Things I Would Like To See Changed in V6

[thwartme]

Hello,

Currently using 6.10 Build 1339.

There are four types of behaviour which I believe worked better in V5 than in V6, and I'd love to see them integrated into the newer version, if possible.

A) Partial Sorting of a download list. In V5, I used to be able to select certain posts and when I hit the column header in the download list (like 'filename' or 'date') it would sort just the selected posts by that criteria. Now, it sorts the entire list every time, no matter what is selected. I would really like to be able to partially sort the download list again.

B) Par2 files jumping to the top of the queue. I am currently downloading a rather large list of things, over 300 posts. I went away for a while, and when I came back to check, Newsbin had downloaded 40 of the complete files, was working on the 41st, and had pre-downloaded seventy (70!) little par2 files for upcoming posts. Why work ahead like this? What's the point of setting a download order if Newsbin is just going to jump ahead and grab all these little files ahead of time? Also, if I decided later on to set a new download path for these, I'd still have to leave all those little par2 files where they are until the full file downloaded, which is majorly annoying. In V5, I think there was an option to turn this par2 queue jumping off.

C) Download order not always respected. Occasionally, Newsbin seems to ignore files at the top of the download queue in favour of other files farther down. I'm sorry I don't have more details on this, I'm not sure why it happens sometimes and not others. But occasionally - especially if I've left it running and come back hours later - I'll notice that the files at the top of the queue are still sitting untouched (or perhaps with just the par2 downloaded) and that Newsbin has started somewhere in the middle of the list and worked it's way down from there. Never saw this in V5.

D) Marking sets as duplicates, instead of individual files. I've mentioned this here before. In V5, if I downloaded a set of files, say r01 to r10 of a set, and then later added an nzb which has those same files in it, but also more, say an additional set of pars, Newsbin would check each file against a duplicate log, and download the new ones (the pars, in this example) and fail the others (the rars) as duplicates. In V6, Newsbin finds the first file to be a duplicate, and fails the whole set. I don't get my pars. I know there are workarounds for this (loading them in a post list, selecting just the files you want, using 'bypass', adjusting the 'duplicate' settings, etc) but my point is that in V5 I didn't need a workaround, it just worked.

Anyway, Newsbin is still the best darn Usenet Downloader there is. But I think it could be even better...

Thanks,
thwartme

[Ace]

Hello,
B) ... I think there was an option to turn this par2 queue jumping off.

There was? What option was that? I wasn't aware of such an option (which doesn't mean it's not there!), but without the option you're talking about, Version 6 has been better in this regard for me than version 5 was.

D) Marking sets as duplicates, instead of individual files. I know there are workarounds for this (loading them in a post list, selecting just the files you want, ....[/quote]Of your 4 items, this is the only one where I also noticed v5 was slightly better in this regard. However it's a rare enough problem for me that selecting just the files I want wasn't a problem. Since version 6 deals with the compact view by default, I think Quade mentioned that dealing with individual headers like in v5 would make v6 a lot slower, or something like that. So it sounds like a trade-off, extra speed for a little less convenience? For me, the tradeoff is a good one so far, because i like the extra speed, and I don't need to manually select the files very often.

[astrax]

hi,
issues A) and B) have been bugging me also quite recently.

I always found it super convenient to be able, to sort certain files how you wanted, no matter in which order they were posted.

[ozzie]

Issue (A) drives me nuts!
I used to sort like that all the time, would like it back too...

[Quade]

I've never seen C without a good reason. The question might be, how many servers do you have.

I can look into adding A back in.

As for B, autopar works best if the par downloads first so, when you download and the pars aren't combines with the files, it'll move them, up and try to get the small pars out of the way. I already have on my todo list to try to see if the download list is re-ordering the pars on restart. Just keep in mind, if you manually order the pars below the files, autopar might not cleanup properly when it's done.

[astrax]

Another thing just came to mind: the selection of posts via CTRL key. Right now it's not possible to select single posts with CTRL+click and then add more via click+drag, which was possible before. And is quite handy IMO.

