«

max <> wrote:

> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 02:20:52 +1300, (Jamie
> Kahn Genet) wrote:
[snip]
> >Then what's your take on Slingshot's total lack of replies to my
> >requests for help? _That's_ unconstructive. Are they simply refusing to
> >help because I'm a Mac user? Because I actually chose to use decent,
> >standards respecting email and web clients (i.e. not MSOE and MSIE)? If
> >so, why? NOTHING that has happened to me is system, OS or even
> >application specific.
> >
> >Regards,
> > Jamie Kahn Genet
> You didn't tell us how long you waited for them to respond or when you
> sent the emails. They don't reply in the weekend, so if you sent it on
> Saturday expecting an answer then that could be why.

The oldest email to their helplessdesk is now 20 days old.

Regards,
Jamie Kahn Genet
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 13:40:43 +1300, (Jamie
Kahn Genet) wrote:

>max <> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 02:20:52 +1300, (Jamie
>> Kahn Genet) wrote:
>[snip]
>> >Then what's your take on Slingshot's total lack of replies to my
>> >requests for help? _That's_ unconstructive. Are they simply refusing to
>> >help because I'm a Mac user? Because I actually chose to use decent,
>> >standards respecting email and web clients (i.e. not MSOE and MSIE)? If
>> >so, why? NOTHING that has happened to me is system, OS or even
>> >application specific.
>> >
>> >Regards,
>> > Jamie Kahn Genet
>> You didn't tell us how long you waited for them to respond or when you
>> sent the emails. They don't reply in the weekend, so if you sent it on
>> Saturday expecting an answer then that could be why.
>
>The oldest email to their helplessdesk is now 20 days old.
>
>Regards,
> Jamie Kahn Genet
OK that is quite a long time. I give people 7 days for responding to
email before I follow it up.

(Jamie Kahn Genet) wrote in
news:1g34qol.1k15vq010rxp38N%. nz:
Thus, it's pretty hard to see how even a couple
> thousand text only emails - none longer than ten pages - could exceed
> the size limit. Unless Slingshot are so monumentally stupid as to use
> the size of the SPAM before attachment deletion to figure mailbox
> limits. The amount of SPAM a couple weeks ago was monumental, though.
>
> Regards,
> Jamie Kahn Genet

What is the size limit ?

Hi there,

Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:
> I've been with them since getting a recommendation from this group a few
> weeks ago.

I've heard mixed reactions about their service, and the Xcelerator
service for dialup users (says up to 3 times faster) is just a
slightly different compression algorithm that is passed over the
modem then de/compressed by client and server software at each end
of the phone. I understand the client package is Windoze only, so
Mac and Linux surfers luck out (correct me if wrong). I also would
imagine slingshot would cache popular website files locally (cnn,
google, etc...), so that requests for these files would come from
a local server, not a 'distant' one...

Kind regards,

Chris Wilkinson, Christchurch.

"Chris Wilkinson" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Hi there,
>
> Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:
> > I've been with them since getting a recommendation from this group a few
> > weeks ago.
>
> I've heard mixed reactions about their service, and the Xcelerator
> service for dialup users (says up to 3 times faster) is just a
> slightly different compression algorithm that is passed over the
> modem then de/compressed by client and server software at each end
> of the phone. I understand the client package is Windoze only, so
> Mac and Linux surfers luck out (correct me if wrong). I also would
> imagine slingshot would cache popular website files locally (cnn,
> google, etc...), so that requests for these files would come from
> a local server, not a 'distant' one...

So how does it stack up in the real world? Anyone using it like to comment?
--
~misfit~

"~misfit~" wrote
> So how does it stack up in the real world? Anyone using it like to
comment?

well my mum used to use it, no hassles for her, although I used to do any
helpdesk type work for her.

In <> Chris Wilkinson wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:
>> I've been with them since getting a recommendation from this group a
>> few weeks ago.
>
> I've heard mixed reactions about their service, and the Xcelerator
> service for dialup users (says up to 3 times faster) is just a
> slightly different compression algorithm that is passed over the
> modem then de/compressed by client and server software at each end
> of the phone. I understand the client package is Windoze only, so
> Mac and Linux surfers luck out (correct me if wrong). I also would
> imagine slingshot would cache popular website files locally (cnn,
> google, etc...), so that requests for these files would come from
> a local server, not a 'distant' one...
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Chris Wilkinson, Christchurch.

