[ANN] MacSOUP 2.8.2 available
Stefan Haller
Leopard.
This is a bugfix release, it fixes the following problems:
- Fixed problems when running under Leopard (Mac OS X 10.5):
- Very low data rates when connecting to the server
- Bogus error message when clicking in the All Groups or New Groups window
- Fixed possible crash with the address completion window.
Available from:
<http://home.snafu.de/stk/macsoup/>
--
Stefan Haller
Berlin, Germany
http://home.snafu.de/stk/
Burt Johnson
> The 2.8.2 version of MacSOUP is available. It is now compatible with
> Leopard.
>
> This is a bugfix release, it fixes the following problems:
>
> - Fixed problems when running under Leopard (Mac OS X 10.5):
> - Very low data rates when connecting to the server
> - Bogus error message when clicking in the All Groups or New Groups window
> - Fixed possible crash with the address completion window.
>
>
> Available from:
>
> <http://home.snafu.de/stk/macsoup/>
Thanks for the quick work! I have no idea why more people don't use
MacSoup. I have been a loving user of it since 1.0. :-)
--
- Burt Johnson
MindStorm, Inc.
http://www.mindstorm-inc.com/software.html
J.P. Kuypers
Stefan Haller <s...@snafu.de> wrote (écrivait) :
> The 2.8.2 version of MacSOUP is available.
The French version, F-2.8.2, of MacSOUP is now available at
<ftp://ftp.sri.ucl.ac.be/pub/News/MacSOUP/>.
And maybe soon on one of the mirrors :
<ftp://ftp.calvacom.fr/pub/mac-fr/>
<ftp://ftp.oleane.fr/pub/mirrors/version-francaise/>
<ftp://ftp.free.fr/mirrors/ftp.sri.ucl.ac.be/>
<ftp://ftp.ciril.fr/pub/Mac/UCL/>
<ftp://ftp.cidif.org/mac/>
<ftp://ftp.belnet.be/mirror/ftp.sri.ucl.ac.be/pub/>
--
Jean-Pierre Kuypers
Doc O'Leary
bu...@mindstorm-inc.com (Burt Johnson) wrote:
> Thanks for the quick work! I have no idea why more people don't use
> MacSoup. I have been a loving user of it since 1.0. :-)
I think you've answered your own question. MacSOUP needs to discard
it's Classic "1.0" base and actually work on a Mac OS X version.
MT-NewsWatcher has the same problem, but at least it's free. Another
problem with MacSOUP is that setup is off-putting. When the web site
for it says "e-mail capabilities are somewhat rudimentary", it makes
*zero* sense to have the first thing prompted for be email settings. It
then apparently will prompt to set "personalities", another feature that
is unused by 90% of the people who read Usenet and aren't asshats, so
I've already quit the app by that point. It takes more than having Mac
in the name to make software user friendly.
--
My personal UDP list: 127.0.0.1, 4ax.com, buzzardnews.com, googlegroups.com,
heapnode.com, localhost, ntli.net, teranews.com, vif.com, x-privat.org
AES
bu...@mindstorm-inc.com (Burt Johnson) wrote:
>
> Thanks for the quick work! I have no idea why more people don't use
> MacSoup. I have been a loving user of it since 1.0. :-)
>
Maybe it would help if, when a post like this is made, there were an
opening paragraph that reminded readers -- in particular, MacSOUP
non-users -- in broad and understandable terms, of what the updated
application is and why they might want to look at it:
"MacSOUP is an application that does blah blah blah and is
very useful to users who want to mumble rumble bumble"
D. Kirkpatrick
<droleary.usenet-66...@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
Doc O'Leary <drolear...@4q2007.subsume.com> wrote:
> asshats
Is there a Wiki for that word?
:-)))
Burt Johnson
> When the web site
> for it says "e-mail capabilities are somewhat rudimentary", it makes
> *zero* sense to have the first thing prompted for be email settings.
I wish it would just drop the email part too. So I just don't use it.
The newsreader portion is the best I have tried, and I have pretty much
tried them all...
