Eudora survey

[Patty Winter]

I recently launched Eudora on my MacBook for the first time in
some months and was greeted with a window that said, "We'd like
to know how you use Eudora." It had some introductory text about
why user information is important to the Eudora developers, and
checkboxes for the types of data I wanted to let Eudora send them.
(How would it know my demographic data???)

I figured what would happen, but I decided to play along anyway,
so I clicked the Generate Info button. Sure enough, a couple of
minutes later I got a returned-mail message from my ISP. Alas,
the address "eudu...@eudora.com" is unknown. Quelle surprise!

It's weird, but in all these years of using Eudora, I don't
remember ever seeing that survey before. Maybe it happened
so long ago that I don't remember. Also, if it only happens
on launch, I can go a long time between relaunches of the
program, so I probably haven't had all that many opportunities
for the survey timer/random selection/whatever to trigger.


Patty

[Peter Ceresole]

Patty Winter <pat...@sonic.net> wrote:

> It's weird, but in all these years of using Eudora, I don't
> remember ever seeing that survey before. Maybe it happened
> so long ago that I don't remember.

I don't think so. I used Eudora from the '80s onwards and don't remember
that one. The usual message is the one about updating to get all the
paid features. I never did that either- but it comes up anytime I start
Eudora nowadays..

Since it became clear that Rosetta was on borrowed time, I switched from
Eudora/POP3 to Mail/IMAP. Works well. Seems to keep it simple...
--
Peter

[David Morrison]

> It's weird, but in all these years of using Eudora, I don't
> remember ever seeing that survey before. Maybe it happened
> so long ago that I don't remember. Also, if it only happens
> on launch, I can go a long time between relaunches of the
> program, so I probably haven't had all that many opportunities
> for the survey timer/random selection/whatever to trigger.

I remember seeing it a few times over the years. Not in the early days
though, just towards the end. Maybe they were trying to gauge whether it
was worth rewriting the Mac version. The lack of response hastening it
to its grave....

[Joe Gwinn]

In article <davidmor-847C95...@news.internode.on.net>,

More likely something triggered it. Look at the Eudora patent (I don't
recall the patent number, but I think the About gives it) - it's pretty
complex, but the complexity is business-model related.

Joe Gwinn

[Daniel Cohen]

Peter Ceresole <pe...@cara.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> The usual message is the one about updating to get all the
> paid features. I never did that either- but it comes up anytime I start
> Eudora nowadays

Do you mean the registration message? You can search and find free
registration codes.

Not something I would normally do, but since Eudora is abandoned I see
no reason why not.
--
<http://www.decohen.com>
The Labyrinth of the Heart: Changed Myths for Changing Lives
book and e-book <http://www.decohen.com/labyrinth>
Send e-mail to the Reply-To address, not the From address.

[Peter Ceresole]

Daniel Cohen <dcohe...@talktalk.net> wrote:

> Do you mean the registration message? You can search and find free
> registration codes.

That's the one.

I've not bothered with it, because Rosetta is disappearing too, so any
future OS update will swtop me running Eudora and I have switched to
Mail with IMAP, which for my purposes runs very well indeed.

My main concern now would be with preserving my archival mailbase and
being able to read it. I believe that there's an online conversion from
Eudora to Mail that's on offer. How good is it?
--
Peter

[Kathy Morgan]

Peter Ceresole <pe...@cara.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> My main concern now would be with preserving my archival mailbase and
> being able to read it. I believe that there's an online conversion from
> Eudora to Mail that's on offer. How good is it?

It worked fairly well for me, except for the attachments which mostly
did not get carried over.

--
Kathy

[Peter Ceresole]

Tim Streater <timst...@greenbee.net> wrote:

> > It worked fairly well for me, except for the attachments which mostly
> > did not get carried over.
>

> If you want something that does a decent job of getting the attachments
> and converting to some other format, try emailchemy.

