Re: Graphic converter query - transparency

Jim <jim@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

> Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> 
> > Jim <jim@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > 
> > > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > Jim <jim@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Rowland McDonnell <real-address-in-sig@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > > > > 
> > > > > > <very puzzled again>  No, 600+kB/s is around about 338kB/s as
> > > > > > far as handwaving regarding this sort of thing goes.  Double
or
> > > > > > half the data rate is `about the same'; ten times or a tenth
> > > > > > isn't.
> > > > > 
> > > > > That's subjective of course.
> > > > 
> > > > <puzzled>  No, it's conventional scientific *****sment of numbers.
> > > 
> > > I don't care. If I'm only getting half my download bandwidth, that's
> > > significant. I don't care what the overall magnitude is.
> > 
> > That's your subjective opinion, of course.  I was eschewing
subjectivity
> > in that sense.
> 
> My point is that although broadband lines are indeed subject to variable
> download conditions, the only person who can say if it's "significant"
> is the person using it. 

And my point is that that's wrong and that there are established methods
for *****sing this sort of thing that avoid the subjectivity that you
insist on applying.

[snip]

I don't see any way of getting through to you on this point.

Rowland.

-- 
Remove the animal for email address: rowland.mcdonnell@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
                                            Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org
                            http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker?   Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking