An error was unable to be described usefully



  • I got handed a huge-ass .tar.gz file today, and since we run Windows computers here (and our terrible French IT morons apparently decided to stop including WinZip on them), I had to download another program to decompress the files: the ass-tacular 7-zip. So named because it's represented on all 7 levels of hell.

    Anyway, our French IT morons also decided it would be a good idea to put the entire user profile on a network drive-- including the local temp folder! (Thus utterly missing the point of having a local temp folder in the first place!) So I had to dive into 7-zip options to change the temp folder location. Thankfully, it has that option, unfortunately, changing it gives me this:

    The error message reads: "An event was unable to invoke any of the subscribers". It raises a few questions:
    1. What event was it?
    2. What is an event, anyway?
    3. What subscribers failed to be invoked?
    4. What is a subscriber?
    5. What does "to invoke" mean in this context?
    6. Clicking the OK button twice made the error go away... was the setting saved? (Note: now I can answer this one now. The radio button was saved, but the setting was not-- now the program lies to me about what temporary folder it uses.)
    7. Why isn't there a period?
    8. Why is this program such a piece of shit?
    9. Fuck it, I'll just download untar and use the shittier-yet-in-this-case-easier-to-use CLI version.

    Edit: Bonus! I just noticed the GUI's unpacked size is off by a factor of 10!

    Edit: Bonus number 2! When using drag-and-drop to decompress a file, the GUI completely siezes up during the entire operation-- this operation takes several minutes for a 38 GB file. Oh, and since it doesn't report back to Explorer on the whole drag&drop thing, it freezes up poor Explorer also!



  • TRWTF is .tar.gz.  Seriously.  WTF!  The .zip file format has existed for more than 20 years and Windows has been able to handle zip files for almost 10 years.  There really is no excuse for anyone, regardless of their OS, to be using some bullshit like .tar.gz.

     

    Oh wait.  They're French.  Never mind.

     



  • I'm afraid I can't help with any of your very valid questions or complaints.  I would say that the error message...

    @Error Message said:

    An event was unable to invoke any of the subscribers
     

    ...sounds very much like a cryptic crossword clue.



  • @El_Heffe said:

    TRWTF is .tar.gz.  Seriously.  WTF!  The .zip file format has existed for more than 20 years and Windows has been able to handle zip files for almost 10 years.  There really is no excuse for anyone, regardless of their OS, to be using some bullshit like .tar.gz.

     

    Oh wait.  They're French.  Never mind.

     

    It actually comes from a popular Adobe web analytics product. The worst part is once it's extracted, I already know the format will be shit-- it's supposed to be tsv, but it includes text fields with tabs and carriage returns. So the next step is to run Awk and trim out every row without the correct number of columns.

    And I had so much other, more interesting, stuff to work on tomorrow. Now I'm going to be wasting my time on this crap.



  • .tar preserves permissions, .zip doesn't



  • @Kazan said:

    .tar preserves permissions, .zip doesn't

    And yet, this is a dump of .tsv files, and so that doesn't matter.

    Anyway, the CLI tool did the job fine. It's just a pain to use. But a decent CLI program is still better than a totally-shitty GUI program.



  • 7zip's usually pretty good, rely on it a lot here for making compressed archives of work (because most of it is incremental saves, etc.) and extracting your general rar/etc. files. Can't say I've ever had an error message from it. I wouldn't be surprised if, judging by your tales of the IT staff, the install has been horrifically mangled like the Adobe suite is where I am. They MUST be launched via their custom shortcuts, otherwise they tend to take your entire session with them when they crash 30 seconds after starting up.



  • @nexekho said:

    7zip's usually pretty good, rely on it a lot here for making compressed archives of work (because most of it is incremental saves, etc.) and extracting your general rar/etc. files. Can't say I've ever had an error message from it. I wouldn't be surprised if, judging by your tales of the IT staff, the install has been horrifically mangled like the Adobe suite is where I am. They MUST be launched via their custom shortcuts, otherwise they tend to take your entire session with them when they crash 30 seconds after starting up.