[AKo]

Quade, I know you put in a lot of effort into Newzbin development and want to make it as good as it possibly can be. I appreciate that, but v6 has some forms of behaviour that make me really upset. So much so that, at this point, I find it nearly impossible to see the good aspects that, doubtlessly, are part of the new version too. So my comments below could easily make forget how I appreciate your work because they seem to focus solely on the negative. I'm just writing this so you don't get the wrong impression, as I can't hide how extremely disappointed I am at this point right now. Just wanted to insert this to establish the context of my appreciation for your work and avoid creating an all negative impression .But in the attempt to do things as best as one can think of, on may sometimes take the trees of specific features for the forest, which should be a good user experience. And autopar is just a tree. Okay, context established, so here are the nuts and bolts of my frustration:

A and B are extremely important to me. I've spend the best part of a night nicely sorting download destinations, routing it to folders suitable to me, but Newzbin has no respect any more for such user input these days. Without even notifying the user, it simply reverts download locations behind a users back to what it thinks serves autopar better than what the user has in mind. This happened a couple of times before I realized what was happening, and I lost more than five hours of work routing my downloads this way. I could have verified all those pars manually and still saved hours compared to Newzbin insisting on doing it differently. Plus, in the cases where files hadn't been downloaded yet and there was still a chance to undo the harm, I needed to re-do all the same folder assignments, making sure this time that all files were downloaded before Newzbin got another chance to revert the locations. As it stands, v6 behaviour sets up user against application in a war of wits. You can't just put in your intentions but you've got to understand what Newsbin intends to do and how it goes about undoing your input behind your back; then you need to find ways to prevent that from happening.. The code's disrespect for the way I like to work with Usenet files and manage my downloads and how it nullifies and disposes of the time and effort I've put in to make things happen my way has been infuriating.


Another thing that made me angry was that I spend a whole night and then several hours on several other days customizing the interface. The ability to define ones' own keyboard shortcut and tailor suit aspects of the user interface is, in theory, very welcome. I always appreciate and like to make use of this type of flexibility in programs I use a lot, and, given the choice between two programs of equal functionality, I'll always chose the one that offers me more customisation options. So the improved interface customisation in v6 was very welcome, but then.... A first damper on my enthusiasm was that the decision which screens have tabs on top and which ones are below was hardwired (mostly turned upside down compared to v5 that had a more intuitive division, in my perception).

But that was only a minor damper compared to what happened today. On running the update to v6.20, setup tells me there have been changes to, can't remember, the menus or toolbars, and offers me the option to switch back to default. Because I was aware, from other programs, that changes to the default interface might upset my own customizations and that there might be compatibility issues, I selected "yes". But the intention in mind was, of course, to switch back to my custom interface once I had ascertained I could do so without trouble. Far too much work had gone into it to just throw all changes away. But now I can't find an easy way to get my changes back, and it looks as if another 20 hours of effort has, indeed, been lost for nothing. I hope there is a way to get my changes back though, if not the option to revert the interface should not have been offered in the first place. Or, it should only have been proposed if there had been a clear necessity and only with full instructions on how to first back up any changes one has made earlier. Now I'm left in limbo and the only way to find out if I can get my interface back is to request for support.. This is another example how user input is not considered and respected but treated as if it was nothing, simply to be thrown overboard at the first chance. I have to admit, this kind of behaviour ,in both mentioned instances, has started to make me hate the new version deeply. If I had the power to turn back time and never upgrade to v6, thus avoiding to spend nearly two days in activities that the new version simply reverts as if nothing had been done, I gladly would. This has got to be the most frustrating upgrade of my life.

I'd be willing to continue with v6 if issue B got fixed and if there was a way to get my interface customizations back (anything short of a using Acronis Echo Workstation for a complete system restore which would see me loose other changes to the system). But if either of these are unlikely, I'm actually more interested reverting back to v5, ideally without loosing my signature database and downloaded headers. I still have the nbi file I used before the upgrade, so that might help to get most other settings back to what they were.
much data.

Even though I'm thoroughly disappointed now and most certainly lost to seeing a value in staying upgraded, I'd still recommend that the program behaviour gets changed, in the interest of future users. Newzbin can't just go on and simply kick out, delete and neutralize user effort to suite its needs without seriously pissing off potential users who will lose their input. The least would be to fess up and acknowledge what it does, perhaps by means of a pop-up message: Newsbin speaking, "I've just deleted your custom paths that took you ages [amount of minutes, hours] to set up. Don't do custom paths if there are pars, they'll get deleted at the earliest opportunity".