Thanks Kathy and Tim. Emailchemy I think I have got tucked away
somewhere... I'll have a look. Although I'll confess to not being very
highly motivated, as it's possible to search the mailbase as text, and
all the attachments are in one place anyway. You know how it is... So
little to do, so much time to moon around...
--
Peter

[Daniel Cohen]

Kathy Morgan <kmo...@spamcop.net> wrote:

> It worked fairly well for me, except for the attachments which mostly
> did not get carried over.

I had trouble with attachments, too. Finally settled on Postbox rather
than Mail, and found a way that preserved attachments, which might work
for Mail also.

I imported from Eudora into Eudora OSE (which is based on Thunderbird).
That worked fine, even for attachments, as far as I am aware. Postbox is
also based on Thunderbird, so I did not have to do more work, but for
Mail you would have to import again and see how that went.

[John H Meyers]

Relevant settings:
<x-eudora-setting:13509> One in this many startups ask to send audit info.
<x-eudora-setting:13305> Format for beginning of audit data

Eudora's Windows version generates a user file named audit.log
whose initial content is also self-explanatory; I will append
my log to the end of this post for anyone curious.

I believe that this function is unrelated to "registration."

At one time, everyone was eventually demanded to "register" Eudora,
but bear in mind that Eudora can be "registered" in any mode
(Light, Sponsored or Paid) and that the Eudora web site
originally generated free "registration" codes for anyone,
for either "Light" or "Sponsored" modes,
as someone may have noted during perusal of this patent:

"E-mail software and method and system for distributing advertisements
to client devices that have such E-mail software installed thereon"
<http://www.freepatentsonline.com/7103643.html>

A very brief history of that patent, omitting the battles
among companies who once had similar but more primitive systems:

Qualcomm submits patent application: 2000 Sept 22
Patent is finally granted to Qualcomm: 2006 Sept 05
Qualcomm announces end of Eudora development: 2006 Oct 11

That history reminds me about some overhead electric power lines,
put in place in anticipation of future development
of some empty land next door to our buildings,
below which a tree kept growing until it reached the power lines
and from time to time caught fire. We asked the electric company
to remove the power lines, but nothing happened, other than
the tree continuing to catch fire every now and then.

A month after we had given up and had the tree cut down,
electric company showed up unannounced and removed power lines,
then towering over only a tree stump.

Similar things occur millions of times per year,
in the vast miscommunication of our tangled world.

---

My Audit.log (from Windows version):

This file describes how you use Eudora;
we might ask you for it someday to help us understand our users better.
It will n e v e r contain any of your email or personal information,
and it will n e v e r be sent anywhere without your permission.

There is a legend below that explains what the items mean.

Thank you for your help.

--Jeff Beckley & the rest of the Windows Eudora development team


LEGEND

The usage statistics all begin with when the event occurred,
what application it occurred in, and what sort of event it was.
For example, an entry beginning:

9908311810 32 1

means that at 8:10 AM on August 31, 1999 (9908311810), Eudora (32), quit (1).


Now, that last number will change
depending on what sort of event Eudora has recorded,
and there will be other numbers on the line
that give details about the event. The event codes
and an explanation of their details follow, with an example of each:


Shutdown: 9911231516 32 1 1282 1088 2550 100257
(1) means shutdown. The next four numbers are the amount of time you used Eudora (1282 seconds),
the amount of time Eudora was in the background (1088), the amount of time you were connected to
the Internet (2550), and the total time Eudora was running (100257). Times in seconds.


Timestamp: 9911181835 32 2 1939 4631 9150 9152
(2) is a timestamp. It gets written once in a while, so the log clearly shows Eudora is still
running. The next four numbers are the same as for shutdown.


Ad Display: 9911201520 32 8 2.14
(8) records the display of an ad. The last field identifies which ad it was.


Ad Close: 9911231914 32 9 2.18
(9) shows the closing of an ad. The last field identifies which ad got closed.


Ad Click: 9911192010 32 10 2.22
(10) is a click on an ad. The last field identifies which ad.


