Winken, Blinken & Nod

Have a question or want to show off your project? Post it! No Registration Necessary.  Now with pictures!

Threaded View
Sometime this past week I saw a post on here about the chart "Winken,
Blinken & Nod" but I believe it was buried in another post. Anyhow, I
found a data base that says it was in "Just Cross Stitch" in the
Jan/Feb 1998 issue. Does anyone have it that I could buy it from?? I'd
sooooooooooo appreciate it as I'd love to do it for my little
grandson.

THANK YOU!
Jennifer/Poetta

Ladybug Lane Designs
jennifer@ladybuglane.com


www.ladybuglane.com

Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod
Would you tell us where you found an index to "Just Cross
Stitch"? I'd love to know!  Have often thought of doing one every
time I'm looking for a project.

Kathy

> Sometime this past week I saw a post on here about the chart
"Winken,
> Blinken & Nod" but I believe it was buried in another post.
Anyhow, I
> found a data base that says it was in "Just Cross Stitch" in
the
> Jan/Feb 1998 issue. Does anyone have it that I could buy it
from?? I'd
> sooooooooooo appreciate it as I'd love to do it for my little
> grandson.
>
> THANK YOU!
> Jennifer/Poetta
>
> Ladybug Lane Designs
> jennifer@ladybuglane.com
>
>
> www.ladybuglane.com



Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Dick Peters developed software that is a searchable data base of most of the
popular needlework magazines. It goes back quite a few years. I don't have
it installed on this computer so I can't check righ now.  It works on
various programs such as Microsoft Works and Access. I bought mine in 2002
and I think he makes updates each year.  I have his email address if you are
interested.

Mavia


Quoted text here. Click to load it



Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod
Be happy to: http://www.xsmagdb.com/ - it's not quite up to date, but
does have a LOT of information about different x-stitch magazines!
Hope it helps.

Jennifer/Poetta
Ladybug Lane Designs






 On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 09:48:09 -0500, "Kathy Tabb"

>Would you tell us where you found an index to "Just Cross
>Stitch"? I'd love to know!  Have often thought of doing one every
>time I'm looking for a project.
>
>Kathy
>
>> Sometime this past week I saw a post on here about the chart
>"Winken,
>> Blinken & Nod" but I believe it was buried in another post.
>Anyhow, I
>> found a data base that says it was in "Just Cross Stitch" in
>the
>> Jan/Feb 1998 issue. Does anyone have it that I could buy it
>from?? I'd
>> sooooooooooo appreciate it as I'd love to do it for my little
>> grandson.
>>
>> THANK YOU!
>> Jennifer/Poetta
>>
>> Ladybug Lane Designs
>> jennifer@ladybuglane.com
>>
>>
>> www.ladybuglane.com
>

www.ladybuglane.com

Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod
Poetta@mindspring.com wrote:
> Be happy to: http://www.xsmagdb.com/ - it's not quite up to date, but
> does have a LOT of information about different x-stitch magazines!
> Hope it helps.
>  
> Jennifer/Poetta
> Ladybug Lane Designs
>  


EEK!  Nice service, and I'm sure I'll make use of it, but jeez...it  
makes my head hurt just thinking about the poor web design choices.  Why  
on earth would one use a java-based watermark crawl?

Excellent idea, iffy execution...
Becky


Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod
I hate those site that never update any part of the site.  It still looking
and acts like it from the 2400 baud.   Their IT folk still think the 2400
baud is wonderful, I guess.

> Poetta@mindspring.com wrote:
> > Be happy to: http://www.xsmagdb.com/ - it's not quite up to date, but
> > does have a LOT of information about different x-stitch magazines!
> > Hope it helps.
> >
> > Jennifer/Poetta
> > Ladybug Lane Designs
> >
>
>
> EEK!  Nice service, and I'm sure I'll make use of it, but jeez...it
> makes my head hurt just thinking about the poor web design choices.  Why
> on earth would one use a java-based watermark crawl?
>
> Excellent idea, iffy execution...
> Becky
>



Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod
Genghis Khan's Wife wrote:

> I hate those site that never update any part of the site.  It still looking
> and acts like it from the 2400 baud.   Their IT folk still think the 2400
> baud is wonderful, I guess.

It isn't necessarily that.  Lots of people have limited access to the  
web, such as through libraries.  Many libraries have limited resources  
and they are still using 2400 baud modems.  My husband and I just got  
DSL service not too long ago.  Parts of the U.S. still do not always  
have that option.  And, it is expensive in comparison.