This behaviour would still piss off users, clearly, but at least they'd quickly learn the rules of the game. And when customizing the GUI, there should be a warning that they might be incompatible with future interface changes and that, on future upgrades, on will be asked to destroy those changes and that they can then easily be lost in the blink of an eye. This will piss of others without doubt, but at least in an honest way. Anyway, no need to worry much because very little of such user frustration will probably spill over into this forum, as, from the impression I get, very few users seem to take the trouble and express this type of frustration (the other explanation, that I'm the only one using these options might be convenient to consider but is highly unlikely)..

Originally, prior to all this frustration, I had intended to give other feedback, at some point, regarding various aspects of v6, in the attempt to try and help improve it. There are still quite a few glitches and issues in this early stage of development that can easily be found and reported. But I'm already tired from all the wasted effort that has resulted from simply using the new version and, as a result, I'm tired of it before I could even start.

(Well, just from the top of my head, let me point at least in one direction. I found quite a few easily detectable errors that can easily be mended in the filters section. I've already corrected my own filters, so I can't actually refer to the situation after a fresh installation, but here are just two examples I seem to remember. Names of filters have been mixed up - like, if I remember right, the "RAR archives" and "Comics" filters. A second example are incorrect extensions, for example in the ebook filter (there's "djvu" and "djv" extensions, but no "divyu").But there is more to be found in this and other places.)

And so sorry for again making this such a looooong message. Less is more, but the Inability to keep things short and sweet is a serious shortcoming of mine; in spite of best intentions to improve, I regularly fail. Sorry again.

[DThor]

You've already pegged it, but seriously, if you desire change, the most effective way is to make your requests clearly and succinctly. You're asking a lot of someone to put aside the time to read all that. You might even even have some good ideas in there, who knows?

DT

[Quade]

A is already in 6.2.

As for B. How far Newsbin "looks ahead" in the download list is a function of how many connections you have. When one set of files completes, the only thing downloadable at that point is the first par of each following set. If you have 40 connections, you'll end up with 40 pars. It's something I can think about. There's a balance between keeping all the connections active and looking ahead. If you want to keep all the connections alive, you need to be able to look ahead.

I'll have to think about B.


I don't understand the comment about setting paths and autopar not respecting them. When I set an unrar path that's what it seems to use. If you have a specific example of it not working and how to reproduce it. Let me know and I'll try.

But that was only a minor damper compared to what happened today. On running the update to v6.20, setup tells me there have been changes to, can't remember, the menus or toolbars, and offers me the option to switch back to default. Because I was aware, from other programs, that changes to the default interface might upset my own customizations and that there might be compatibility issues, I selected "yes". But the intention in mind was, of course, to switch back to my custom interface once I had ascertained I could do so without trouble. Far too much work had gone into it to just throw all changes away. But now I can't find an easy way to get my changes back, and it looks as if another 20 hours of effort has, indeed, been lost for nothing. I hope there is a way to get my changes back though, if not the option to revert the interface should not have been offered in the first place. Or, it should only have been proposed if there had been a clear necessity and only with full instructions on how to first back up any changes one has made earlier. Now I'm left in limbo and the only way to find out if I can get my interface back is to request for support.. This is another example how user input is not considered and respected but treated as if it was nothing, simply to be thrown overboard at the first chance. I have to admit, this kind of behaviour ,in both mentioned instances, has started to make me hate the new version deeply. If I had the power to turn back time and never upgrade to v6, thus avoiding to spend nearly two days in activities that the new version simply reverts as if nothing had been done, I gladly would. This has got to be the most frustrating upgrade of my life.

You told it to revert to default and it did. I'm not sure I see the problem here. The settings are stored in the "Workspace.xml" file. You might want to back them up. There's no backup or heavy warnings because at least for me, it takes about 5 minutes (more like 30 seconds) for me to set the display the way I want. Auto-hide the groups. Auto-hide the thumbnails Move groups to top left border, move thumbnails to top right border. Close some windows I don't use. I'm sorry you lost your settings but, I'm not sure what you expect the installer to do about it. Maybe you can try to extract this file from your backup image.

(Well, just from the top of my head, let me point at least in one direction. I found quite a few easily detectable errors that can easily be mended in the filters section. I've already corrected my own filters, so I can't actually refer to the situation after a fresh installation, but here are just two examples I seem to remember. Names of filters have been mixed up - like, if I remember right, the "RAR archives" and "Comics" filters. A second example are incorrect extensions, for example in the ebook filter (there's "djvu" and "djv" extensions, but no "divyu").But there is more to be found in this and other places.)