Ihug are using the Xcelerator software too. According to the ihug web
page on it there's a Mac version coming in December. No mention of a
Linux version there or on the product's web site at http://www.propel.
com/

--
Roger Johnstone, Invercargill, New Zealand

PS/2 Mouse Adapter for vintage Apple II or Mac
order at http://vintageware.orcon.net.nz

"~misfit~" <~misfit~@his.desk.com> wrote in message
news:9f3lb.185436$...
>
> "Chris Wilkinson" <> wrote in message
> news:...
> > Hi there,
> >
> > Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:
> > > I've been with them since getting a recommendation from this group a
few
> > > weeks ago.
> >
> > I've heard mixed reactions about their service, and the Xcelerator
> > service for dialup users (says up to 3 times faster) is just a
> > slightly different compression algorithm that is passed over the
> > modem then de/compressed by client and server software at each end
> > of the phone. I understand the client package is Windoze only, so
> > Mac and Linux surfers luck out (correct me if wrong). I also would
> > imagine slingshot would cache popular website files locally (cnn,
> > google, etc...), so that requests for these files would come from
> > a local server, not a 'distant' one...
>
> So how does it stack up in the real world? Anyone using it like to
comment?
> --
> ~misfit~
>
>


Having use the Xcelerator for 3 months, I would say it's increase huge the
reaction and download speed on "text-based" website, feel like a broadband
connection when browsing.

For most of the time It Xcelerator will compress 90%+ on text-based files in
average, excellent on reading news, forum and browsing.

There is a little drawback, you can lower the graphic quality for faster
speed but in best quality (ie. original, like I does) it actually enlarge
the size 1-2%... Fortunately your computer will cache them for you, no need
to download them everytime.

Also, never had experience of reading OLD stuff, don't think there is any
proxy working behind.


If there's free trial (money-back maybe), and you already their customer,
give it try. It's worth the money ($8 on top of monthly fee), but not a
bargain.

Unless there is 256k+ $60 flatrate available, I'll stick with this "56k
broadband".

"TmcT" <> wrote in message
news:...
> "~misfit~" <~misfit~@his.desk.com> wrote in message
> news:9f3lb.185436$...
> >
> > "Chris Wilkinson" <> wrote in message
> > news:...
> > > Hi there,
> > >
> > > Jamie Kahn Genet wrote:
> > > > I've been with them since getting a recommendation from this group a
> few
> > > > weeks ago.
> > >
> > > I've heard mixed reactions about their service, and the Xcelerator
> > > service for dialup users (says up to 3 times faster) is just a
> > > slightly different compression algorithm that is passed over the
> > > modem then de/compressed by client and server software at each end
> > > of the phone. I understand the client package is Windoze only, so
> > > Mac and Linux surfers luck out (correct me if wrong). I also would
> > > imagine slingshot would cache popular website files locally (cnn,
> > > google, etc...), so that requests for these files would come from
> > > a local server, not a 'distant' one...
> >
> > So how does it stack up in the real world? Anyone using it like to
> comment?
> >
>
> Having use the Xcelerator for 3 months, I would say it's increase huge the
> reaction and download speed on "text-based" website, feel like a broadband
> connection when browsing.
>
> For most of the time It Xcelerator will compress 90%+ on text-based files
in
> average, excellent on reading news, forum and browsing.
>
> There is a little drawback, you can lower the graphic quality for faster
> speed but in best quality (ie. original, like I does) it actually enlarge
> the size 1-2%... Fortunately your computer will cache them for you, no
need
> to download them everytime.
>
> Also, never had experience of reading OLD stuff, don't think there is any
> proxy working behind.
>
>
> If there's free trial (money-back maybe), and you already their customer,
> give it try. It's worth the money ($8 on top of monthly fee), but not a
> bargain.
>
> Unless there is 256k+ $60 flatrate available, I'll stick with this "56k
> broadband".

Thanks for the report, I wondered if it was any good. Prolly not for me.
--
~misfit~

"T.N.O." <> wrote in message
news:...
> "~misfit~" wrote
> > So how does it stack up in the real world? Anyone using it like to
> comment?
>
> well my mum used to use it, no hassles for her, although I used to do any
> helpdesk type work for her.

And did she find it helped?
--
~misfit~