Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: tc-list Hanson's Catalogue of NT Papyri & Codices

Expand Messages
  • Dave Washburn
    ... I have to agree with Bob Waltz: this page is much too large. I contacted Prof. Hanson about it, telling him that I took the liberty of dividing it up and
    Message 1 of 9 , Aug 5, 1998
    • 0 Attachment
      > K. C. Hanson has set up a "Catalogue of New Testament Papyri & Codices 2nd -
      > 10th Centuries". It looks good and has links to other resources. It can be
      > found at:
      >
      > http://www.stolaf.edu/people/kchanson/papyri.html

      I have to agree with Bob Waltz: this page is much too large. I
      contacted Prof. Hanson about it, telling him that I took the
      liberty of dividing it up and offering to send the results to him.
      Here is his response:
      --
      Thanks for your note. I am leaving on a business trip, but I will
      try to attend to it late next week. Thanks for the offer to send it to me,
      but I can break it up without much hassle.
      --

      So hopefully, it will soon be in a form that is more manageable for
      those of us who pay by the hour for our Net connections.
      Dave Washburn
      http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
      When in doubt, go for chocolate. Life is too short
      not to.
    • PMoore4733@aol.com
      I am running windows 98 with a 486 board upgraded to a 586 (at 133 MH). I have the pages loaded in a matter of seconds! I have only about 20 meg. on board
      Message 2 of 9 , Aug 5, 1998
      • 0 Attachment
        I am running windows 98 with a 486 board upgraded to a 586 (at 133 MH). I
        have the pages loaded in a matter of seconds! I have only about 20 meg. on
        board memory. America Online is my provider.....

        I think the site is great......


        Paul Moore
      • Jim West
        ... I m with Paul. I use a 266 mhz processor with a 586 chip; and a 56K modem- and have no trouble whatever with K.C. s page. It loads quick- and the whole
        Message 3 of 9 , Aug 5, 1998
        • 0 Attachment
          At 04:36 PM 8/5/98 -0400, you wrote:
          >I am running windows 98 with a 486 board upgraded to a 586 (at 133 MH). I
          >have the pages loaded in a matter of seconds! I have only about 20 meg. on
          >board memory. America Online is my provider.....
          >
          >I think the site is great......
          >
          >
          >Paul Moore

          I'm with Paul. I use a 266 mhz processor with a 586 chip; and a 56K modem-
          and have no trouble whatever with K.C.'s page. It loads quick- and the
          whole thing is one of the better, and more useful, web pages.


          Jim

          ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
          Jim West, ThD
          Adjunct Professor of Bible
          Quartz Hill School of Theology

          jwest@...
        • Robert B. Waltz
          ... What are you looking for, praise or sympathy? If the site loads speedily, it s because you have it cached. Purge your browser cache, *then* see how fast it
          Message 4 of 9 , Aug 5, 1998
          • 0 Attachment
            On Wed, 5 Aug 1998, PMoore4733@... wrote:

            >I am running windows 98 with a 486 board upgraded to a 586 (at 133 MH). I
            >have the pages loaded in a matter of seconds! I have only about 20 meg. on
            >board memory. America Online is my provider.....

            What are you looking for, praise or sympathy?

            If the site loads speedily, it's because you have it cached. Purge your
            browser cache, *then* see how fast it loads. Your computer has very
            little to do with the loading speed. The controlling factor, in all
            but the most unusual cases (e.g. java), is how fast you can receive the
            data. If you have a fast modem and a good connection, it will load
            quickly. But the whole problem of the Internet is that people frequently
            can't get good connections. I can't, and I'm actually in the same state
            as the site.

            If it works for you, that's fine. The point is, its design philosophy
            *will* make it difficult for some people to use. Especially those
            whose internet connections take a long path to it (typical examples
            are those who are overseas, or those whose suppliers don't have
            enough bandwidth because their local phone company insists on
            using its cables for its own use. I fall into the latter category,
            I believe.)

            >I think the site is great......

            For the most part, so do I; the fact that it takes forever is not
            relevant to that. I merely pointed it out for those who do have
            slow connections. But my basic problem lies with the textual
            classification of the papyri. I don't expect the catalogue compilers to
            read what I've done :-), but they could at least read Zuntz....


            -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-

            Robert B. Waltz
            waltzmn@...

            Want more loudmouthed opinions about textual criticism?
            Try my web page: http://www.skypoint.com/~waltzmn
            (A site inspired by the Encyclopedia of NT Textual Criticism)
          • PMoore4733@aol.com
            In a message dated 8/5/98 5:33:20 PM Central Daylight Time, waltzmn@skypoint.com writes:
            Message 5 of 9 , Aug 5, 1998
            • 0 Attachment
              In a message dated 8/5/98 5:33:20 PM Central Daylight Time,
              waltzmn@... writes:

              << f the site loads speedily, it's because you have it cached. Purge your
              browser cache, >>

              Actually, it loaded fast the first time I used it! ?????

              Paul James Moore
              ______________
              ThD New Testament Greek
              Midwestern State University (CE)
              Wichita Falls, Texas
            • Robert B. Waltz
              ... Well, maybe your standard of fast differs from mine. To me, a page is fast if it loads in ten seconds or less. (Yes, that means that the majority of
              Message 6 of 9 , Aug 5, 1998
              • 0 Attachment
                On Wed, 5 Aug 1998, PMoore4733@... wrote:

                >In a message dated 8/5/98 5:33:20 PM Central Daylight Time,
                >waltzmn@... writes:
                >
                ><< f the site loads speedily, it's because you have it cached. Purge your
                > browser cache, >>
                >
                >Actually, it loaded fast the first time I used it! ?????

                Well, maybe your standard of "fast" differs from mine. To me, a page
                is fast if it loads in ten seconds or less. (Yes, that means that the
                majority of pages out there are slow. :-) Given that the page as I
                loaded it included a 137K graphic, it *cannot* load in ten seconds,
                unless you have a T1 line or the like.

                Still, if you're satisfied, that's fine. You must have a better
                local phone network than we do here in Minnesota. It took me about
                five minutes to load the page.

                But, again and again, I urge my main point: Don't trust the
                classification of the papyri. As an online catalog, it's
                wonderful; Munster should have done this years ago. But the
                textual determinations are unreliable.

                Bob Waltz
                waltzmn@...

                "The one thing we learn from history --
                is that no one ever learns from history."
              • Dave Washburn
                ... You fellows must have caught it on a good day. I run a 233 mHz with 64 meg of RAM and a 56K modem, and it has taken a good two minutes every time I ve
                Message 7 of 9 , Aug 5, 1998
                • 0 Attachment
                  > At 04:36 PM 8/5/98 -0400, you wrote:
                  > >I am running windows 98 with a 486 board upgraded to a 586 (at 133 MH). I
                  > >have the pages loaded in a matter of seconds! I have only about 20 meg. on
                  > >board memory. America Online is my provider.....
                  > >
                  > >I think the site is great......
                  > >
                  > >
                  > >Paul Moore
                  >
                  > I'm with Paul. I use a 266 mhz processor with a 586 chip; and a 56K modem-
                  > and have no trouble whatever with K.C.'s page. It loads quick- and the
                  > whole thing is one of the better, and more useful, web pages.
                  >
                  >
                  > Jim

                  You fellows must have caught it on a good day. I run a 233 mHz with
                  64 meg of RAM and a 56K modem, and it has taken a good two minutes
                  every time I've gone to it. I agree, though, that the end result is
                  a very useful page.
                  Dave Washburn
                  http://www.nyx.net/~dwashbur
                  When in doubt, go for chocolate. Life is too short
                  not to.
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.