Wrestling Forum banner

1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
4,310 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Sorry if this has been posted before, or if this is a stupid suggestion. Well, I've always been bothered by having to search around every page of a thread. Is there anyway this can be fixed by making more than (is it 15 posts?) available per page? Maybe there can be an added option that allows all posts in a single page? I'm sorry if this option is available, I just haven't seen it around. Anyway, this option would really be appreciated by many members in the forums. Thank you :agree:.
 
N

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Hombre said:
40 is the max. An option for all would be nice, but image loading a thread in word games.
Um, no, the server would be screwed with such an option.

But yeah, 15 is default and will remain default (at least for now). I leave mine at 15, although 40 would be nice...but ya, I keep it with the forum default just in case I change something.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
759 Posts
I changed my settings to show 40 posts per page some time back, and although it was nice not having to deal with multiple pages in threads, it was more trouble than it was worth.

I have High Speed Cable {3Mbps} Internet access, and it still took forever for each page to load.
Not to mention that all of the pictures and graphics don't always load without two -three refreshes.

Trust me, stick with 15 posts per page, you'll be glad you did.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,132 Posts
Theres no way in vBulletin to make it max anyway. They have to enter a set number.
 

·
Don't rewrite the books, just rewrite the titles,
Joined
·
15,672 Posts
WWF Angel said:
I changed my settings to show 40 posts per page some time back, and although it was nice not having to deal with multiple pages in threads, it was more trouble than it was worth.

I have High Speed Cable {3Mbps} Internet access, and it still took forever for each page to load.
Not to mention that all of the pictures and graphics don't always load without two -three refreshes.

Trust me, stick with 15 posts per page, you'll be glad you did.
I have a fractionally slower connection than you and I have absolutely no problems at all with pages loading on 40 posts per page.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,885 Posts
Hombre said:
That's high speed cable? I'm using high speed cable and average 36-48Mbps.

I think that's impossible, with cable...
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
759 Posts
Flash said:
I have a fractionally slower connection than you and I have absolutely no problems at all with pages loading on 40 posts per page.
I also run several programs constantly, such as Bearshare, in the background, which might have something to do with it. :D


Hombre said:
Really? Cool, I'm doing the impossible.
Apparently so because here are the current actual speeds attainable for the three most popular connection types. :)

Max. High Speed
Satellite - Up To 1 Mbps
DSL - Up To 1.5 Mbps
Cable - Up To 3 Mbps


Avg. High Speed
Satellite - 400 Kbps
DSL - 467 Kbps
Cable - 708 Kbps
 

·
Don't rewrite the books, just rewrite the titles,
Joined
·
15,672 Posts
No, that's just completely false, I'm afraid. I'm using ADSL with a speed of 2.2Mbps. That's 1.7Mbps faster than the maximum possible speed you quote.
 
N

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Hombre said:
That's high speed cable? I'm using high speed cable and average 36-48Mbps.
...

Maybe you don't know what it is. I did you a favor by going to your ISP's website, and they moved from 3Mbps to 5Mbps.

I'm using 3Mbps ADSL, which is going to be upgraded to 4Mbps to match Comcast. Don't know when.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,015 Posts
Ok, I probably don't know what I'm talking about. The little screen that says Internet Connection, puts my speed at 54Mpbs right now, it's usually at 36. Apparently, were not talking about the same thing then.
 
N

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Ignore that. If it's inside your Windows Control Panel, you need to ignore that. It's not an actual Internet speed. Mine is always 100.0 Mbps. But ya.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
759 Posts
^^^Same with mine.

This is the box Nitemare is referring to.

The speeds I posted were actually a general idea of attainable speeds and were as of 2003, my bad.
At any rate, they do show that the speeds Hombre were speaking of are not correct by any means.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top