Startup: 9911191446 32 15 1 430 3
(15) is Eudora getting going. Next is a platform identifier (1),
then the version number of Eudora (430),
then the build number of that version (3).

================
INFO STARTS HERE
================

0909071825 32 15 1 710 9
0909090011 32 15 1 710 9
0909130537 32 1 57984 294100 361770 365184
[...]
1305201717 32 15 1 710 9

The above data apparently represents an interval
from Sept 2009 through May 2013, although my saved mail
goes back more then ten years' further.

Oh, well, no one really cares, anyway,
about things so much less important than trees,
yet which are easier to discuss and then do nothing about.

--

[Kathy Morgan]

Peter Ceresole <pe...@cara.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> So
> little to do, so much time to moon around...

LOL! I resemble that remark...

--
Kathy

[Peter Ceresole]

Kathy Morgan <kmo...@spamcop.net> wrote:

> > So
> > little to do, so much time to moon around...
>
> LOL! I resemble that remark...

Well, one of the things I moon around doing is to look (most days) at
the FAA airport cam at Tok. You guys seem to be doing okay. But a
question: along the highway, as it goes past the airport, for the past
year fellows have been digging out a large hole. It's not a building
site; they're just taking away tons and tons of dirt. Now the snow has
mostly gone, it's revealed again in all its glory. What the hell are
they doing? Digging for gravel? Hard core for some other building
project, like extending the runway?

Of such wonderings are my days filled.
--
Peter

[Patty Winter]

In article <1l37kwj.1flhulxq0k2nkN%pe...@cara.demon.co.uk>,

Peter Ceresole <pe...@cara.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Well, one of the things I moon around doing is to look (most days) at
>the FAA airport cam at Tok. You guys seem to be doing okay.

Peter, what's the URL for that webcam? I can't seem to find one
in Tok from Googling.


Patty

[Patty Winter]

In article <519ABC16...@nomail.invalid>,
John H Meyers <jhme...@nomail.invalid> wrote:

[snip]

><x-eudora-setting:13509> One in this many startups ask to send audit info.

The default value is:
4000

The current value is:
4000

That explains why I had never seen it before!

I'm actually surprised that I had restarted that copy of Eudora
4,000 times...


Patty

[Peter Ceresole]

Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:

> Peter, what's the URL for that webcam? I can't seem to find one
> in Tok from Googling.

http://akweathercams.faa.gov/

That takes you to the top level; on the left, choose 'south east' sites.
There's a drop down list that includes Tok, among a great load of them.

My favourite is the North view, showing an infinity of spruce and, in
the foreground just this side of the Alaska Highway, the 'gravel pit' I
posted about.

Clicking on the view when it first comes up brings up a larger picture
which will take quite a bit of zooming in.
--
Peter

[Patty Winter]

In article <1l38mj1.1t6wcktdgd77lN%pe...@cara.demon.co.uk>,

Peter Ceresole <pe...@cara.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>
>> Peter, what's the URL for that webcam? I can't seem to find one
>> in Tok from Googling.
>
>http://akweathercams.faa.gov/

Thanks, I had used the search term "webcam" on the FAA site,
but I see they call them "weathercams."

Beautiful view on the mountains on the SW view!

I hope Kathy knows the answer to your gravel-pit question...


Patty

[Peter Ceresole]

Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:

> Beautiful view on the mountains on the SW view!

There's a lot of beuty in those huge skies, too. Which is of course the
point of the sites.

> I hope Kathy knows the answer to your gravel-pit question...

Kathy usually has the answer to most questions. If you look at the Tok
web site, she does a lot for the community there, especially although
not exclusively with the Tok library. I always think of her as a real
frontierswoman, making things happen and forging her own way.
--
Peter

[Kathy Morgan]

Peter Ceresole <pe...@cara.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> Well, one of the things I moon around doing is to look (most days) at
> the FAA airport cam at Tok. You guys seem to be doing okay. But a
> question: along the highway, as it goes past the airport, for the past
> year fellows have been digging out a large hole. It's not a building
> site; they're just taking away tons and tons of dirt. Now the snow has
> mostly gone, it's revealed again in all its glory. What the hell are
> they doing? Digging for gravel? Hard core for some other building
> project, like extending the runway?