So, if you want to reach a wide audience, you temper your site to appeal  
to a wider audience.

Dianne


--  
"The Journal of Needlework" - The E-zine for All Needleworkers
http://journal.heritageshoppe.com


Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod
True, some folks will never get to the 21st century.  I still hate the slow
site never upgrade any part of their site.

> Genghis Khan's Wife wrote:
>
> > I hate those site that never update any part of the site.  It still
looking
> > and acts like it from the 2400 baud.   Their IT folk still think the
2400
> > baud is wonderful, I guess.
>
> It isn't necessarily that.  Lots of people have limited access to the
> web, such as through libraries.  Many libraries have limited resources
> and they are still using 2400 baud modems.  My husband and I just got
> DSL service not too long ago.  Parts of the U.S. still do not always
> have that option.  And, it is expensive in comparison.
>
> So, if you want to reach a wide audience, you temper your site to appeal
> to a wider audience.
>
> Dianne
>
>
> --  
> "The Journal of Needlework" - The E-zine for All Needleworkers
> http://journal.heritageshoppe.com
>



Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod
Genghis Khan's Wife wrote:
> True, some folks will never get to the 21st century.  I still hate the slow
> site never upgrade any part of their site.

I think that's harsh rhetoric.  In some parts of the U.S., 2400 baud  
modems is all that is available.  And for some folks, that's all that is  
affordable.  It's not that we're not "part" of the 21st century.  Japan  
is light years ahead of the U.S.

I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing.  Some sites are very  
forward thinking and have lots of bells, whistles, moving parts.  In  
fact, I'd like to learn how to do some of these "tricks" (which require  
knowledge and Flash).  People who have older technology often get  
frustrated with these sites.  I suppose that some sites don't care, they  
have the audience they want.  Other sites have to be more careful.

But as I said above, I'm no sure we are talking about the same thing.  
In order the understand, you'd need to elaborate about what you mean by  
"webmasters don't upgrade portions of their sites".

Dianne


--  
"The Journal of Needlework" - The E-zine for All Needleworkers
http://journal.heritageshoppe.com


Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod

Actually, the users of the 2400 to 56k are usually smaller companies/small
business.  These companies (people) have just invented too much into their
system at that baud.   So many sites still have them and are slow.  Big
deal, if you have not invented into the new technology, people just go to
other places.   Some of folk just like it faster than 2400 to 56k.   Now if
you want to leave our site at 2400 just don't put large media/graphics on
it.   This has nothing to do with users dialup speed, and I talking about
sites.

If the site has slow downloads ,  they are slow then.  If that harsh, then
reality is not a picture nice place.



I love speed the faster the bester and I been asking that for Internet since
1963.  So sue me.

> Genghis Khan's Wife wrote:
> > True, some folks will never get to the 21st century.  I still hate the
slow
> > site never upgrade any part of their site.
>
> I think that's harsh rhetoric.  In some parts of the U.S., 2400 baud
> modems is all that is available.  And for some folks, that's all that is
> affordable.  It's not that we're not "part" of the 21st century.  Japan
> is light years ahead of the U.S.
>
> I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing.  Some sites are very
> forward thinking and have lots of bells, whistles, moving parts.  In
> fact, I'd like to learn how to do some of these "tricks" (which require
> knowledge and Flash).  People who have older technology often get
> frustrated with these sites.  I suppose that some sites don't care, they
> have the audience they want.  Other sites have to be more careful.
>
> But as I said above, I'm no sure we are talking about the same thing.
> In order the understand, you'd need to elaborate about what you mean by
> "webmasters don't upgrade portions of their sites".
>
> Dianne
>
>
> --  
> "The Journal of Needlework" - The E-zine for All Needleworkers
> http://journal.heritageshoppe.com
>



Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod
I'm still thinking we're not on the same page.  And maybe it, in the  
end, doesn't matter.  But I would like to actually visit one of these  
sites that you are condemning so that I can understand what you are  
talking about.

We have run our own server, so I'm not exactly ignorant of the Web and  
how it works.

