Can't share .files with .RA extension with 3.54 beta 4

by **HEAT84** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 11:47 pm

First of all why do you have to reshare all your files anyways?

I added .ra to the shared filetypes in the settings, then refreshed and didn't work. Changed .ra to .ra* didn't work. Then tried .ra#. Didn't work. Then chenged the file's extension to .ram and changed .ra to .ram in the filetype settings. Didn't work.

by **Nessmaster** » Thu Dec 16, 2004 11:56 pm

What are .ra?

by **HEAT84** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 2:27 am

Real Media audio files or Real Streaming media files. Usually the extension is RAM but in this case its RA. It makes no difference to Realplayer.

by **puzzlepants** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 3:34 am

What program are we talking about? Why is it necessary to share these files?

I could go on with a list of questions, but I would rather ask you just to please provide as much relevant information as you can. That will help us to be able to solve your problem much easier.

by **BigWillyStyle42** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 5:20 am

FFS he posted in the WinMX forum, I think it's pretty obvious he's talking about KaZaA... :roll:

As for why it's necessary, maybe he just wants to share some files...

by **lordfoul** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 6:01 am

by **HEAT84** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 6:05 am

I was able to fix it by adding .ra to the "other Audio" section. But the question still remains why didn't it work when I put .ra in its own section. Another question: How is this better than the way the library used to be? If it ain't broke don't fix it. Note: section is not the proper word where used above but I think you know what I mean.

by **HEAT84** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 6:09 am

IN CASE SOME PEOPLE POSTING IN THIS TOPIC DON"T KNOW :evil:

(bigwilly and lordfoul), the Newest version of WinMX has a new library system and one difference is the way you select the filetypes to share.

And WTF is FFS?

by **lordfoul** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 4:59 pm

HEAT84 wrote:IN CASE SOME PEOPLE POSTING IN THIS TOPIC DON"T KNOW (bigwilly and lordfoul), the Newest version of WinMX has a new library system and one difference is the way you select the filetypes to share.

And WTF is FFS?

Don't have a cow man...I was laughing at BWS retort to puzzlepants.

FFS=For F#ck Sake

by **Dazzle** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 8:19 pm

The sensible course of action is to inform Frontcode so they can look into it , although .ra types of file are not greatly common and too similar to the familiar .rar extension

betatest@winmx.com

by **DaBlade** » Fri Dec 17, 2004 9:38 pm

Dazzle wrote:The sensible course of action is to inform Frontcode so they can look into it , although .ra types of file are not greatly common and too similar to the familiar .rar extension

betatest@winmx.com

Why don't you just shout "SPAMMERS, COME HERE!"? You don't post direct email links on public sites

I've been having connection problems on this new beta on WINE..
I emailed Kev about it.

by **Dazzle** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:29 am

Sorry not impressed with the "name dropping" :roll:

I suspect from your comments that you have never visited the beta test page where that e-mail addy resides ,its open to the public as it has been for the last 8 months.

http://www.winmx.com/beta/beta354.html

Try being polite to strangers, you might be on their forum one day and would soon complain if some one spoke down to you in a condescending manner.

by **HEAT84** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 10:43 pm

Oh yeah, forgot it was a beta version.

by **Libertad** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:26 am

puzzlepants wrote:What program are we talking about? Why is it necessary to share these files?

I could go on with a list of questions, but I would rather ask you just to please provide as much relevant information as you can. That will help us to be able to solve your problem much easier.

Believe it or not, it is possible to share files other than .mp3 and .avi

The nature of winMX is that it is supposed to be able to share any type of file. This is desirable because lots of different media forms can be shared, and also IIRC, the fact that napster was an .mp3 only program made it easier to attack legally.

The fact that winMX was designed as a general sharing program, not one designed to share just mp3 versions of copyrighted songs, makes it harder to attack as a piracy tool. It has substantial legitimate uses.

by **Libertad** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:31 am

DaBlade wrote:
Dazzle wrote:The sensible course of action is to inform Frontcode so they can look into it , although .ra types of file are not greatly common and too similar to the familiar .rar extension

betatest @t winmx dot com [edited from the prior post]

Why don't you just shout "SPAMMERS, COME HERE!"? You don't post direct email links on public sites
***

If posting the winmx email was so problematic, why did you choose to re-post it in quote fashion?

by **DaBlade** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:39 am

cuz it was already done.
@Dazzle, on the beta page it was written like betatest at winmx dot com. that dosn't get caught by spammer bots.

by **Mel_Smiley_VIP** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:42 am

Theres nothing wrong with posting that addy, frontcode doesnt even read the emails anyway.

by **Libertad** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:47 am

DaBlade wrote:cuz it was already done.
@Dazzle, on the beta page it was written like betatest at winmx dot com. that dosn't get caught by spammer bots.

Yes, it was done, but perhaps the best thing would have been for a moderator to edit the link to a form like you suggested that would be more obscure to email mining bots before they got around to checking this site.

by **Libertad** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 9:57 am

Mel_Smiley_VIP wrote:Theres nothing wrong with posting that addy, frontcode doesnt even read the emails anyway.

Perhaps it was inappropriate to post that email in a machine readable form in public.

How do you know that do not read the emails? The fact that they do not send reply emails doesn't mean they do not read them.

I have sent/posted bug reports and fantasy feature requests dozens of times and several of the issues I raised have been addressed.. i.e. the ability to enable/disable file share permissions on a file level as in v3.54. It is possible, perhaps likely, that others had been dreaming up the similar functionality and also communicating with the winmx team. No way to know about this but it matters little as long as the program is gradually improved.

by **Mel_Smiley_VIP** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 10:25 am

It was a joke! lol

by **Dazzle** » Tue Dec 21, 2004 2:48 am

I sometimes do not beleive what I read here .
Are you seriously trying to tell me that Frontcode who themselves say "we get thousand of replies", do not have a mail filter in place , we are not talking home user here, they run a buisiness .
I would have liked to have posted the name only but that would not have addressed the issue raised by the original poster, as time is critical when working on a beta and possible new release.
I trust Frontcode to be able to afford to subscribe to a mail service that rejects spam, most do these days .

by **BigWillyStyle42** » Sun Dec 26, 2004 10:25 pm

HEAT84 wrote:IN CASE SOME PEOPLE POSTING IN THIS TOPIC DON"T KNOW (bigwilly and lordfoul), the Newest version of WinMX has a new library system and one difference is the way you select the filetypes to share.

And WTF is FFS?

I've heard about WinMX's new library function, but it's not at all relevent to understanding my reply. I was simply pointing out that puzzlepants post was idiotic.

Can't share .files with .RA extension with 3.54 beta 4

Can't share .files with .RA extension with 3.54 beta 4

Who is online