Gosh, I've no idea. I'll have to drive by and take a look.

--
Kathy

[Kathy Morgan]

Peter Ceresole <pe...@cara.demon.co.uk> wrote:

> Well, one of the things I moon around doing is to look (most days) at
> the FAA airport cam at Tok. You guys seem to be doing okay. But a
> question: along the highway, as it goes past the airport, for the past
> year fellows have been digging out a large hole. It's not a building
> site; they're just taking away tons and tons of dirt. Now the snow has
> mostly gone, it's revealed again in all its glory. What the hell are
> they doing? Digging for gravel? Hard core for some other building
> project, like extending the runway?

I can't find it! After driving around this afternoon trying to find the
hole on the ground, I came back again to look at the weathercam picture.
The picture I see on the cam doesn't seem to match what I see on the
ground. I'm thinking it must be an optical illusion, and that the cam
is higher and farther back from the highway than it appears, and facing
a bit farther towards the east than the area I was searching on the
ground. Tomorrow I'll go out and look around again, just a little
farther east than I was today.

In the meantime, I'm suspecting that it is indeed a gravel pit; that
they are just digging for the gravel, used for fill wherever it might be
needed or maybe for concrete. I'll be able to check, also, during the
day when the trucks are moving in and out. Seeing whose trucks it is
will perhaps also give me a clue.

--
Kathy

[Jim Gibson]

In article <1l3c9dq.1s59s6t1estrdjN%kmo...@spamcop.net>, Kathy Morgan

This web page has the FAA camera locations marked on a map:

<http://avcams.faa.gov>

You can find the Tok camera on that map by dwelling over each dot (if
you don't know where Tok is -- Kathy should have no problem). Tok is
near the Canadian border (but not the nearest), west of the "Yukon"
label on the map.

Zoom way in on Tok and switch to the Satellite view. Then fire up
Google Earth, zoom in on the same area, and find the building that
houses the camera at 63d 19m 13.77s N 142d 47m 47.13s W. It's six miles
east of town on Highway 2, on the south side.

Imagery is from 9/7/2009, so I guess Google's satellites don't wander
that far north very often.

Using the ruler tool indicates the camera is about 180 meters due south
of Highway 2. There is even a street view from the highway that shows a
tall communications tower. That is probably where the camera is
mounted.

Thanks for the map problem, Kathy.

--
Jim Gibson

[Kathy Morgan]

Ah! Thank you! That really helps to solve the mystery. I had assumed
that the FAA weather cam was at the airport, 1 mile east of town. The
view from the weather cam simply doesn't match what's on the ground
there. Well, 5 miles distance does make a huge difference!

I can't go out tonight to check out the corrected location; I went out
for a few drinks with my husband and we took the taxi home. Tomorrow
when it's a little more sober out I'll retrieve my car and check it out.
According to that map, the weather cam is located out at Young's Timber,
well out of town.

> Imagery is from 9/7/2009, so I guess Google's satellites don't wander
> that far north very often.
>
> Using the ruler tool indicates the camera is about 180 meters due south
> of Highway 2. There is even a street view from the highway that shows a
> tall communications tower. That is probably where the camera is
> mounted.

I think you're right about the Google satellites not going over very
often. That tower was one of five U.S. Coast Guard LORAN towers used to
help ships in the Gulf of Alaska determine their location. They were
taken down last summer since GPS has now replaced their function.

> Thanks for the map problem, Kathy.

Thank you for saving my sanity. It was driving me nuts that I couldn't
locate the spot, but I was working from the faulty assumption that the
weather cam was at the airport.