Don't know what you mean here. Any sample filters are just samples. They make no effort to be correct. It's more about showing you how to set things.

[itimpi]

I did not think that any sample filters were supplied any more? Could this be references to filters brought forward from an earlier Newsbin release.

[Quade]

I think you're right Itimpi.

[AKo]

Firstly about my overlong messages. I'm just trying to help but unfortunately, that's the only way I can, presently, express my thinking. It might be related to health issue affecting my memory span, not sure. I've tried to be shorter, clearer and more succinct but, at this point, its either this kind of style or I don't even manage to finish any input at all. While my form of expression may be difficult to follow, and I'm genuinely sorry for that, the content is sound and well-considered. Anyway, I hope it can contribute something useful.

Responding to both your comments, starting with the last ones: The sample filters I found were not the filters I've been using up to that point. I had shifted all settings to a custom folder in a different location, but perhaps a very rudimentary, early attempt at creating my own filters dating back many years was left behind somewhere and setup picked it up, not sure. But possible, in which case I'm sorry for thinking the errors were inbuilt.

About the interface, thanks for the info that it is in "workspace.xml". Fortunately, I suspected that file might have some relevance in this respect and backed it up before clicking "yes" during setup to restore the default GUI. I just compared the backed up version to the default of this file and its size is 78 KB, up from 11 KB for the default GUI. So this might be an indication that the changes weren't the work of 30 seconds. On restoring it, all previous interface modifications seem to be back, including custom icons. Hurray! That's one of the issues solved!

I think a short mention of this file as the location for GUI modifications and to perhaps back it up if one thinks of later restoring them might be a good idea, but, Quade, you say you aren't even aware there could be a problem, so I probably need to explain in a bit more detail. I hope it will help to see this from the perspective of a potentially affected use and, perhaps, take their view points into consideration in future.

Of course, minimal interface adaptations can be restored with a few clicks, and if that was all there was too it (in v5 it still was), then there wouldn't be an issue, really. But in v6 you've added a whole host of customisation options, basically allowing users to modify nearly every aspect of the menu setup. And I'm not referring to the changes you described. What you described only affects the arrangement of screens or tabs (or whatever you like to call them) but leaves the menu bar (or however you like to call it) untouched. It isn't really surprising that you don't think of modifying the default menu: you designed it, so it probably suits you perfectly. If you wanted anything to be different, you would have designed a different default.

But different people think and work in different ways. If a different person had set up the default menu, aspects of it would have turned out differently. The extend of difference would have depended on who was responsible. Just as everybody looks different, has different physical features (from the largest to the smallest: different height, width, hair, face, down to fingerprints > cell metabolism > different genetic code) , in the same way, everybody thinks and understands things differently and has different ways to work and get things done.

When using an application to get things done, it is the interface that gives us a grasp of its functionality and puts us in control. Therefore, the closer the interface reflects each individuals patterns of understanding and getting things done, the more it allows them to do thing in a way that's natural to them and the better it serves that individuals purpose by making it easier and quicker to from A to B, from effort to result. If the interface is fixed and can't be changed, the individual needs to adapt to the software and find ways to do what they want within the framework they've got. But if the interface can be changed, users can adapt the software to suite their way of thinking and how they like to do things. Useful modification require a bit of initial thought and fiddling around but will esult in improved workflow and, afterwards, achieving the same results will take less time and effort and be more fun. So the initial loss of time can easily be regained. All in all, there is clearly something to be gained in software customisation, and generally, people enjoy making a software "their own" , a very personal, possibly unique tool that fits as good as one could make it fit.

I don't know the proper technical vocabulary for various aspects of menu design, so this isn't easy to express and I'll probably not be very clear, but I'll try to give an idea of what can be changed in v6. Hopefully this will help to get a better idea of the point of view of a user who has put in the kind of effort I'm talking about. And please don't think that the lack of feedback from other users regarding menu customisation can only leave the conclusion that something's got to be wrong with *me* for even considering to make use of these options. GUI modification isn't a new thing but has been a staple feature of many applications for ages, including some favourites of mine, like Opera, Foobar2000, or Textpad, among many others. When visiting relevant Web Forums for users of such applications, I've found that I'm, at best, I'm a minor to moderate fiddler, compared to many others users who are much more into it. So, while there might not have much feedback in this respect so far, you may be sure that these features are already used by some and are going to be used by more and more users of v6 as time passes. It may, in the end, not be the majority of users but, at least, a substantial percentage of them who'll take the trouble to spend some time modifying their Newsbin menu to some extend.

