Google Groups Beta was better (and a plea for peace)

Earlier in thread:
> From: tysteel3...@aol.com
> Some of us don't live in areas that have broadband access, and
> this new configuration takes a painfully long amount of time to
> load on my dial-up.

Here in thread:
> From: "Phil Payne" <p...@isham-research.co.uk>
> Much of my access is 800 x 600. I know from my own Google Analytics
> that this puts me in the disadvantaged 1% of users, but it's really
> not that much better on my 1280 x 1024 office system.

> PLEASE, PLEASE can I have the right hand side of my display back? It
> displays nothing that a dysfunction and metally retarded giraffe
> wouldn't know. I don't mind that display being the norm for newbies -
> but PLEASE, PLEASE give me an option to trun it off. PLEASE.

Would it help if somebody wrote a CGI application that interfaced
between you and Google Groups, whereby the bulk of data is sent
only over high-speed link between Google and the CGI host, with
only the essential stuff sent between the CGI host and your dialup?
In addition, tree view would be available again for the first time in
years, only better than before, with the features of Java/swing
<http://java.sun.com/j2se/1.3/docs/api/javax/swing/JTree.html>
but with connector lines like Google Groups tree view had several
years ago, altogether like the directory-heirarchy tree-view in
RedHat Linux with GNOME?

Earlier in thread:
> I don't know if there is anything I could turn off in IE which will
> make this new format load faster. Graphics are turned off....but that
> isn't helping much. Maybe I could switch something else off that
> could make a difference. Does anyone have suggestions?

AFAIK most of the bulk is JavaScript, which is transmitted even to
user clients such as lynx which don't even have support for it.
I know of no way to stop Google from transmitting all that
worthless crap to browsers that don't support it or which have it
disabled in a futile effort to reduce data bulk.

IMO Google had it right three years ago, when:
- If you click on tree view you see a real tree (with connecting
branches), so that if you see a really long side branch you can
visually follow it downward across many screens until finally it
expands into a sub-tree.
- If you are viewing search results, and you click on a result, or
you are viewing tree view, and you click on a node, you are
taken to the article you wanted, not the first of a group of ten
or twenty-five where you must then manually search for the
individual article you had clicked on.
Beta broke both of those two years ago, and the latest version
didn't fix either of them. Instead of breaking what was working
then, and never fixing them, Google should have enhanced
true-tree-view with ability to collapse or expand sub-trees. For
example, if the first sub-tree is a non-interesting sub-thread, you
could collapse it to a single node, and then that really long side
branch wouldn't have to be followed down many screens, it'd be
right there next on the same screen after the collapsed node. In
fact the default should be to collapse the tree down to what would
fit on one screen. Why didn't Google think of that?

Also, a few weeks ago I came up with a new idea for advertising
revenue, proof that users pay attention to ads, as a possible
replacement for both pop-up ads and banner/rightside ads which are
so annoying to users. I called both Google and Yahoo to ask if I
could come in to their office to meet with somebody to explain my
idea, under protection of a non-disclosure agreement. Google
telephone receptionist said I needed to e-mail my whole idea to
them, which I am not willing to do without a non-disclosure
agreement. Yahoo telephone receptionist told me what number to
call, but all I got was voice-mail, so I gave a vague summary of my
idea, and the person never called me back. Maybe some other
Web-advertising company nearby (Sunnyvale, CA) would be interested
in meeting with me in-person to demo my idea for consideration??
Anybody here know of any such??