Eaglemode: ZUI (Zoomable User Interface)

PorteuX - The Next Experience. It's inspired by Slax and Porteus but with heaps of improvements
Vic
Samurai
Samurai
Posts: 122
Joined: 10 Aug 2016, 05:36
Distribution: Porteux V-0.1 64 KDE
Location: Utopia in Tampa, Florida, USA

Eaglemode: ZUI (Zoomable User Interface)

Post#16 by Vic » 08 Sep 2023, 01:39

I use Porteux KDE with no dep problems. Also root user if that makes a difference.

No beep sound for me either but as I am not interested in the alarm I did not check it. Probably more things to find not working to come.

I focused on what I wanted and was able to change. The dev made it difficult to do global changes, so many different aspects for sections that look the same. Frustrating but I am happy with my results.

I do not see a picture from abload just weird text.

Vic

User avatar
Rava
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5416
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 02:46
Distribution: XFCE 5.01 x86_64 + 4.0 i586
Location: Forests of Germany

Eaglemode: ZUI (Zoomable User Interface)

Post#17 by Rava » 08 Sep 2023, 01:48

Vic wrote:
08 Sep 2023, 01:39
I do not see a picture from abload just weird text.
I removed the img tags when quoting myself but the images are all viewable in the original post.
Cheers!
Yours Rava

Vic
Samurai
Samurai
Posts: 122
Joined: 10 Aug 2016, 05:36
Distribution: Porteux V-0.1 64 KDE
Location: Utopia in Tampa, Florida, USA

Eaglemode: ZUI (Zoomable User Interface)

Post#18 by Vic » 08 Sep 2023, 02:01

Hi Rava

For your earlier question, to pan the view hold down the middle button ( scroll ) and move the mouse. Also you can stick the cursor to not move when panning, just change the setting over at the far left top.

Vic

donald
Full of knowledge
Full of knowledge
Posts: 2073
Joined: 17 Jun 2013, 13:17
Distribution: Porteus 3.2.2 XFCE 32bit
Location: Germany

Eaglemode: ZUI (Zoomable User Interface)

Post#19 by donald » 09 Sep 2023, 10:08

Rava wrote:
08 Sep 2023, 01:48
Vic wrote:
08 Sep 2023, 01:39
I do not see a picture from abload just weird text.
I removed the img tags when quoting myself but the images are all viewable in the original post.
@Rava
-->..the images are all viewable..<--Nope.
This is what I see:
Image

...and yes, I can view webp images (normally)
Example - from this link:
https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/gallery1

EDIT
To be more precise:
No picture at all in your post -- only the word 'Image'
I found the link to the image (abload) in the page source.

User avatar
Rava
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5416
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 02:46
Distribution: XFCE 5.01 x86_64 + 4.0 i586
Location: Forests of Germany

Eaglemode: ZUI (Zoomable User Interface)

Post#20 by Rava » 09 Sep 2023, 10:54

donald wrote:
09 Sep 2023, 10:08
@Rava
-->..the images are all viewable..<--Nope.
This is what I see:
Image
Indeed.

I was the one making the request to add webp.
seems they missed setting the server-side MIME type to image/webp (I presume it is just "data")

Here is an unrelated image the same way, just a JPEG:
https://abload.de/img/1ad2845b63379768d2c02i8kha.jpg
and it works as it should.

I think I have to tell the aboad.de crew that they please fix that issue with webp hosting.

Added in 8 minutes 35 seconds:
I just wrote them a Support ticket about the issue. :)
Cheers!
Yours Rava

Vic
Samurai
Samurai
Posts: 122
Joined: 10 Aug 2016, 05:36
Distribution: Porteux V-0.1 64 KDE
Location: Utopia in Tampa, Florida, USA

Eaglemode: ZUI (Zoomable User Interface)

Post#21 by Vic » 09 Sep 2023, 12:59

Also from this link https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/gallery1 the webp images do not have the common .jpg distortion.

User avatar
Rava
Contributor
Contributor
Posts: 5416
Joined: 11 Jan 2011, 02:46
Distribution: XFCE 5.01 x86_64 + 4.0 i586
Location: Forests of Germany

Eaglemode: ZUI (Zoomable User Interface)

Post#22 by Rava » 09 Sep 2023, 15:16

Vic wrote:
09 Sep 2023, 12:59
Also from this link https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/gallery1 the webp images do not have the common .jpg distortion.
Indeed, webp is a very modern file type, and it was not developed by google (they bought it later, though, but kept it a free and open standard)
The page you linked gives a good comparison, you either get smaller files with similar compression, or better quality with same file size.
For those too lazy to click the link given by Vic: the site claims this:
Overall, the resulting WebP files provided a global saving of 32% compared to the JPEG file sizes.

Note that the WebP thumbnails used on this page are also smaller by 26% compared to their JPEG equivalent.
Cheers!
Yours Rava

Post Reply