So what can be changed in v6 are the number and names of menu column headers (? not sure of the term) and of all individual commands/entries that appear in the menus, their sequence and how they are grouped and sub-grouped. One can also decide whether they appear as text or images (icons) or both and one can change the icons/images (incl. designing own icons or importing from elsewhere). One can place most used commands as icons on the menu bar, and remove or put out of sight less used commands. And there's still more one can do, some of which I'm still discovering. Not really part of GUI design but one of my most favoured options is to assign keyboard shortcuts to each command, something I've been hoping to see introduced for a long time.

The only thing regarding interface that I don't understand and come to terms with is that, in spite of all this new freedom, it is no more possible to change which screens/tabs are located on top and which ones below. Most tabs (except Groups and Image Database) are now at the exact other end to what I've been used to for the best part of a decade (and longer if I include Forte Agent use). So my brain is kind hardwired to expect most screens/tabs at the other half of the screen to where they are now, and there seems to be no way to change that. It is not just the force of arbitrary habit but the habit was always based on an underlying logic: I had pre-download info (Servers, Groups + Headers, Search) on top and download related info (download queue, pars, downloaded files and fails) below. This arrangement and the underlying logic have become so deeply hardwired into my brain that I find it difficult to get my head around the new arrangement and wonder if I'll ever get used to it. If an option to change the location of screens/tabs from above to below (and vice versa) were possible, I'd be perfectly happy, as far as interface customisation is concerned.

Well, I also preferred par recovery blocks on a list separate from the actual download queue but that was probably not simply an interface decision but more related to the function that causes the other issue I have, namely Autopar and how it is supposed to work now.

I'll respond to the Autopar issue later because if I wrote more, not only would this message, that is already far too long, become far longer, but the quality would go down too. Also, I'm still digesting both the issue as well as my frustration about it. What you mentioned about "reading ahead" just reminded me of more aspects I didn't like and that it wasn't just pars where Newsbin downloads according to an agenda of its own rather than according to sequence in the download list. Anyway, I'll call it a day for now, really need some sleep. Hope I'll find time to continue tomorrow but may take a day or two.

[itimpi]

I am very confused when you say that you cannot move tabs to the part of the screen that you prefer. With v6 the layout of tabs is far more powerful than was available with earlier versions. Perhaps you need to watch the video tutorial on re-arranging the user interface? The only restriction that I am aware of is that Post lists appear in the same part of the screen as the Search tab.

[AKo]

Appears I missed those videos and didn't properly grasp how to move the elements around. My interface looked quite different from the video on first setup and I don't find it so easy to purposefully move elements, so, I guess, I'll have to do some more fiddling. But interface-wise, everything seems to be cared for and v6 is clearly improved in all aspects. Only thing, because so much effort can now go into making the interface ones own (and specially changes to the menu bar and menus can be extensive and cost much time) it would be good if this was taken account of in the development. I'd be concerned if the only way to include updated to the default menu during software upgrades was to undo all personal modifications and revert to the default. Considering the amount of effort users might put into their own menu modifications now, if all their customizations would get lost whenever there was an update to the default menu, that'd be bound to frustrate anyone who previously spend time and effort to modify their menus. Seeing that simply offering the menu customisation options means this is an accident bound to happen, perhaps it would be better to remove these menu related customisation options as they'd be, really, nothing but an invitation to waste time. But if software updates to the default menu could be implemented in a way that doesn't interfere with user customizations but allow them to stick, that'd be much better, of course.

