseare

Quoted text (19 lines)

> > 3D accelerated graphics. If the physics are half as good as they are > hyped > > to be, it will be a great title. > > > > Marc. > > > > "Roger Squires" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > > news:c_Zj5.10666$[email hidden]... > > > http://www.the-unofficial.com/ > > > > > > rms > > > [email hidden] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

You're so far up Crammond's arse, even the brightest shaft of light won't reach you. Not being able to lean on the car (at least not with total confidence) is a fair criticism of RS1 and RS2, but otherwise I disagree vehemently (but you already knew that ;-)). Jan. =--- Stephen Ferguson wrote...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> Hype hype hype... if it doesn't offer the same weather > conditions as GP3, and if the graphics don't have the > same "feel" as GP3 (see the thread on the "Hidden Beauty > of GP3") then I certainly won't put GP3 on the shelf. > If I can't really "lean" on the car the way I can in GP3, > then I won't be interested. RS1 and RS2 were supposed to > also offer "revolutionary" driving models and "breathtaking > graphical realism". In my opinion, they provided cartoony > (but crisp, no doubt) graphics, and a soap-bar car sitting > on a pin, driven by a sewing machine motor with a 2gram > flywheel. > > Stephen

Check out the alpha screen shots at 640x480 and compare to GP3. These are 3D accelerated graphics. If the physics are half as good as they are hyped to be, it will be a great title. Marc. "Roger Squires" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:c_Zj5.10666$[email hidden]...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> http://www.the-unofficial.com/ > > rms > [email hidden] > > >

when it comes out GP3 will be shelved "Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:644k5.572$[email hidden]... > Check out the alpha screen shots at 640x480 and compare to GP3. These are > 3D accelerated graphics. If the physics are half as good as they arehyped

Quoted text (15 lines)

> to be, it will be a great title. > > Marc. > > "Roger Squires" <[email hidden]> wrote in message > news:c_Zj5.10666$[email hidden]... > > http://www.the-unofficial.com/ > > > > rms > > [email hidden] > > > > > > > >

"Stephen Ferguson" <[email hidden]> wrote: >Hype hype hype... if it doesn't offer the same weatherconditions as GP3, >and if the graphics don't have the same "feel" as GP3 (see thethread on the >"Hidden Beauty of GP3") then I certainly won't put GP3 on theshelf. Interesting. The weather does make GP3 attractive, but IMHO the lack of a proper multiplayer solution more than outweighs that. F1RC is vapourware, and some screenshots and awed whispers about the sim engine don't count for much with me. But if they have a slick online client, I will be waiting with interest. ----------------------------------------------------------- Got questions? Get answers over the phone at Keen.com. Up to 100 minutes free! http://www.keen.com

In article <ZVak5.38042$t%[email hidden]>, "Vintook" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

>when it comes out GP3 will be shelved > >"Marc Collins" <[email hidden]> wrote in message >news:644k5.572$[email hidden]... >> Check out the alpha screen shots at 640x480 and compare to GP3. These are >> 3D accelerated graphics. If the physics are half as good as they are >hyped >> to be, it will be a great title. >> >> Marc.

Sadly, Ubi are showing behind closed doors at ects. This is one title i had hoped to have seen :( Z. Please remove my_pants when replying.

22 players on a network, for a modern F1 game !!! Thats enough to get my interest. And the game is also developped in Paris, which is a garantee of quality :-) Just remember we are soccer World and Europe champions... and forget about the current Prost Grand Prix's season :-) I stop kidding : My GP3 copy is already on the shelf, and i am back to GPL. GP3 wouldnt be on this shelf if it provided internet online racing support. I think Ubisoft is able to build a good online racesim (remember POD and its online possibilities. Ubi was pionneer on that point). I am very excited, as i am still expecting an online playing modern F1 sim. Au revoir messieurs, and forgive my big French mouth :-) Thierry Cailleteau