Burt Johnson
I'll let Stefan (the author of MacSoup) give the full answer. I will
just note that I use because:
1) It allows offline reading/responding, which is a heck of a lot faster
than any fully online program I have tried
2) It stores those posts locally (an option I have turned on), letting
me search long histories of groups I frequent offline. In the technical
forums I visit (C++ and Java mostly), I can almost always answer my
question by searching locally, and don't even need to go online for it.
3) The thread following is the absolute best, and uses a paradigm I have
not seen elsewhere. This is the clincher for me that keeps me from even
considering other alternatives.
Jamie Kahn Genet
> Doc O'Leary <drolear...@4q2007.subsume.com> wrote:
>
> > When the web site
> > for it says "e-mail capabilities are somewhat rudimentary", it makes
> > *zero* sense to have the first thing prompted for be email settings.
>
> I wish it would just drop the email part too. So I just don't use it.
>
> The newsreader portion is the best I have tried, and I have pretty much
> tried them all...
I totally disagree. MacSOUP is the best mailing list reader I've ever
used. Why would you want to kill that? If you don't like it - don't use
it. I fail to see how it can be getting in your way. I can't stand the
thought of having to read any threaded conversations in a lesser client
like Mail or Thunderbird. No doubt those two programs are better at
reading individual, business and HTML emails, but not - IMHO - at
reading text-only mailing lists. MacSOUP's excellent true references
based threading, graphical thread tree, regular expression filtering and
clean UI beats any other GUI client I've used, hands down. Only
Hogwasher has come close IME.
So bravo Stefan and keep up the good work! :-)
Regards,
Jamie Kahn Genet
--
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
David Empson
> The 2.8.2 version of MacSOUP is available. It is now compatible with
> Leopard.
>
> This is a bugfix release, it fixes the following problems:
>
> - Fixed problems when running under Leopard (Mac OS X 10.5):
> - Very low data rates when connecting to the server
> - Bogus error message when clicking in the All Groups or New Groups window
> - Fixed possible crash with the address completion window.
>
>
> Available from:
>
> <http://home.snafu.de/stk/macsoup/>
Hi Stefan
Thanks for the Leopard update.
MacSOUP is still my preferred newsreader (and has been for at least a
decade). Despite having a broadband connection I still find the offline
mode of operation more convenient, as I can accumulate messages and
browse them on my laptop even when I don't have an Internet connection.
While it would be nice if MacSOUP could get a general "user interface
refresh" to bring it more in line with Mac OS X applications, I realise
that this would be a lot of work and you don't have as much time to work
on it these days. Just a few little usability tweaks here and there
could make a big difference.
With this in mind, I have what I hope is a minor request:
Can you please get rid of the "MacSOUP wants attention. Please bring it
to the front" alert which appears in the middle of whatever I'm doing,
or at least add a preference to turn it off? If I've left MacSOUP to do
a news transfer in the background and switched to another application,
it is very annoying to have an alert interrupt me.
Mac OS X's bouncing dock indication is perfectly good as an attention
grabber.
As far as I can recall, MacSOUP is the only application I use regularly
which still has the old style pop-up alert.
(Apple has started doing it more often - Airport now pops up an alert in
Leopard if it wants to offer a connection to a wireless network. I just
turned that one off after it annoyed me one time too often.)
--
David Empson
dem...@actrix.gen.nz
Per Rønne
> While it would be nice if MacSOUP could get a general "user interface
> refresh" to bring it more in line with Mac OS X applications, I realise
> that this would be a lot of work and you don't have as much time to work
> on it these days. Just a few little usability tweaks here and there
> could make a big difference.
I'd much more like it to bring full UTF8 support. And to drop the
obsolete MacRoman.
I do, however, not know how much programming would be needed for that.
More than substituting one class with another? Replacing a MacRoman
class with a unicode class in the underlying class library, but with the
same name and the same interface to the other classes?
But even with such deficiencies, MacSOUP is still the best newsreader of
the world.
--
Per Erik Rønne
http://www.RQNNE.dk
Per Rønne
> 2) It stores those posts locally (an option I have turned on), letting
> me search long histories of groups I frequent offline. In the technical
> forums I visit (C++ and Java mostly), I can almost always answer my
> question by searching locally, and don't even need to go online for it.