Now I don't have much time to touch on download behaviour, which is probably all the better to avoid another message like the last two: From my experiences so far, there seems to be an enormous loss of user control over the way Newzbin downloads files, both concerning the sequence of downloads as well as the destination folders. In a very brief period of time, I found Newsbin overturning decisions I made, though the experience was so distressing and confusing that I haven't managed to understand the underlying logic of what happened. I may come back to what happened earlier, but will now only focus on something different. Yesterday, I tried a different thing, I selected a poster and chose the option to download all posts by that poster. Firstly, the process went ahead very slowly, at first, nothing happened. But then, *only* the par files appeared in the download list and were downloaded straight away. I don't know if the other files would have been added later because hours passed without anything happening. A TV show that I had also added to the download list, downloaded only partially (only sample files, sfvs, nfos and pars). The download of all split volumes containing the actual video file all stalled after Newsbin had downloaded just the first block of each archive. Today, I was able to get the remainder downloaded too, but yesterday this post was a no go. As far as the post by a specific poster that I had selected for download are concerned, the main body of these posts have never added themselves to the list, so I guess the attempt y'day to "Download All Posts from Poster" only fetched a few hundred pars.

I remember that during the previous download, when I decided I'd like certain files to be downloaded immediately. Newzbin would not concentrate solely on the files I wanted but continue to download other posts it had started earlier. I don't know if that's due to bugs or a quirk of my system or intended software behaviour. But if any of the above described download behaviour is intended, I can only ask, why? Each one of these means control over the download (which posts to download in which sequence and to which folders) has been taken away from the user and handed over to some function, be it Autopar or a need for reading ahead which I don't even understand. I use eight threads and, in v5, they used to download the files on top of the queue, not files belonging to different posts. I found my download speed maxed out all the time, that was fast enough for me. Aren't Autopar and all other functions of a software supposed to bring advantages to the user? If, in practice, they mean that control is taken away from users and handed over to the software to look after its functions, then I have to say, I think most users would probably prefer control; at least I do. By control I mean the ability to decide which post gets downloaded first, which second, and so on, so I can decide the whole sequence. Also, the ability to modify destination folders up to the very last minute, when a post to has reached the top of the download queue and the main body of the post is in the process of download (irrespective of some pars that might have been fast-tracked to the top of the queue earlier). Personally I don't even see why users shouldn't have the option to split posts that have already started downloading and change the download location those files that haven't started downloading yet. If a user chose to change the destination for remaining files in the middle of a download, clearly they must have their reason, rather than being concerned about automatic par checking at this point.

Okay, have to stop for today. Out.

[Quade]

In Debug mode, which simulates a really slow PC. I was able to "Download all Posts by Poster" over 80 GB in under 5 minutes. In release build, under XP using a single core virtual machine, I could add 300 gigs in under a minute. Now, I can't slow down how quickly the single CPU runs, it's about 3 Ghz so, it's hard to get a close measurement. So, I'm not sure why your results are so bad. I can't reproduce them at this point. Adding to the download list is ALL disk IO so, slow performance probably indicates a disk bottleneck.

As for the folder stuff, you might want to pause, add, edit download folders and then unpause. You've been very unclear about the download folder stuff that "distresses" you.

[AKo]

My health is pretty shaky due to an unfortunate incident last year, and losing so much time and energy has exhausted me to an extend that I must have been totally unable to express convey what I wanted to, either because my style of writing was really unintelligible or, more likely, the sheer quantity was overwhelming and the effort to digest the meaning was simply too much to expect.

After finding a bit of distance, I may now be able to condense some of my concerns to key points. To me, they would have appeared too self-evident to even mention, but the reason I feel v6 leaves me with not enough control over the download process plus some other points I haven't mentioned so far that mean I feel alienated and unhappy with the way Newsbin is going are all probably bases on one single fundamental issue, that there are, more than slight differences in how users use settings - there are diametrically opposite approaches to downloading, a Ying and a Yang form, or a "+" and "-" polarity. But the fact they are diametrically opposite doesn't have to mean they are contraditory or mutually exclusive or that an application can only cater for one approach. It means that, like men and women, the different poles find it difficult to understand the opposite approach and, in this area, are often not even aware it exists, or how a the presence or absence of certain features may affect the other approach. For a program not to lose part of its user base which would mean beginning to sink into lesser and lesser relevance, it is important that caters for an as wide array of different approaches to its functionality as it possibly can.

If it was just for me and my personal usage, I'd probably given up trying to convey my concerns and just move on and try to find a solution that works for me. But my feeling is, there's more at stake than losing a single user to an earlier version or a competing product. Unless I have grown seriously out of touch with Usenet use (which is possible but not very likely) I see real risks for Newsbin to keep the position and relevance it used to have if some aspects of currently released versions don't become clearer and more user friendly. But v6 and developments I'm concerned about are still very young and I think the potential risks can easily be averted by making sure of a few basic principles. My concerns may be totally without basis in the real world too, of course, but, in the past, I often had a quite good nose for smalling problems ahead of time (or just in the nick of time).

