Micha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> That leads me to another question. wwwoffle gets more an more
> sophisticated config options. Basically this is not bad, but it
> also means it gets more difficult to (learn to) maintain it. I know
> this kind of saoftware is for professional or geek users anyway.
> But still there is the question of usability.... Possible
> improvement ? I don't know.
>
> Or perhaps look at digital cameras. They offer predefined profiles
> for different situations (like 'sunny morning' or 'neon light
> room').
> You can choose that setting, and start from there with any further
> customization. Then it would also be desireable to save and restore
> multiple custom profiles.
A set of pre-prepared configuration files would do what you want. The
trouble is that somebody needs to decide what the scenarios are and
then to generate the configuration files that do that.
> And that all leads me to more basic questions. What are wwwoffles
> most important usages, under todays conditions ? That is, fast
> spreading broadband access, with increasing share of flatrate
> billing, in some global areas, while probably much less progress in
> others. Where are the wwwoffle users ? What are they doing ? Maybe
> we would find out by a poll shipped with the packages ? Maybe point
> it to a forum-page or a kind of wiki ?
There is a definite reduction in the number of WWWOFFLE users (or
perhaps the program is now perfect and nobody needs to raise any bug
reports). A poll would be a good idea to find out who uses WWWOFFLE
and why, but I don't see the point in setting up a new website to
collect this data at a time when the number of users is reducing.
> For example, try to imagine what wwwoffle might turn out to become
> in, say, 10 or even 20 years ? Could you imagine, for example,
> somebody picking up the code, and turning it into something rather
> different ? Maybe to solve a quite different (new) need. And would
> that idea possibly be something you'd like to realize yourself ?
I know that quite a few people want WWWOFFLE to be an archiving
program, but I am against that. An archiving program does not need
the proxying functions but probably works best if it works like
www.archive.org.
I will continue to make WWWOFFLE work best as a proxy that is
sometimes, not always, connected to the internet. The other key
feature is the ability to reduce the bandwidth by giving the user the
choice about when pages are re-requested, not the server. Both of
these are the opposite of the trend for always connected flatrate
broadband. The increasing use of portable computers may reverse this,
but semi-permanent connections (Wi-Fi) reduce the need for WWWOFFLE in
that situation.
--
Andrew.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew M. Bishop [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gedanken.demon.co.uk/
WWWOFFLE users page:
http://www.gedanken.demon.co.uk/wwwoffle/version-2.8/user.html