On Wed, 9 Aug 2000 14:08:30 +0200, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote: >You're so far up Crammond's arse, even the brightest shaft of light won't >reach you. > >Not being able to lean on the car (at least not with total confidence) is a >fair criticism of RS1 and RS2, but otherwise I disagree vehemently (but you >already knew that ;-)). So, let's put it in the r.a.s. FAQ. Then you don't have to repeat it each and every day ;-) JoH

"Vintook" <[email hidden]>wrote > when it comes out GP3 will be shelved V A P O R W A R E -- Especially when you know more about it :) -- Fran�ois M�nard <ymenard> -- May the Downforce be with you... -- http://www.WeRace.net

Stephen Ferguson wrote:

Quoted text (10 lines)

> Hype hype hype... if it doesn't offer the same weather conditions as GP3, > and if the graphics don't have the same "feel" as GP3 (see the thread on the > "Hidden Beauty of GP3") then I certainly won't put GP3 on the shelf. If I > can't really "lean" on the car the way I can in GP3, then I won't be > interested. RS1 and RS2 were supposed to also offer "revolutionary" driving > models and "breathtaking graphical realism". In my opinion, they provided > cartoony (but crisp, no doubt) graphics, and a soap-bar car sitting on a > pin, driven by a sewing machine motor with a 2gram flywheel. > >

Do you really thing it will take a great effort to beat the graphics in GP3? Please Gp3, graphics are behind by 3 years. Shame on Mr Crammond for lagging behind the rest of the world.

Jan Verschueren wrote:

Quoted text (23 lines)

> You're so far up Crammond's arse, even the brightest shaft of light won't > reach you. > > Not being able to lean on the car (at least not with total confidence) is a > fair criticism of RS1 and RS2, but otherwise I disagree vehemently (but you > already knew that ;-)). > > Jan. > =--- > Stephen Ferguson wrote... > > Hype hype hype... if it doesn't offer the same weather > > conditions as GP3, and if the graphics don't have the > > same "feel" as GP3 (see the thread on the "Hidden Beauty > > of GP3") then I certainly won't put GP3 on the shelf. > > If I can't really "lean" on the car the way I can in GP3, > > then I won't be interested. RS1 and RS2 were supposed to > > also offer "revolutionary" driving models and "breathtaking > > graphical realism". In my opinion, they provided cartoony > > (but crisp, no doubt) graphics, and a soap-bar car sitting > > on a pin, driven by a sewing machine motor with a 2gram > > flywheel. > > > > Stephen

I have to agree with you Jan. Stephen is a bit disillusioned.

"Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > Stephen Ferguson wrote... > > You swing to the other extreme in your opinion of GP3. > > Fine. Everyone has different tastes. > > Huh? -Read my post again and note I didn't express an opinion with regardto > GP3 whatsoever. My opinion of GP3 hasn't changed, I don't like it so I got > rid of it. I do not actively discourage anyone from buying it if theythink > they will like it, in fact, I'm trying to use whatever limited experienceI > had to help others (V2 issue). I do argument against what I can only > describe as a "Crammond cult", as, IMO, there is plenty to indicate he > underachieved mightily with this title and therefore is cheating everyoneof > us, even those who do like the game. You stated your opinions earlier. I have a memory. My point was that I am not part of a cult. I just like the damn game. > > Know what? I also like GPL. It doesn't mean I'm best > > buddies with David Kaemmer. > > Neither am I, however it wasn't him I questioned your attitude towards. It was a simple example to show that it is possible to gush about a game without worshiping the developer. > > > Know something else? It's 25 degrees in Bern today. > > No shit, here too. Just threw that in for fun. > > You insulted me with your comment. > > Well, I didn't like your comment on my favourite modern F1 sim either, butI > guess you noticed that. You hurt me, I hurt you, that's how it goes. No, the difference is that I expressed an opinion about a product. You made a direct personal comment. > > > I feel a certain desire to offer my rebuttal, but somehow > > I think you would just pick up on the "butt" part. > > Hahaha, very good. You might have lasted more than five minutes on the > Vegeserver (in-joke, sorry). Thing is, I don't really get into flame wars. That's why I try to defuse them quickly by pointing out what I take offense to in a (hopefully) calm manner. > > Some of us like the "look" and "feel" of GP3. Guess what? > > It's subjective. > > I do not question the looks either, but I expect increased performancefrom > 3D *accelerated* graphics. I have always stated that the performance is lacking. > > If you like, go read what I've written in the last few > > days about GP3. I've highlighted the faults, as I see > > them, but also what I like about it. > > Balanced opinions don't make for good arguments. Some of us on the Usenet, and in r.a.s., would prefer to read balance opinions rather than arguments. I'm happy to discuss the relative merits of sims. Just don't put me up someone's butt! Or, more broadly stated, don't imply that I am not capable of offering an objective, balanced critique. The points which I pointed out about RS2 were the nagging things that bugged me: crazy behaviour on the kerbs (the dreaded canned spin argument), a horrible engine sound (sewing machine motor), and instant revs in neutral (2 gram flywheel). Stephen