    The bar for "pretty good" lowers another few notches.

    BTW, I installed it myself. As if I'd let the Frenchies touch my computer! They've already screwed up enough.



  • I think I've got to agree with nexekho - I've been using 7zip for a good 6 or 7 years with no issues whatsoever. It seems more like there is something in your Windows install (blame your IT if you like) related to the shell integration.

    By the way, those errors about events and nothing able to invoke it are your clue. Yes, it's cryptic, but suspect it's telling you that 7zip is trying to either set up or use an 'event' that is related to shell hooks, and that hook cannot be created.

    I will grant you, though, that displaying a check box to indicate "this is applied" when it's not really applied is a bug. A bug associated with a really strange corner case of usage, but a bug nonetheless.

    CS strikes again... why doesn't it give some kind of indication if the edit box is HTML versus one that automatically generates <p> tags?



  •  cygwin will solve all your problems. I believe tar and gzip and selected by default.



  • @too_many_usernames said:

    I think I've got to agree with nexekho - I've been using 7zip for a good 6 or 7 years with no issues whatsoever.

    No issues? Just LOOK at it. It has an eye-searingly terrible UI. Jesus, what does a program have to look/behave like to be declared "bad" to you people? Raise your standards!

    @too_many_usernames said:

    It seems more like there is something in your Windows install (blame your IT if you like) related to the shell integration.

    Due to their weird way of mapping user profiles, my desktop is on a network drive-- that throws some programs which are poorly-written. Either way, having an error is one thing, presenting a dialog like that to the end-user is something entirely different.

    @too_many_usernames said:

    By the way, those errors about events and nothing able to invoke it are your clue. Yes, it's cryptic, but suspect it's telling you that 7zip is trying to either set up or use an 'event' that is related to shell hooks, and that hook cannot be created.

    Annnnnnd...? Your explanation is no more useful than the dialog. So what does that mean? What went wrong? How do I fix it? How do I prevent it from happening again?

    Remember, it's showing this to an end-user, not a developer!

    (Although I would assume a developer would be equally perplexed, since it drops things like "an event" and "subscribers" without actually telling us *which* event causes the problem for *which* subscribers. Even if I knew the terminology, this error message would be useless for actually fixing the problem.)



  • @trwww said:

     cygwin will solve all your problems. I believe tar and gzip and selected by default.

    I just download the Windows-compiled tools as I need them. Gnutar and Gawk so far. If it needs to be repeatable, once I figure out how to massage the data, I'll probably whip-up a quick and dirty C# program to do it.



  •  I tried to use 7-Zip to add some files to a .jar archive  once and not only did it not add my files, it deleted every other file that was in there. Other than that, I haven't had any significant problems with it.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    the ass-tacular 7-zip
     

    7-zip is my compression program of choice.

    I was once at a customer premeses and had to create a zip file (about 1.5GB of different sized files). We started it  with Explorer but after 10 minutes of it chugging I thought we had to do something better.

    So I copied the files to a USB stick, booted up my (starting to get old) laptop, and ran 7-zip on the files back onto the stick. Explorer was still adding files to the original file.

    @blakeyrat said:

    8. Why is this program such a piece of shit?

     Google seems to suggest the error comes from a COM component in the .Net framework. So...

    @blakeyrat said:

    our French IT morons

    Sounds like TRWTF!

     @blakeyrat said:

    this operation takes several minutes for a 38 GB file

    If it were a zip file that wouldn't even open using native Windows!

     



  • @El_Heffe said:

    TRWTF is .tar.gz.  Seriously.  WTF!
     

    It gets better compression than zip!



  • @Zemm said:

    @blakeyrat said:

    our French IT morons

    Sounds like TRWTF!

    They call themselves "Re:Sources". I'm not joking.