Dianne

Genghis Khan's Wife wrote:

> Actually, the users of the 2400 to 56k are usually smaller companies/small
> business.  These companies (people) have just invented too much into their
> system at that baud.   So many sites still have them and are slow.  Big
> deal, if you have not invented into the new technology, people just go to
> other places.   Some of folk just like it faster than 2400 to 56k.   Now if
> you want to leave our site at 2400 just don't put large media/graphics on
> it.   This has nothing to do with users dialup speed, and I talking about
> sites.
>  
> If the site has slow downloads ,  they are slow then.  If that harsh, then
> reality is not a picture nice place.
>  
>  
>  
> I love speed the faster the bester and I been asking that for Internet since
> 1963.  So sue me.
>  
>  
>>Genghis Khan's Wife wrote:
>>
>>>True, some folks will never get to the 21st century.  I still hate the
>  
> slow
>  
>>>site never upgrade any part of their site.
>>
>>I think that's harsh rhetoric.  In some parts of the U.S., 2400 baud
>>modems is all that is available.  And for some folks, that's all that is
>>affordable.  It's not that we're not "part" of the 21st century.  Japan
>>is light years ahead of the U.S.
>>
>>I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing.  Some sites are very
>>forward thinking and have lots of bells, whistles, moving parts.  In
>>fact, I'd like to learn how to do some of these "tricks" (which require
>>knowledge and Flash).  People who have older technology often get
>>frustrated with these sites.  I suppose that some sites don't care, they
>>have the audience they want.  Other sites have to be more careful.
>>
>>But as I said above, I'm no sure we are talking about the same thing.
>>In order the understand, you'd need to elaborate about what you mean by
>>"webmasters don't upgrade portions of their sites".
>>
>>Dianne
>>
>>
>>--  
>>"The Journal of Needlework" - The E-zine for All Needleworkers
>>http://journal.heritageshoppe.com
>>
>  
>  
>  

--  
"The Journal of Needlework" - The E-zine for All Needleworkers
http://journal.heritageshoppe.com


Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod
No we not on the same page.  IT IS a personal thing.  The site are great to
go to but the download is slow.    It goes back to the old saying " If you
not with the techology, then get out of way".  Like I said it a geekie thing
and I don't like waiting for a download.

> I'm still thinking we're not on the same page.  And maybe it, in the
> end, doesn't matter.  But I would like to actually visit one of these
> sites that you are condemning so that I can understand what you are
> talking about.
>
> We have run our own server, so I'm not exactly ignorant of the Web and
> how it works.
>
> Dianne
>
> Genghis Khan's Wife wrote:
>
> > Actually, the users of the 2400 to 56k are usually smaller
companies/small
> > business.  These companies (people) have just invented too much into
their
> > system at that baud.   So many sites still have them and are slow.  Big
> > deal, if you have not invented into the new technology, people just go
to
> > other places.   Some of folk just like it faster than 2400 to 56k.   Now
if
> > you want to leave our site at 2400 just don't put large media/graphics
on
> > it.   This has nothing to do with users dialup speed, and I talking
about
> > sites.
> >
> > If the site has slow downloads ,  they are slow then.  If that harsh,
then
> > reality is not a picture nice place.
> >
> >
> >
> > I love speed the faster the bester and I been asking that for Internet
since
> > 1963.  So sue me.
> >
> >
> >>Genghis Khan's Wife wrote:
> >>
> >>>True, some folks will never get to the 21st century.  I still hate the
> >
> > slow
> >
> >>>site never upgrade any part of their site.
> >>
> >>I think that's harsh rhetoric.  In some parts of the U.S., 2400 baud
> >>modems is all that is available.  And for some folks, that's all that is
> >>affordable.  It's not that we're not "part" of the 21st century.  Japan
> >>is light years ahead of the U.S.
> >>
> >>I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing.  Some sites are very
> >>forward thinking and have lots of bells, whistles, moving parts.  In
> >>fact, I'd like to learn how to do some of these "tricks" (which require
> >>knowledge and Flash).  People who have older technology often get
> >>frustrated with these sites.  I suppose that some sites don't care, they
> >>have the audience they want.  Other sites have to be more careful.
> >>
> >>But as I said above, I'm no sure we are talking about the same thing.
> >>In order the understand, you'd need to elaborate about what you mean by
> >>"webmasters don't upgrade portions of their sites".
> >>
> >>Dianne
> >>
> >>
> >>--  
> >>"The Journal of Needlework" - The E-zine for All Needleworkers
> >>http://journal.heritageshoppe.com
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
> --  
> "The Journal of Needlework" - The E-zine for All Needleworkers
> http://journal.heritageshoppe.com
>



Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod
I hate to point it out, but most websites are NOT self-hosted.  The  
website sits on servers belonging to a hosting company.  The coding can  
be sleek and sexy, but it makes no difference if the host's servers are  
capped or overloaded.  You're pissed at the wrong person.