You forget that nodes stored globally, on the net, vanishes again. Not
so if you store them locally, on your harddisk ...
Per Rønne
> It takes more than having Mac
> in the name to make software user friendly.
The real userfriendly part of MacSOUP is the the graphical way it shows
a thread's tree structure, and how you can navigate between nodes with
the numerical keyboard.
Doc O'Leary
"D. Kirkpatrick" <sun...@sunclad.com> wrote:
I don't know, but there's definitely a nice entry on Urban Dictionary:
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=asshat
Doc O'Leary
bu...@mindstorm-inc.com (Burt Johnson) wrote:
> Doc O'Leary <drolear...@4q2007.subsume.com> wrote:
>
> > When the web site
> > for it says "e-mail capabilities are somewhat rudimentary", it makes
> > *zero* sense to have the first thing prompted for be email settings.
>
> I wish it would just drop the email part too. So I just don't use it.
When the setup "wizard" forces you to configure it, you can't just
ignore it. It's a huge warning flag right off the bat that demonstrates
muddled thinking by the developer.
> The newsreader portion is the best I have tried, and I have pretty much
> tried them all...
I've tried them all, too, and am always left with the desire to develop
my own. I see many people who swear by MacSOUP, but as a new user it
sure looks like the developer is doing everything possible to make it
unattractive out of the box as a Usenet reader on Mac OS X.
Per Rønne
> In article <1i780kt.1inhxzaloz2psN%bu...@mindstorm-inc.com>,
> bu...@mindstorm-inc.com (Burt Johnson) wrote:
> > The newsreader portion is the best I have tried, and I have pretty much
> > tried them all...
>
> I've tried them all, too, and am always left with the desire to develop
> my own. I see many people who swear by MacSOUP, but as a new user it
> sure looks like the developer is doing everything possible to make it
> unattractive out of the box as a Usenet reader on Mac OS X.
As soon as you lean the shortcuts to navigate within a single thread
[using the numerical keypad] you will realize how good it is.
The only major drawback being the lacking unicode support.
D. Kirkpatrick
<droleary.usenet-5D...@sn-ip.vsrv-sjc.supernews.net>,
Doc O'Leary <drolear...@4q2007.subsume.com> wrote:
>
> I don't know, but there's definitely a nice entry on Urban Dictionary:
>
> http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=asshat
LOL!!!
I have a new word!
Walter Bushell
Yes, but no spell checking. Goodness know what sort of evil entities can
get loose, if your spells are not checked.
Jamie Kahn Genet
I simply use Excalibur. I totally agree about not being without
spellchecking! :-)
Doc O'Leary
p...@RQNNE.invalid (Per Rønne) wrote:
> Doc O'Leary <drolear...@4q2007.subsume.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <1i780kt.1inhxzaloz2psN%bu...@mindstorm-inc.com>,
> > bu...@mindstorm-inc.com (Burt Johnson) wrote:
>
> > > The newsreader portion is the best I have tried, and I have pretty much
> > > tried them all...
> >
> > I've tried them all, too, and am always left with the desire to develop
> > my own. I see many people who swear by MacSOUP, but as a new user it
> > sure looks like the developer is doing everything possible to make it
> > unattractive out of the box as a Usenet reader on Mac OS X.
>
> As soon as you lean the shortcuts to navigate within a single thread
> [using the numerical keypad] you will realize how good it is.
Like I said, I quit the app long before that point. Until the developer
actually changes their approach to setup, I'm not really going any
farther than their annoying mail/personality "wizard". Also, I have a
Nostromo n52, so I can pretty much assign convenient navigation
shortcuts in any app. It doesn't help me at all to hear that MacSOUP
has been comfortable fit for some people since 1.0 on OS 7, because what
I and others are looking for is something new that fits with Mac OS X.
Peter Ceresole
> It doesn't help me at all to hear that MacSOUP
> has been comfortable fit for some people since 1.0 on OS 7, because what
> I and others are looking for is something new that fits with Mac OS X.
It fits very well. You set it up once (a piece of cake, really) and then
use it for ever.