    Could be worse, though. I fully expected Windows XP + IE6 on my new laptop, I was shocked it came with Windows 7 and Office 2010. Once I knew they were upgrading and not downgrading, I had them do my desktop, too... so I'm set.



  • @Zemm said:

    @El_Heffe said:

    TRWTF is .tar.gz.  Seriously.  WTF!
     

    It gets better compression than zip!


    I can go to walmart right now and buy a 16 gig flash drive for 20 dollars or a terrabyte hard drive for 100. Those kinds of arguments don't hold water anymore.



  • @Master Chief said:

    I can go to walmart right now and buy a 16 gig flash drive for 20 dollars or a terrabyte hard drive for 100. Those kinds of arguments don't hold water anymore.
     

    Just because you can, doesn't mean everyone can. And compression is more for transportation than storage. The fatest Internet upload speed we can get in our office is 384kbps, which is about 140MB an hour. If a file is 2GB smaller using a tarball instead of a zip it will save half a day!

    (Though I checked, around here a 1TB drive is $59 and 2TB for $99 - the Flash drives are slightly more expensive than yours) It can be quicker to drive to the store, buy the drive, copy data onto it, and courier it to the destination than to upload it over the Internet.



  • @Zemm said:

    @Master Chief said:

    I can go to walmart right now and buy a 16 gig flash drive for 20 dollars or a terrabyte hard drive for 100. Those kinds of arguments don't hold water anymore.
     

    Just because you can, doesn't mean everyone can. And compression is more for transportation than storage. The fatest Internet upload speed we can get in our office is 384kbps, which is about 140MB an hour. If a file is 2GB smaller using a tarball instead of a zip it will save half a day!

    Either you're really in the boonies, or your company is cheap as hell. Or both. Run some fiber in. You having a shitty connection isn't an excuse for inconveniencing everybody else.

    The real point isn't the space savings-- ok, gzip or rar or 7zip or whatever is smaller, you win the cookie, whatever-- the point is that you're being a jackass by ignoring the technology everybody already has installed and making them go out and get something else entirely, just to read your precious data. And it doesn't help that the only app with a non-shitty GUI that does gzip is WinZip. Which costs money.

    Social factors are always more important than technological factors. Always. Don't be a dick.



  • @trwww said:

     cygwin will solve all your problems. I believe tar and gzip and selected by default.

    +1

    Our IT frogs, although not French, give everyone WinZip (a horrible program, which regularly causes filename too long errors, after which it fraks up completely), and save the data we get on a minute base from other parties as zip files on a server, where each file is one day of data. Such an archive typically contains 10k files, and recently one of my colleagues had to get a whole year of data for just one of the items archived. So that would mean opening 365 files, and extract 1440 files from each of them. And the network is sloooowwww. Opening a largish zip file can take half a minute.

    Can you imagine how long your wrist would have to recover after doing that? I've got cygwin on my machine, so I wrote a quick loop in bash using unzip and some awk stuff, and the whole thing was limited to 10 minutes of manual labor.

    When your personal purgatorium is called Windows, Cygwin brings the light!



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Either you're really in the boonies, or your company is cheap as hell. Or both
     

    We are in the broadband black hole which is the Gold Coast. We have attempted connection with several companies and none of them are able to provide anything past 8000/384 ADSL, and even that is congested. It's either that or a 3G-based wireless connection (much the same speed, and more expensive)

    @blakeyrat said:

    Run some fiber in.

    That is coming in the next few years (The National Broadband Network) Here's hoping it is as good as it promises to be!

     Besides, gzip is more common on unix-based computers than zip. The Mac OSX can open .tar.gz without problems, just from the Finder.

    For the record, we do usually upload zip files for "normal" people. 7-zip is much faster than Explorer, and Mac Finder adds extra crap into it. (I usually .tar.zip when it is going to be opened on a unix-based OS - i have both a Mac and a PC on my desk at work and use Ubuntu on my netbook) 



  • @Zemm said:

    @blakeyrat said:

    our French IT morons

    Sounds like TRWTF!