That said, I'm all geeked out about my ISP upgrading the lines in our  
area.  They're bumping us up to a 1.0 megabit connection for free.  I'm  
slightly annoyed that they're throttling some of the more common  
filesharing ports, but then there's a bazillion unassigned ports to  
choose from.  I'm sure they're scratching their heads and wondering why  
a port sitting in the numerical boonies is pulling so much traffic.

The downside is that all three harddrives on my puter are full.  Either  
I buy yet another drive or I fire up the DVD burner and archive the data.

200GB isn't as big as it used to be...
Becky A


 >Genghis Khan's Wife wrote:
 >
> No we not on the same page.  IT IS a personal thing.  The site are great to
> go to but the download is slow.    It goes back to the old saying " If you
> not with the techology, then get out of way".  Like I said it a geekie thing
> and I don't like waiting for a download.
>  
>>  
>>I'm still thinking we're not on the same page.  And maybe it, in the
>>end, doesn't matter.  But I would like to actually visit one of these
>>sites that you are condemning so that I can understand what you are
>>talking about.
>>
>>We have run our own server, so I'm not exactly ignorant of the Web and
>>how it works.
>>
>>Dianne
>>


Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod
On 11/22/05 4:43 PM, in article VPmdnabSas6OEh7e4p2dnA@telenor.com, "Becky

>  
> The downside is that all three harddrives on my puter are full.  Either
> I buy yet another drive or I fire up the DVD burner and archive the data.
>  
> 200GB isn't as big as it used to be...
> Becky A
>  


Becky, if you knew hard I laughed reading this. I remember when a 1 Meg of
RAM was a lot!

Cheryl


Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod
Cheryl Isaak wrote:

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Bah.  I go back to the Amiga, which shipped with 256K of RAM, and we
splurged on upgrading it to 512K, which MIL just couldn't see the need
for on a home computer (she worked on the room-size computer at the
university).

--
Karen C - California
www.CFSfacts.org where we give you the facts and dispel the myths
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod
On 11/23/05 11:40 AM, in article 3uk8daF1267emU1@individual.net, "Karen C -

Quoted text here. Click to load it

Man, we are old farts aren't we! LOL!

Cheryl


Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod
Karen C - California (KMC528@aol.com) writes:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

     I have forgotten what my original Commodore had in the way of memory;
 I think it was 4K.  I know the Commodore 64 (with 64K of memory) was a
*huge* increase.  IIRC, the first Apple had 1K of memory.

Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod



Quoted text here. Click to load it


You've made me nostalgic for the computer I learned on.  It was an IBM XT,
with I think a 6 mb hard drive, 128 kb of memory and one floppy drive.  I
used Multi Mate for a word processor and had to save every single thing I
did on floppies.  We would lock up those floppies every night as though they
were made from gold, just in case they were stolen in the night.

It had a 12" black and white screen and was slow as molasses, but I produced
a lot on that workhorse.  Does anyone but me remember when the mantra for
MultiMate and I think Corel was WSIWYG, that stood for "what you see is what
you get?"

Lucille>



Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod


Lucille wrote:
 > Does anyone but me remember when the mantra for
Quoted text here. Click to load it

Yep.  I also used MultiMate.  Before that I used WordStar (before it had
a number), DecType, and Displaywrite.

--
Karen C - California
www.CFSfacts.org where we give you the facts and dispel the myths
We've slightly trimmed the long signature. Click to see the full one.
Re: Winken, Blinken & Nod
Karen C - California wrote:
Quoted text here. Click to load it

OK, folks.  I am sitting here writing on the keyboard of my Gateway
desktop, which when we bought it was the "latest and greatest" with
"gasp" SIX GIGS !!!!!!!!  Upstairs is the laptop which I got for a
combined b/day wedding anniv. present last year, and which has 40 GB,
and about which (after I got it) PC World was decidely sniffy, saying it
just wasn't powerful enough for serious gamers.

Well, I don't play games on my computer.  I use it strictly for
communication and research, and DH also uses it for household
bookkeeping.  Occasionally we find things which will not come up on the
desktop, and if we REALLY want to see them , we will try the laptop.

Laugh if you like, but it works for me (so does AOL Dial-up).

Olwyn Mary in New Orleans.

Site Timeline