--
Peter
Per Rønne
Yes, and if the user interface was drastically changed, I would drop the
application.
Just let's get full unicode support!
Jack Campin - bogus address
> tried them all...
> I've tried them all, too, and am always left with the desire to develop
> my own. I see many people who swear by MacSOUP, but as a new user it
> sure looks like the developer is doing everything possible to make it
> unattractive out of the box as a Usenet reader on Mac OS X.
Have there been any recent updates to MT-NewsWatcher? It has some
annoying bugs but at least the basic design is okay.
============== j-c ====== @ ====== purr . demon . co . uk ==============
Jack Campin: 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland | tel 0131 660 4760
<http://www.purr.demon.co.uk/jack/> for CD-ROMs and free | fax 0870 0554 975
stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, & Mac logic fonts | mob 07800 739 557
Rob Kouwenberg
> The 2.8.2 version of MacSOUP is available. It is now compatible with
> Leopard.
Thanks ! I'll download and test it in a minute.
How about a feature request:
a checkbox and functionality to get new articles straight away when
opening the application, without intervention (command-k)
Cheers!
Per Rønne
You can add it yourself. Just use QuicKeys ...
Also, you can use QuicKeys to add facilities such as attachen a key
combination to opening or switching to an application. And to let
MacSOUP downlaod and upload for example every 5 minutes.
--
Per Erik Rųnne
http://www.RQNNE.dk
Doc O'Leary
pe...@cara.demon.co.uk (Peter Ceresole) wrote:
No, I set it up never and see if the developer got their act together at
the next major or minor revision. The last thing I'm going to do is to
pay for another Usenet client that the developer doesn't really care
about. I got burned for letting little things slide first by Thoth and
then by Unison. I'm not about to jump through hoops just for another
"new" client when it's obvious that they can't even get the setup right.
Am I really expecting too much to not have MacSOUP make me configure
crap I'll never use? Like I said, it takes more than having Mac in the
name to make software user friendly.
--
Jeroen Scheerder
> I'm not about to jump through hoops just for another "new" client when
> it's obvious that they can't even get the setup right.
MacSOUP is hardly new. It's been around for ages. And so is its
interface. It might turn out differently if it would have been created
yesterday, but it wasn't, and as software goes things get entrenched.
Not that I recall finding MacSOUP's initial setup counterintuitive,
involved, or hard in any other way. But that's been well over a decade
ago, and maybe things were different back then and people didn't get
upset when a program asked about a username, SMTP server and NNTP server
at first run.
Peter Ceresole
> I'm not about to jump through hoops just for another
> "new" client when it's obvious that they can't even get the setup right.
> Am I really expecting too much to not have MacSOUP make me configure
> crap I'll never use?
I think you are protesting too much. The setup is trivial- I did it
years ago and now forget how to do it, because years ago was the only
time I even needed to think about it.
To refuse to use a remarkably good new client just because of a trivial,
extra, one-time step in the setup seems perverse to me. But heck, it's
only a news reader, not the invasion of Iraq.
--
Peter
Peter Ceresole
> To refuse to use a remarkably good new client just because of a trivial,
> extra, one-time step in the setup seems perverse to me.
Bugger- that should be 'news' client, not 'new'. We've established that
it's far from new.
--
Peter
Jamie Kahn Genet
> In article <1i7br2u.ydjnfai6l5xnN%pe...@cara.demon.co.uk>,
> pe...@cara.demon.co.uk (Peter Ceresole) wrote:
>
> > Doc O'Leary <drolear...@4q2007.subsume.com> wrote:
> >
> > > It doesn't help me at all to hear that MacSOUP
> > > has been comfortable fit for some people since 1.0 on OS 7, because what
> > > I and others are looking for is something new that fits with Mac OS X.
> >
> > It fits very well. You set it up once (a piece of cake, really) and then
> > use it for ever.
>
> No, I set it up never and see if the developer got their act together at
> the next major or minor revision. The last thing I'm going to do is to
> pay for another Usenet client that the developer doesn't really care
> about. I got burned for letting little things slide first by Thoth and
> then by Unison. I'm not about to jump through hoops just for another
> "new" client when it's obvious that they can't even get the setup right.