    What a wisdom ! I'm really impressed.

    That's this kind of reasonning that makes the difference between French morons (like me) and bright english/american geniuses like you... thanks for the light you bring on our land of cluelessness and shadows...

     

     Seriously blakey... your stubborn venting is really entertaining for us here, please don't stop. I've gathered some yummy yummy trollfood for you in the tags, help yourself !


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @TGV said:

    recently one of my colleagues had to get a whole year of data for just one of the items archived. So that would mean opening 365 files, and extract 1440 files from each of them.
    Should give them 42.zip for a laugh.



  • @PJH said:

    @TGV said:
    recently one of my colleagues had to get a whole year of data for just one of the items archived. So that would mean opening 365 files, and extract 1440 files from each of them.
    Should give them 42.zip for a laugh.

    Cute, but I'm afraid they wouldn't even notice, let alone get the meaning of the number. I mean, these are people that have almost no idea of the meaning of systems administration, let alone the meaning of life, the universe and everything. Ok, that was cheap, but sys administration in my company mainly consists of blocking developers out of production systems.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @TGV said:

    @PJH said:

    @TGV said:
    recently one of my colleagues had to get a whole year of data for just one of the items archived. So that would mean opening 365 files, and extract 1440 files from each of them.
    Should give them 42.zip for a laugh.

    Cute, but I'm afraid they wouldn't even notice, let alone get the meaning of the number. I mean, these are people that have almost no idea of the meaning of systems administration, let alone the meaning of life, the universe and everything.

    It's not[another] a Mr. Adams sort of '42'. (Though the name might have come from that - I've no idea on the etymology of the filename and pikiweedia is light on the subject.)



  • @TGV said:

    Our IT frogs, although not French, give everyone WinZip (a horrible program, which regularly causes filename too long errors, after which it fraks up completely), and save the data we get on a minute base from other parties as zip files on a server, where each file is one day of data. Such an archive typically contains 10k files, and recently one of my colleagues had to get a whole year of data for just one of the items archived. So that would mean opening 365 files, and extract 1440 files from each of them. And the network is sloooowwww. Opening a largish zip file can take half a minute.

    Can you imagine how long your wrist would have to recover after doing that? I've got cygwin on my machine, so I wrote a quick loop in bash using unzip and some awk stuff, and the whole thing was limited to 10 minutes of manual labor.

    Right-click allyeardata.zip, "WinZip" - "Extract to allyeardata/" (or whatever, I don't remember WinZip's exact lines), wait, go to allyeardata/, ctrl+a, right-click, "WinZip" - "Extract to */". I'm pretty sure WinZip (I know 7zip does. Yes, it looks like shit, but it has never failed for me so far. Not like I even see it's actual GUI that much, had that functionality. At very least, it had "extract to here"



  • @Zemm said:

    @Master Chief said:

    I can go to walmart right now and buy a 16 gig flash drive for 20 dollars or a terrabyte hard drive for 100. Those kinds of arguments don't hold water anymore.
     

    Just because you can, doesn't mean everyone can. And compression is more for transportation than storage. The fatest Internet upload speed we can get in our office is 384kbps, which is about 140MB an hour. If a file is 2GB smaller using a tarball instead of a zip it will save half a day!

    (Though I checked, around here a 1TB drive is $59 and 2TB for $99 - the Flash drives are slightly more expensive than yours) It can be quicker to drive to the store, buy the drive, copy data onto it, and courier it to the destination than to upload it over the Internet.

    I will agree on the "save data amounts for transport" any day. Which is why I don't care much for XML files used for transporting data to portable devices. I would often rather build a lean, slick, binary format.

    Regarding getting a drive: Way back, my Communications Theory teacher told us never to underestimate the bandwidth of a truck full of backup tapes. Even when driving for days it can be very high. When using todays much larger disks, I bet the rate from the US east- to the west coast could be staggering.