"Mrv" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > Jan Verschueren wrote: > > > You're so far up Crammond's arse, even the brightest shaft of lightwon't > > reach you. > > > > Not being able to lean on the car (at least not with total confidence)is a > > fair criticism of RS1 and RS2, but otherwise I disagree vehemently (butyou

Quoted text (21 lines)

> > already knew that ;-)). > > > > Jan. > > =--- > > Stephen Ferguson wrote... > > > Hype hype hype... if it doesn't offer the same weather > > > conditions as GP3, and if the graphics don't have the > > > same "feel" as GP3 (see the thread on the "Hidden Beauty > > > of GP3") then I certainly won't put GP3 on the shelf. > > > If I can't really "lean" on the car the way I can in GP3, > > > then I won't be interested. RS1 and RS2 were supposed to > > > also offer "revolutionary" driving models and "breathtaking > > > graphical realism". In my opinion, they provided cartoony > > > (but crisp, no doubt) graphics, and a soap-bar car sitting > > > on a pin, driven by a sewing machine motor with a 2gram > > > flywheel. > > > > > > Stephen > > I have to agree with you Jan. Stephen is a bit disillusioned. >

I think you should go look up the word "disillusioned" in your dictionary. Stephen

"Mrv" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:[email hidden]... > > > Stephen Ferguson wrote: > > > Hype hype hype... if it doesn't offer the same weather conditions asGP3, > > and if the graphics don't have the same "feel" as GP3 (see the thread onthe > > "Hidden Beauty of GP3") then I certainly won't put GP3 on the shelf. IfI > > can't really "lean" on the car the way I can in GP3, then I won't be > > interested. RS1 and RS2 were supposed to also offer "revolutionary"driving > > models and "breathtaking graphical realism". In my opinion, theyprovided > > cartoony (but crisp, no doubt) graphics, and a soap-bar car sitting on a > > pin, driven by a sewing machine motor with a 2gram flywheel. > > > > > > Do you really thing it will take a great effort to beat the graphics inGP3? > Please Gp3, graphics are behind by 3 years. Shame on Mr Crammond forlagging > behind the rest of the world. > > To clarify (if you haven't read the other thread), I acknowledge that the GP3 hardware graphics lack both speed and the filtering that one expects. However, my feeling (shared by others) is that the Microprose group has somehow picked the right combination of palette and textures to give the game a very realistic look. It's subjective, of course, but when I beamed GP3 and MGPRS2 through a projector onto the big screen, several people had to look twice to realise that GP3 wasn't a broadcast, wherea MGPRS2 immediately said "game". To sum up my opinion: performance lacks in GP3's graphics engine, but the look is good Stephen

In article <[email hidden]>, Mrv <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (17 lines)

> >Stephen Ferguson wrote: > >> Hype hype hype... if it doesn't offer the same weather conditions as GP3, >> and if the graphics don't have the same "feel" as GP3 (see the thread on the >> "Hidden Beauty of GP3") then I certainly won't put GP3 on the shelf. If I >> can't really "lean" on the car the way I can in GP3, then I won't be >> interested. RS1 and RS2 were supposed to also offer "revolutionary" driving >> models and "breathtaking graphical realism". In my opinion, they provided >> cartoony (but crisp, no doubt) graphics, and a soap-bar car sitting on a >> pin, driven by a sewing machine motor with a 2gram flywheel. >> >> > >Do you really thing it will take a great effort to beat the graphics in GP3? >Please Gp3, graphics are behind by 3 years. Shame on Mr Crammond for lagging >behind the rest of the world.