> Am I really expecting too much to not have MacSOUP make me configure
> crap I'll never use? Like I said, it takes more than having Mac in the
> name to make software user friendly.
Sheesh, you're one angry guy. Get over it, seup MacSOUP and then try to
ignore the awful truth (for you) that it is also an email client.
Burt Johnson
You don't like it or want to use it. So what? use whatever tickles your
fancy. I don't see why you are making such a big deal about it. Odds
are that I don't like whatever you are using (since I do like MacSoup).
That is why there are alternatives.
The Wolf
On 11/7/07 1:03 AM, in article
1i76o5h.1wythqz1weo2p2N%bu...@mindstorm-inc.com, "Burt Johnson"
<bu...@mindstorm-inc.com> wrote:
> Stefan Haller <s...@snafu.de> wrote:
>
>> The 2.8.2 version of MacSOUP is available. It is now compatible with
>> Leopard.
>>
>> This is a bugfix release, it fixes the following problems:
>>
>> - Fixed problems when running under Leopard (Mac OS X 10.5):
>> - Very low data rates when connecting to the server
>> - Bogus error message when clicking in the All Groups or New Groups
>> window
>> - Fixed possible crash with the address completion window.
>>
>>
>> Available from:
>>
>> <http://home.snafu.de/stk/macsoup/>
>
> Thanks for the quick work! I have no idea why more people don't use
> MacSoup. I have been a loving user of it since 1.0. :-)
I stopped using it because there is no spell check and the author tells me
there can't be.
Jamie Kahn Genet
Paul Fuchs
> Doc O'Leary <drolear...@4q2007.subsume.com> wrote:
>
> > When the web site
> > for it says "e-mail capabilities are somewhat rudimentary", it makes
> > *zero* sense to have the first thing prompted for be email settings.
>
> I wish it would just drop the email part too. So I just don't use it.
>
> The newsreader portion is the best I have tried, and I have pretty much
> tried them all...
I live in the Virgin Islands and started using MacSoup 11 years ago when
I had to pay the phone company $0.10 per minute for an internet
connection. After I got unlimited local dial-up I continued to use it
so I would tie up my phone line. Now with DSL, I just use it because I
like it.
Only had to pay for it once - not every 18 months like some other Mac
software.
My only complaint is that there is a very short limit on signatures. I
complained to Stefan about it recently, but he refuses to change it
because he regards them as a waste of band width. I regard this as
ridiculous in an age of youtube, but Stefan is a man of fixed opinions.
--
Never believe anything until it's officially denied.
D.M. Procida
> My only complaint is that there is a very short limit on signatures. I
> complained to Stefan about it recently, but he refuses to change it
> because he regards them as a waste of band width. I regard this as
> ridiculous in an age of youtube, but Stefan is a man of fixed opinions.
Hooray for Stefan! It's not just Stefan's opinion, by the way.
Daniele
Jim
> My only complaint is that there is a very short limit on signatures. I
> complained to Stefan about it recently, but he refuses to change it
> because he regards them as a waste of band width. I regard this as
> ridiculous in an age of youtube, but Stefan is a man of fixed opinions.
AIUI MacSOUP signatures are RFC complient. I see no reason why this
should be changed. I don't want to read people's biography with every
message they post - that's what web sites are for.
Jim
--
Find me at http://www.ursaminorbeta.co.uk
Burt Johnson
> I live in the Virgin Islands and started using MacSoup 11 years ago when
> I had to pay the phone company $0.10 per minute for an internet
> connection. After I got unlimited local dial-up I continued to use it
> so I would tie up my phone line. Now with DSL, I just use it because I
> like it.
I forgot about that. Me too! :-) I had an ISDN line installed in 1988
that cost me per mile (I chose my ISP because they are only 3 miles from
my house) and per minute. I was paying $100-$150 per month for "high
speed" access back then (128Kb if I remember right), and MacSoup kept
the costs down by sucking it all quickly.
