"Martin Sykes" wrote in message ...
"JennyC" wrote in message
...
But the bees drove me mad !

I originally tested my page on my old 486 running at 66Mhz. The bees were
quite sedate then. Now on my 2.4Ghz machine they're almost a blur. I'll
update the code to slow them down when I do the revamp. Thanks for the
comments.

Martin

I thought JavaScript used timeouts based on the system clock-ticks.
Mind you, that hasn't stopped the same thing happening to me.

"Warwick Michael Dumas" wrote in message I
thought JavaScript used timeouts based on the system clock-ticks.
Mind you, that hasn't stopped the same thing happening to me.

The problem is that because it was coded on a very slow machine, the timeout
was set to 10ms. This was negligible compared to the whole second it took
the code to run. Effectively the 10ms was doing nothing. Now that the code
is running on a fast machine, the flaw is obvious.

Martin

In message , Rhiannon Macfie Miller
writes
It was a dark and stormy night, and as the people of uk.rec.gardening
huddled around the fire, Sharon Curtis told them this story:

* I don't like it when separate windows come up for photos,

Absolutely. If I want a new window for something, I`ll bring it up
myself, thank you very much. Besides, I`ve rather fallen in love with
Netscape`s new tags idea

Tabs I think you mean.

(several pages one behind the other in a single
browser window) and bringing up separate windows seems so crude these
days..

Indeed, but it's not a new idea, Opera has been like that for years,
which is why I use it.

--
Chris French and Helen Johnson, Leeds
urg Suppliers and References FAQ:
http://www.familyfrench.co.uk/garden/urgfaq/index.html