14 Dec
2005
14 Dec
'05
11:41 a.m.
Pete Turnbull wrote:
On Dec 14 2005, 0:58, Jules Richardson wrote:
Oh sure, they still broke it as compared to the old interface - presumably in
an attempt to appeal to the morons out there who can't think beyond the
concept of a web forum :)
Browsing the archive is much harder than it used to be, but at least the data
*is* there in an unmasked form, which was the bit I was most concerned about.
One day in a museum capacity I might approach them to see if I can get a copy
of the raw archive data for some relevant computing groups (for the purposes
of a local rather than online archive, to avoid anyone getting worried about
competition). I'd be interesting to see whether they have a "defend our
assets" big-business attitude or a "sure, we're doing this as an important
archival tool" one... (or something inbetween)
(incidentally out of habit I still type www.deja.com to get to the groups
interface :-)
cheers
Jules
wow, no I hadn't. They make that rather
obscure!
I only discovered it recently. I'd almost given up using it, for all
the reaons you gave. As I see it, Google itself is easy to use, gives
you the information you want by and large, in a sensible presentation.
Google Groups doesn't fare well by comparison, so I use it
infrequently.
well, I stand corrected. I might have to start
liking Google again :)
I wouldn't go that far :-) I said it "mostly" works. And the
interface and layout still sucks.