I later went to DSL and then to cable. I keep using MacSoup because I
like it. I have toyed with others to get binary downloads, or other
missing features. I keep coming back to MacSoup though, with the major
draws being:
1) Absolute best threading model anywhere (I am still baffled why it
hasn't been copied a zillion times)
2) The offsite reading means I have a local database to search quickly
to answer questions fast (mostly used for computer programming issues)
>
> Only had to pay for it once - not every 18 months like some other Mac
> software.
Yep. Of course that is probably one reason for the slow changes.
Stefan probably doesn't get much money out of MacSoup, as most users
probably have been with him for years. No money income makes it hard to
put much time and effort into new features.
>
> My only complaint is that there is a very short limit on signatures. I
> complained to Stefan about it recently, but he refuses to change it
> because he regards them as a waste of band width. I regard this as
> ridiculous in an age of youtube, but Stefan is a man of fixed opinions.
Thank you Stefan! If you want a biography in your sig, create a web
site and point me to it in your sig, which is what I do. No reason to
clog up every message with the details.
BTW, that ISP that I chose back in 1988 because of proximity? They are
still my ISP today, and have been hosting my web site since 1995. When
products and people work, I stick with them. :-)
Doc O'Leary
j...@xs4all.nl (Jeroen Scheerder) wrote:
> Doc O'Leary <drolear...@4q2007.subsume.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm not about to jump through hoops just for another "new" client when
> > it's obvious that they can't even get the setup right.
>
> MacSOUP is hardly new. It's been around for ages.
If only there were some way to indicate I meant it would be new to me as
a regular client. I know, let me go back in time and put quotes around
my use of the word new. Done. Hope that makes things clear. Please go
back in your timeline and adjust your response to maintain consistency.
> And so is its
> interface. It might turn out differently if it would have been created
> yesterday, but it wasn't, and as software goes things get entrenched.
Realize that I didn't take any serious issue with the look of MacSOUP.
While it is true that Classic ports often don't fit with the Mac OS X,
my main complaint was that the developer demonstrated muddled thinking
by putting center stage the configuration of things they acknowledge
MacSOUP does poorly and, in fact, have nothing to do with reading Usenet.
> Not that I recall finding MacSOUP's initial setup counterintuitive,
> involved, or hard in any other way.
I never said it was hard or in any way beyond my abilities. I said it
was evidence that the developer had no interest in actually developing a
user friendly Mac app. It creates a barrier to entry that is completely
unnecessary, and given the alternatives it is often much easier to move
on to trying the next Usenet client.
> But that's been well over a decade
> ago, and maybe things were different back then and people didn't get
> upset when a program asked about a username, SMTP server and NNTP server
> at first run.
You'd think a decade would be enough time to get things done right.
You'd think it would eventually dawn on the developer that when "e-mail
capabilities are somewhat rudimentary" it might not make a whole lot of
sense to make that the *first* thing you're prompted to configure.
Maybe it's time for you to look at MacSOUP with a fresh set of eyes with
the idea that it can be made even better rather than accepting what has
become entrenched.
Doc O'Leary
bu...@mindstorm-inc.com (Burt Johnson) wrote:
> You don't like it or want to use it. So what? use whatever tickles your
> fancy. I don't see why you are making such a big deal about it.
I'm not making a big deal out of it, but rather I'm simply pointing out
things about MacSOUP that might be off-putting. I was responding to
someone who wondered aloud why more people don't use it. If you want to
"So what?" anyone, that's the person deserving your distain. Here, let
me help you out and go back to see who it was. It appears it was Burt
Johnson. Funny.
Peter Ceresole
> My only complaint is that there is a very short limit on signatures. I
> complained to Stefan about it recently, but he refuses to change it
> because he regards them as a waste of band width. I regard this as
> ridiculous in an age of youtube, but Stefan is a man of fixed opinions.
More like a man of good sense. Sounds to me like an excellent reason to
continue using MacSOUP.
--
Peter
Peter Ceresole
> You'd think a decade would be enough time to get things done right.
> You'd think it would eventually dawn on the developer that when "e-mail
> capabilities are somewhat rudimentary" it might not make a whole lot of
> sense to make that the *first* thing you're prompted to configure.
So it'd be okay if it asked those questions second?