Not to mention variable weather was back in F1RS 3 years ago, IIRC. Z. Please remove my_pants when replying.

Mrv wrote: > > Do you really thing it will take a great effort to beat the graphics in GP3? > Please Gp3, graphics are behind by 3 years. Shame on Mr Crammond for lagging > behind the rest of the world. > I actually think it would, but mostly in the wet races department, and the artistic impression the realistic choice of colours makes (this one is so often overlooked in racing sims). The graphics in the wet are not only pretty but useful as thay look so natural one immediately can recognize dry lines from wet ones. The graphics engine is not very sophisticated but what they did with it beats most other racing sims. -Gregor

Ok, I apologise for my comment. It was uncalled for. Jan. =--- Stephen Ferguson wrote...

Quoted text (13 lines)

> Some of us on the Usenet, and in r.a.s., would prefer to > read balance opinions rather than arguments. > > I'm happy to discuss the relative merits of sims. Just > don't put me up someone's butt! Or, more broadly stated, > don't imply that I am not capable of offering an objective, > balanced critique. The points which I pointed out about > RS2 were the nagging things that bugged me: crazy behaviour > on the kerbs (the dreaded canned spin argument), a horrible > engine sound (sewing machine motor), and instant revs in > neutral (2 gram flywheel). > > Stephen

In article <644k5.572$[email hidden]>, Marc Collins <[email hidden]> wrote: >Check out the alpha screen shots at 640x480 and compare to GP3. These are >3D accelerated graphics. If the physics are half as good as they are hyped >to be, it will be a great title. > >Marc. Would love to, but he's *still* locking out netscape users. Why is beyond me, I don't mind html a little off or whatever. The author has utterly failed to understand what the web is all about. BTW, any mirror site for the screen shots? Uwe -- Uwe Schuerkamp http://www.schuerkamp.de/ GnuPG Fingerprint: 2093 20B8 B861 9358 A356 B01A E145 9249 5D27 33EA PGP Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61

Now _THAT_ is lame. I'm no great fan of the N-program, but I don't mind other people using it. Can you turn off Javascript in Netscape like you can in IE? -And if so, does it help? Jan. =--- Uncle Fester wrote...

Quoted text (7 lines)

> Javascript. He detects browser type & then does a > redirect on Netscape users to a page he calls > no-netscape.htm. Fire up your Netscape & go > see for yourself. :-) > > -- > Chuck Kandler

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden] (Uwe Schuerkamp) writes:

Quoted text (11 lines)

>In article <644k5.572$[email hidden]>, >Marc Collins <[email hidden]> wrote: >>Check out the alpha screen shots at 640x480 and compare to GP3. These are >>3D accelerated graphics. If the physics are half as good as they are hyped >>to be, it will be a great title. >> >>Marc. > >Would love to, but he's *still* locking out netscape users. Why is >beyond me, I don't mind html a little off or whatever. The author has >utterly failed to understand what the web is all about.

How does he lock out netscape users? Do you get errors, or just no display? Eldred -- Tiger Stadium R.I.P. 1912-1999 Homepage - http://www.umich.edu/~epickett GPL hcp. +51.31 Never argue with an idiot. He brings you down to his level, then beats you with experience... Remove SPAM-OFF to reply.