  • There are people out there who PREFER Winzip's UI to 7-zip's? Consider my mind boggled. Raise your own standards.



  • 7-zip is an open-source project. If you find a bug, please file it with the dev so it can be fixed and not cause other people issues, instead of ranting about it on TDWTF where Igor Pavlov will never see it.

    7-zip is miles better than WinZip - faster, slicker, supports pretty much every compression format known to man, has one of the best compression algorithms known to man, and more. WinZip's latest and greatest feature is... AES encryption for passwords, which has been its latest featire for years now. WHOOP-DE-DO!



  • @Buzer said:

    Right-click allyeardata.zip, "WinZip" - "Extract to allyeardata/" (or whatever, I don't remember WinZip's exact lines), wait, go to allyeardata/, ctrl+a, right-click, "WinZip" - "Extract to */". I'm pretty sure WinZip (I know 7zip does. Yes, it looks like shit, but it has never failed for me so far. Not like I even see it's actual GUI that much, had that functionality. At very least, it had "extract to here"

    Well, there are 365 zip archives per year (over 12 directories, of course), but you're saying it can extract all these in one go from a network drive to some local drive? Without ending up with 3.650.000 in one directory (because that really kills Windows)? Anyway, they contain way more data than should be re-processed, so they will have to be filtered out by some kind of script.



  • @Zemm said:

    @Master Chief said:

    I can go to walmart right now and buy a 16 gig flash drive for 20 dollars or a terrabyte hard drive for 100. Those kinds of arguments don't hold water anymore.
     

    Just because you can, doesn't mean everyone can. And compression is more for transportation than storage. The fatest Internet upload speed we can get in our office is 384kbps, which is about 140MB an hour. If a file is 2GB smaller using a tarball instead of a zip it will save half a day!

    (Though I checked, around here a 1TB drive is $59 and 2TB for $99 - the Flash drives are slightly more expensive than yours) It can be quicker to drive to the store, buy the drive, copy data onto it, and courier it to the destination than to upload it over the Internet.


    I get 1.5 up and 30 down for $25 a month. Whoever is purchasing your internet access is either scamming you or is a massive idiot.



  • @Master Chief said:

    @Zemm said:

    @Master Chief said:

    I can go to walmart right now and buy a 16 gig flash drive for 20 dollars or a terrabyte hard drive for 100. Those kinds of arguments don't hold water anymore.
     

    Just because you can, doesn't mean everyone can. And compression is more for transportation than storage. The fatest Internet upload speed we can get in our office is 384kbps, which is about 140MB an hour. If a file is 2GB smaller using a tarball instead of a zip it will save half a day!

    (Though I checked, around here a 1TB drive is $59 and 2TB for $99 - the Flash drives are slightly more expensive than yours) It can be quicker to drive to the store, buy the drive, copy data onto it, and courier it to the destination than to upload it over the Internet.


    I get 1.5 up and 30 down for $25 a month. Whoever is purchasing your internet access is either scamming you or is a massive idiot.

    I'm in SA and our office's download/upload speeds are similar to his (2x 4Mb/2x 512KB bonded lines), the bill is well over $200 a month. My home down/up is 384Kb/128Kb which costs me around $70. You yanks and Europeans don't know how good you've got it.



  • @TGV said:

    Well, there are 365 zip archives per year (over 12 directories, of course), but you're saying it can extract all these in one go from a network drive to some local drive? Without ending up with 3.650.000 in one directory (because that really kills Windows)? Anyway, they contain way more data than should be re-processed, so they will have to be filtered out by some kind of script.

    I stand corrected, apparently I remembered wrong (WinZip treats multiple selected zip files like regular files). With 7zip, there is option "extract to */" which creates the folder named after zip's name (-.zip part) & extracts files there. It does that on the current directory, so you need to copy the archive to the local drive first.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    And it doesn't help that the only app with a non-shitty GUI that does gzip is WinZip.