I find your reasoning extremely.... strange. But if you really are so
thrown by a simple setup sequence that seems to you to be out of
sequence, that you then refuse to try what is a uniquely capable news
client, that's your privilege. But strange.
--
Peter
Burt Johnson
> In article <1i7d6ku.1npyzprkv8y3iN%bu...@mindstorm-inc.com>,
> bu...@mindstorm-inc.com (Burt Johnson) wrote:
>
> > You don't like it or want to use it. So what? use whatever tickles your
> > fancy. I don't see why you are making such a big deal about it.
>
> I'm not making a big deal out of it, but rather I'm simply pointing out
> things about MacSOUP that might be off-putting. I was responding to
> someone who wondered aloud why more people don't use it. If you want to
> "So what?" anyone, that's the person deserving your distain. Here, let
> me help you out and go back to see who it was. It appears it was Burt
> Johnson. Funny.
Yes, it was, and your first response was completely appropriate. It is
the turning of this into a monster thread that seems out of whack to me.
You seem rather emotionally involved with hating the setup for some
reason...?
There is software that I have tried and not liked. When it get discussed
here, I make a single post (or maybe two, if someone asks for more
details) stating why I don't use it. I then let the thread evolve for
those that DO like it, to say why, and to try and convince others to
come join the party.
Your reasons for not liking MacSoup were made clear up front. The rest
of us don't agree. Rather than making so much effort to stomp on
Stefan's work, why not let others just discuss why it is good (with your
contrary points made), so others will come and join the fun? If they
also turn off to hate the setup so terribly, you can say "I told you
so," but I see no valid reason for you to try so fervently to convince
them to not even try.
Paul Mitchum
> In article <1i7br2u.ydjnfai6l5xnN%pe...@cara.demon.co.uk>,
> pe...@cara.demon.co.uk (Peter Ceresole) wrote:
>
> > Doc O'Leary <drolear...@4q2007.subsume.com> wrote:
> >
> > > It doesn't help me at all to hear that MacSOUP has been comfortable
> > > fit for some people since 1.0 on OS 7, because what I and others are
> > > looking for is something new that fits with Mac OS X.
> >
> > It fits very well. You set it up once (a piece of cake, really) and then
> > use it for ever.
>
> No, I set it up never and see if the developer got their act together at
> the next major or minor revision. The last thing I'm going to do is to
> pay for another Usenet client that the developer doesn't really care
> about. I got burned for letting little things slide first by Thoth and
> then by Unison. I'm not about to jump through hoops just for another
> "new" client when it's obvious that they can't even get the setup right.
> Am I really expecting too much to not have MacSOUP make me configure crap
> I'll never use? Like I said, it takes more than having Mac in the name to
> make software user friendly.
Then don't use it.
--
http://groups.google.com/group/seattle.general/msg/fa780efda9a6edb4
Stefan Haller
> My only complaint is that there is a very short limit on signatures. I
> complained to Stefan about it recently, but he refuses to change it
> because he regards them as a waste of band width. I regard this as
> ridiculous in an age of youtube, but Stefan is a man of fixed opinions.
Paul, this is nonsense. Wasted bandwidth is not an issue nowadays, and
I said so quite clearly in my email reply to your complaint. Just to
set things straight, this is what I replied to Paul:
: Well, I disagree; the limit is not because of wasted bandwidth, but
: because it's annoying to have to look at huge signatures, with poems
: and witty quotes and whatnot. This has not changed from 8 years ago.
:
: However, it may not have to be a strict requirement but rather only a
: strong warning, allowing you to use longer signatures if you really
: feel you must. I might change this some day (no promises though).
--
Stefan Haller
Berlin, Germany
http://home.snafu.de/stk/
Stefan Haller
> Doc O'Leary <drolear...@4q2007.subsume.com> wrote:
>
> > I'm not about to jump through hoops just for another
> > "new" client when it's obvious that they can't even get the setup right.
> > Am I really expecting too much to not have MacSOUP make me configure
> > crap I'll never use?
>
> I think you are protesting too much.