In article <[email hidden]>, "Jan Verschueren" <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (18 lines)

>Ok, I apologise for my comment. It was uncalled for. > >Jan. >=--- >Stephen Ferguson wrote... >> Some of us on the Usenet, and in r.a.s., would prefer to >> read balance opinions rather than arguments. >> >> I'm happy to discuss the relative merits of sims. Just >> don't put me up someone's butt! Or, more broadly stated, >> don't imply that I am not capable of offering an objective, >> balanced critique. The points which I pointed out about >> RS2 were the nagging things that bugged me: crazy behaviour >> on the kerbs (the dreaded canned spin argument), a horrible >> engine sound (sewing machine motor), and instant revs in >> neutral (2 gram flywheel). >> >> Stephen

Er... Instant revs in neutral would be accuracte. I believe as far back in 1990*, without rev limiters,if the throttle was reved in neutral, a engine would reach about 100,000rpm in miliseconds slightly before the pistons started flying out the sides of the engine... (From some aussie car magazine bod who test drove a leyton house). Z. Please remove my_pants when replying.

EldredP wrote: > > How does he lock out netscape users? Do you get errors, or just no display? Javascript. He detects browser type & then does a redirect on Netscape users to a page he calls no-netscape.htm. Fire up your Netscape & go see for yourself. :-) -- Chuck Kandler Windows--computing for the Unwashed Masses Registered Linux User #180746 http://counter.li.org

Jan Verschueren wrote:

Quoted text (8 lines)

> > Now _THAT_ is lame. > > I'm no great fan of the N-program, but I don't mind other people using it. > Can you turn off Javascript in Netscape like you can in IE? -And if so, does > it help? > > Jan.

No, it won't help. Most sites that implement such routines usually use them to send the user to either an IE-friendly or a NS-friendly page to optimize their viewing. Only he has chosen instead to display a page that "maybe soon I'll also have a NS page", to loosely paraphrase. And it was dated like early January, if I recall correctly. :-/ Personally, if the guy don't want to code specifically for NS, I don't have a problem with that. I realize it may not look the way he intended, but I should still have the choice to enter or not. Just put up a disclaimer, "Designed for MS IE, not responsible for layout problems with other browsers..." etc., etc. Oh well. End of another Fester-rant. ;-) -- Chuck Kandler Windows--computing for the Unwashed Masses Registered Linux User #180746 http://counter.li.org

Uncle Fester wrote:

Quoted text (23 lines)

> > Jan Verschueren wrote: > > > > Now _THAT_ is lame. > > > > I'm no great fan of the N-program, but I don't mind other people using it. > > Can you turn off Javascript in Netscape like you can in IE? -And if so, does > > it help? > > > > Jan. > > No, it won't help. Most sites that implement such routines usually use > them to send the user to either an IE-friendly or a NS-friendly page to > optimize their viewing. Only he has chosen instead to display a page > that "maybe soon I'll also have a NS page", to loosely paraphrase. And > it was dated like early January, if I recall correctly. :-/ > > Personally, if the guy don't want to code specifically for NS, I don't > have a problem with that. I realize it may not look the way he > intended, but I should still have the choice to enter or not. Just put > up a disclaimer, "Designed for MS IE, not responsible for layout > problems with other browsers..." etc., etc. Oh well. End of another > Fester-rant. ;-)

I stand corrected. I thought I'd un-enabled Javascript on my browser (Linux Netscape tends to get flaky sometimes with javascript enabled), but as it turned out I'd only turned it off for mail & news. I turned it off in my browser as well, and lo and behold The Unofficial comes up ok. Just an fyi. -- Chuck Kandler Windows--computing for the Unwashed Masses Registered Linux User #180746 http://counter.li.org

In article <[email hidden]>, Jan Verschueren <[email hidden]> wrote:

Quoted text (7 lines)

>Now _THAT_ is lame. > >I'm no great fan of the N-program, but I don't mind other people using it. >Can you turn off Javascript in Netscape like you can in IE? -And if so, does >it help? > >Jan.

That helped, Jan. Thanks much both to you and to Chuck for helping me along. Cheers, Uwe -- Uwe Schuerkamp http://www.schuerkamp.de/ GnuPG Fingerprint: 2093 20B8 B861 9358 A356 B01A E145 9249 5D27 33EA PGP Fingerprint: 2E 13 20 22 9A 3F 63 7F 67 6F E9 B1 A8 36 A4 61