    Do you consider WinRAR shitty?



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Jesus, what does a program have to look/behave like to be declared "bad" to you people? Raise your standards!

    Well, you see, if you have low standards, then most of the software you use is good. If you have high standards, most of it is bad. And I prefer using good software!



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Jesus, what does a program have to look/behave like to be declared "bad" to you people? Raise your standards!

    Err, my thoughts on 7zip, it works, I have never experienced an issue with it.

    Is the GUI shitty?

    Yes the standard for compressor tools GUI is very low, look at the competition.

    Does this bother me?

    No, I don't even use the GUI, at most the contextual menu



  • @El_Heffe said:

    TRWTF is .tar.gz.  Seriously.  WTF!  The .zip file format has existed for more than 20 years and Windows has been able to handle zip files for almost 10 years.  There really is no excuse for anyone, regardless of their OS, to be using some bullshit like .tar.gz.

     

    Oh wait.  They're French.  Never mind.

     

     

    The patents that cover the format Zip uses only recently expired (they were the same ones Unisys was actively suing companies that used the GIF image format over).

    Having said that, I use .tar.gz and .tar.bz2 all the time... on *NIX machines.

    I also use bz2 alone, but that's just because the Source game engine only supports bzip2, so when I compress custom maps for people who play on [url=http://www.ocrtf2.com]my TF2 Servers[/url], I have to use bz2.

     As for using 7z, lets not get into its problems right now, particularly dealing with multi-core processors...



  • @blakeyrat said:

    No issues? Just LOOK at it. It has an eye-searingly terrible UI. Jesus,
    what does a program have to look/behave like to be declared "bad" to you
    people? Raise your standards!

    Could be... I never use the GUI for 7-zip. I just use the shell integration (specifically, the right-click menus). The single dialog that pops up when you want to make an archive is straightforward enough.

     

    Edit: Ah, looks like I'm not the only one with this sentiment, just saw the post from s. above.



  • @kilroo said:

    There are people out there who PREFER Winzip's UI to 7-zip's? Consider my mind boggled. Raise your own standards.

    Well, it does have the advantage of FUCKING WORKING. Also, not lying to me.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    Social factors are always more important than technological factors. Always. Don't be a dick.
     

    Did you suffer from some sort of amnesia or mental fugue between writing the bulk of your dickish comment and this postscript?

    Pot. Kettle. Etc.



  • @The_Assimilator said:

    7-zip is an open-source project. If you find a bug, please file it with the dev so it can be fixed and not cause other people issues, instead of ranting about it on TDWTF where Igor Pavlov will never see it.

    I used to do that. After I put in a couple dozen bugs to open source projects, I realized:

    1) They were never triaged
    2) They were never even fucking READ
    3) Two years later they were inevitably marked "invalid" due to either moving bug tracking systems, or a new major release-- note that they were marked "invalid" without ever being triaged

    So now I no longer submit bugs to open source projects. (With rare exceptions-- browser DOM bugs I report, because fixing them makes my job easier.) It's a waste of my time.

    @The_Assimilator said:

    7-zip is miles better than WinZip - faster, slicker, supports pretty much every compression format known to man, has one of the best compression algorithms known to man, and more. WinZip's latest and greatest feature is... AES encryption for passwords, which has been its latest featire for years now. WHOOP-DE-DO!

    And yet it doesn't fucking work. It's faster! At giving you useless errors. It's slicker! At mis-counting the extracted size of the archive. It supports pretty much every compression format known to man! But you can't actually decompress anything because it's using the wrong temp folder.



  • @Spectre said:

    @blakeyrat said:
    And it doesn't help that the only app with a non-shitty GUI that does gzip is WinZip.

    Do you consider WinRAR shitty?