--
Kathy

[Patty Winter]

In article <1l3ebh7.1xwv35b1fchpedN%kmo...@spamcop.net>,

A logical assumption for an FAA camera. :-)


Patty

[Peter Ceresole]

Kathy Morgan <kmo...@spamcop.net> wrote:

> According to that map, the weather cam is located out at Young's Timber,
> well out of town.

Yup. You have all solved my tiny query. Young's Timber is the location;
I too had been assuming it was at the airport. But it certainly seems to
be in a box half way up that tall mast. In fact the sat image was shot
with the sun due south, and the shadow of the tower falls directly
across what looks like a gravel pit exactly the right shape to match the
FAA cam North view.

Isn't it great when the mysteries of life are revealed one by one..?
Especially as for every one that's cleared another bazillion turn up.

Like, why did they put it there? Answer being, I guess, that towers next
to airfields are, understanably, frowned upon. And there they had a
tower *and* a power supply all laid on. So whoopee.

And Kathy, I'm glad that your evening out was so successful that you had
to take a cab home...

--
Peter

[Patty Winter]

In article <1l3zx3r.14jn539b7z7yaN%pe...@cara.demon.co.uk>,

Peter Ceresole <pe...@cara.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
>Yup. You have all solved my tiny query. Young's Timber is the location;
>I too had been assuming it was at the airport. But it certainly seems to
>be in a box half way up that tall mast. In fact the sat image was shot
>with the sun due south, and the shadow of the tower falls directly
>across what looks like a gravel pit exactly the right shape to match the
>FAA cam North view.

So...it's a gravel pit at a lumber yard?


Patty

[Peter Ceresole]

Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:

> So...it's a gravel pit at a lumber yard?

Well.... A hundred metres or so West of the lumber yard, connected to it
but with a separate entrance.
--
Peter

[Patty Winter]

In article <1l40amj.1ko04qd1yd7cxsN%pe...@cara.demon.co.uk>,

And have you figured out yet where the gravel is going? :-)


Patty

[Peter Ceresole]

Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:

> >> So...it's a gravel pit at a lumber yard?
> >
> >Well.... A hundred metres or so West of the lumber yard, connected to it
> >but with a separate entrance.
>
> And have you figured out yet where the gravel is going? :-)

The only thing I've figured out so far is that (1) it's not where I
thought it was and (2) Kathy and Don have lively nights out.

Significant progress, I'd call it.

Since I'll never see them in real life (closest I ever got was an
overnight snowed in in Anchorage, on the way to Tokyo- by the next time
they flew us over Russia, so all I saw of AK was a stuffed polar bear
and some drunken Innuit in the hotel lobby. Oh yeah, and some spruce) I
rely on Kathy for all my Alaskan experiences. And a very good source she
is too.
--
Peter

[Patty Winter]

In article <1l41bf6.yx6uvi10q38spN%pe...@cara.demon.co.uk>,

Peter Ceresole <pe...@cara.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
>

>> And have you figured out yet where the gravel is going? :-)
>
>The only thing I've figured out so far is that (1) it's not where I
>thought it was and (2) Kathy and Don have lively nights out.
>
>Significant progress, I'd call it.

Indeed! The turn of discussion to their nightlife is ever so much
more interesting than gravel. :-)


Patty

[Peter Ceresole]

Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:

> >The only thing I've figured out so far is that (1) it's not where I
> >thought it was and (2) Kathy and Don have lively nights out.
> >
> >Significant progress, I'd call it.
>
> Indeed! The turn of discussion to their nightlife is ever so much
> more interesting than gravel. :-)

Oh, I dunno. Important stuff, gravel.
--
Peter

[John H Meyers]

On 6/7/2013 12:05 PM, Peter Ceresole wrote:

> Oh, I dunno. Important stuff, gravel.

My first thoughts upon seeing the first photo were:

"Gravel Circle"?

"Alien landing site"?

After all, the reason that so many pilots
report sightings of alien craft
might be that those creatures, too,
can make use of nearby runway lights etc.

--