Anyway, I don't want to leave with an ominous not like that. Once I'm in a little better condition again, I ll be happy to try and explain what I mean - in clear and simple words - provided there is still some interest left t hen
.

[thwartme]

There are four types of behaviour which I believe worked better in V5 than in V6, and I'd love to see them integrated into the newer version, if possible.

A) Partial Sorting of a download list. In V5, I used to be able to select certain posts and when I hit the column header in the download list (like 'filename' or 'date') it would sort just the selected posts by that criteria. Now, it sorts the entire list every time, no matter what is selected. I would really like to be able to partially sort the download list again.

A is already in 6.2.

I am now using Version 6.30B6 build 1824.

I still cannot sort part of the download list, and have never been able to in any V6 build. Quade seems to say that you can now (see the quotes above) but it has never worked for me.

If I select a certain group of posts in my download list and click on a column header to sort, I get a dialogue box pop-up that asks me if I wish to sort the entire list. If I say no, nothing sorts. If I say yes, the full list sorts, which is exactly what I DON'T want to happen.

This is the number one annoyance on Newsbin for me right now, and has been since upgrading to V6.

Any chance we can get it fixed?

Thanks,
thwartme

[Quade]

You might want to disable the prompt on the options. I suspect you lose your selection.

I just sorted 12 items. You can't sort anything INSIDE a grouping (+ sign). of files but, you can sort the groupings. The order inside the grouping is set to maximize Autopar reliability.

I just turned the confirmation window on and sorted 12 files again. They were the only ones that sorted. I suspect you're trying to sort inside a grouping at this point.

[thwartme]

Hooray! As simple as that, and I couldn't find it.

Thanks very much.

thwartme

[mkanet]

I would like to see NewsBin run as a Windows service with a Win32 app front end. This is one of the primary advantages of SABnzbd over Newsbin. At least one advantage Newsbin has over SABnzbd is it doesn't have a cheap html-based front end.

I would like to see better handling of unraring/unparing. After all this time, it still can't cleanly unarchve a multi-part rar archive without leaving orphaned .par2_yEnc.Nb2 files and/or .tmp folders. I think its time that this get fixed.

[DThor]

It's been discussed, and certainly might be a direction things go. At this point, Quade has mentioned that newsbin is already extremely bi-polar in terms of having a central engine and a GUI wrapped around it, and while that's not to suggest it's trivial to implement as a service right now, it's definitely a serious possibility. As always, it's down to timing and priorities.

Managing usenet posts, which has no central posting policy, which even if it existed would guarantee nothing about who stuck with it, is obviously an ongoing process. There's never going to be a point when the newsbin guys say 'there, it's done', and they've never even hinted at that. It's a moving target, and there will *always* been posts that you can't parse. It's just a question of trying to keep their numbers down.

DT

[Quade]

without leaving orphaned .par2_yEnc.Nb2 files and/or .tmp folders

I don't get any of this. The par2 thing suggests you're manually unpausing the PARS and Newsbin finishes up the set before the par downloads. Ditto for the tmp folders. I don't get anything like this. It's not clear to me why you see this and I don't.

[mkanet]

The problem is I'm not manually unpausing anything. I let it unpause when it thinks it needs to. The odd thing is this kind of problem doesnt happen on another newsreader software on the same PC using very similar settings. Interestingly, this happens the same way every time. It's very consistent in Newbin. The trick is to find out what's circumstances causes this to happen.

without leaving orphaned .par2_yEnc.Nb2 files and/or .tmp folders

I don't get any of this. The par2 thing suggests you're manually unpausing the PARS and Newsbin finishes up the set before the par downloads. Ditto for the tmp folders. I don't get anything like this. It's not clear to me why you see this and I don't.

[DThor]

Correct. And that won't happen until you pm some examples to Quade. I almost never see what you're describing, so obviously you're poking around different groups, you just need to convey it.

DT

[mkanet]

Yes, I already PMed Quad a couple of times. They are in my PM sent items. Maybe he hasn't gotten around to replying back to me. I know he's very busy. Hopefully its something easy to fix. It's 100% consistent on my machine. The good news is I know its fixable since it doesnt happen in a different news reader. It's probably something uncommon; whatever the cause of the problem.