    It would be unfair of me to answer, since it's been like 3 years since I've used it. It was definitely shitty then, though... in fact, for some reason, compression products are one of the shittier classes of product out there, somewhere between video encoding software and instant messaging software.



  • @Rootbeer said:

    @blakeyrat said:

    Social factors are always more important than technological factors. Always. Don't be a dick.
     

    Did you suffer from some sort of amnesia or mental fugue between writing the bulk of your dickish comment and this postscript?

    Pot. Kettle. Etc.

    I'm not being a dick to anybody except possibly the author of the program. (Who I presume isn't on this forum.)

    I'm certainly being less of a dick than the person who blithely sends a non-zip archive around without caring if the recipient needs additional software to open it or not. Sticks and stones.



  • @powerlord said:

    The patents that cover the format Zip uses only recently expired (they were the same ones Unisys was actively suing companies that used the GIF image format over).

    I beg your pardon? ZIP (and gzip) uses DEFLATE, which has always been patent free. GIF uses LZW.



  • @The_Assimilator said:

    I'm in SA and our office's download/upload speeds are similar to his (2x 4Mb/2x 512KB bonded lines), the bill is well over $200 a month. My home down/up is 384Kb/128Kb which costs me around $70. You yanks and Europeans don't know how good you've got it.


    Yes, living in the prosperous areas of the world does have benefits. You guys should join us.



  • @Master Chief said:

    @The_Assimilator said:

    I'm in SA and our office's download/upload speeds are similar to his (2x 4Mb/2x 512KB bonded lines), the bill is well over $200 a month. My home down/up is 384Kb/128Kb which costs me around $70. You yanks and Europeans don't know how good you've got it.


    Yes, living in the prosperous areas of the world does have benefits. You guys should join us.

    Or attack us with that giant UFO and all those bug aliens just loafing around.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Master Chief said:

    Yes, living in the prosperous areas of the world does have benefits. You guys should join us.
    That's the thing I don't get about Australia. I can't figure out ANY reason why their internet should be so fucking lousy other than overregulation and the laziest telecoms in the world. They all seem civil. Lately I've been frequenting 'The Australia Hours' on the various forums and IRC channels that I frequent, and they certainly don't act like they live in a third world country. They have odd taste in cars and music, but that's just cultural - they're more normal than western europe anyway. Furthermore, they ALL live in cities. If I can get excellent internet in the wilderness shithole that I live in, they sure as hell should be able to pull it off in a city.



  • @Weng said:

    @Master Chief said:

    Yes, living in the prosperous areas of the world does have benefits. You guys should join us.
    That's the thing I don't get about Australia. I can't figure out ANY reason why their internet should be so fucking lousy other than overregulation and the laziest telecoms in the world. They all seem civil. Lately I've been frequenting 'The Australia Hours' on the various forums and IRC channels that I frequent, and they certainly don't act like they live in a third world country. They have odd taste in cars and music, but that's just cultural - they're more normal than western europe anyway. Furthermore, they ALL live in cities. If I can get excellent internet in the wilderness shithole that I live in, they sure as hell should be able to pull it off in a city.

    They ban violent games. Thus, there are no good deathmatch games legal in Australia. Thus, the ISPs see no reason to increase coverage. All Internet growth is due to multiplayer video games, it's a well-made-up fact.

    This might change if/when they get a local version of Netflix, but only if their government doesn't just ban that right away too. They might also have to start banning things like, say, downloading OS patches... those take a lot of bandwidth!



  • @Master Chief said:

    I get 1.5 up and 30 down for $25 a month. Whoever is purchasing your internet access is either scamming you or is a massive idiot.

    Pls send me teh connectionz.



  • @blakeyrat said:

    No issues? Just LOOK at it. It has an eye-searingly terrible UI. Jesus, what does a program have to look/behave like to be declared "bad" to you people? Raise your standards!

    Now that you mention it, the CLI could indeed do with some hot pink to contrast all the gray and black.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.