No, he's not. I appreciate it that so many loyal users defend MacSOUP
here, but you have to admit it: Doc is exactly right. It's ridiculous
that MacSOUP requires you to configure an email account, but doesn't ask
you for an NNTP server.
If I ever get around to writing a successor of MacSOUP, it will behave
more reasonable with regard to this and many other user interface
oddities; however, I won't spend time to do any such changes to the old
MacSOUP codebase.
Jim
>
> If I ever get around to writing a successor of MacSOUP, it will behave
> more reasonable with regard to this and many other user interface
> oddities; however, I won't spend time to do any such changes to the old
> MacSOUP codebase.
Can I just reiterate that I would be very happy to pay for a new version of
MacSOUP that was fully Cocoa-ised (given that Carbon seems to be being
pushed gently out of the door).
If you set the price at, say, 30UKP I'd be happy to pay half now, half when
finished. Just a thought.
Jim
--
http://www.ursaMinorBeta.co.uk
ARDSLIGNISH (adj.)
Adjective which describes the behaviour of Sellotape when you are tired.
Gareth Slee
> On 2007-11-12, Stefan Haller <s...@snafu.de> wrote:
> >
> > If I ever get around to writing a successor of MacSOUP, it will behave
> > more reasonable with regard to this and many other user interface
> > oddities; however, I won't spend time to do any such changes to the old
> > MacSOUP codebase.
>
> Can I just reiterate that I would be very happy to pay for a new version of
> MacSOUP that was fully Cocoa-ised (given that Carbon seems to be being
> pushed gently out of the door).
>
> If you set the price at, say, 30UKP I'd be happy to pay half now, half when
> finished. Just a thought.
>
> Jim
Same here. I'd be more than happy to help with development costs.
--
Am I the only Gareth Slee?
http://www.garethslee.com
Gareth Slee
Stefan, please don't allow long signatures. There's nothing that annoys
me more than lines and lines of stuff in signatures.
Pretty please!!!
Niels Jørgen Kruse
> If I ever get around to writing a successor of MacSOUP, it will behave
> more reasonable with regard to this and many other user interface
> oddities; however, I won't spend time to do any such changes to the old
> MacSOUP codebase.
What would you call a successor? SOUP is obsolete right?
--
Mvh./Regards, Niels Jørgen Kruse, Vanløse, Denmark
Chris Ridd
Kruse) said:
> Stefan Haller <s...@snafu.de> wrote:
>
>> If I ever get around to writing a successor of MacSOUP, it will behave
>> more reasonable with regard to this and many other user interface
>> oddities; however, I won't spend time to do any such changes to the old
>> MacSOUP codebase.
>
> What would you call a successor? SOUP is obsolete right?
Don't you normally have a main course after soup?
Cheers,
Chris
Andrew Templeman
Count me in.
--
Andy Templeman <http://www.templeman.org.uk/>
Paul Fuchs
Well, of course you are right Stefan (as I wipe the egg of my face.)
Should have rechecked your message in my archives. My only excuse is
that I am old and my memory is failing. Looks like the decision is
unanimous against my opinion regarding length of signatures.
Frank Slootweg
> Well, of course you are right Stefan (as I wipe the egg of my face.)
> Should have rechecked your message in my archives. My only excuse is
> that I am old and my memory is failing. Looks like the decision is
> unanimous against my opinion regarding length of signatures.
It's not an "unanimous decision" (i.e. of this audience), but a
long-standing de-facto standard. As it's part of the GNKSA (Good
Net-Keeping Seal of Approval), any sane newsreader complies.
FYI, this is what the GNKSA (<http://www.gnksa.org>) says about it:
</quote>
15) Separate signatures correctly, and don't use excessive ones
Posting software SHOULD separate any signature appended to outgoing
articles from the main text with a line containing only `-- ' ("dash
dash space"). To quote son-of-rfc1036:
<<If a poster or posting agent does append a signature to an
article, the signature SHOULD be preceded with a delimiter
line containing (only) two hyphens (ASCII 45) followed by
one blank (ASCII 32). Posting agents SHOULD limit the
length of signatures, since verbose excess bordering on
abuse is common if no restraint is imposed; 4 lines is a
common limit.>>
Hence, posting software SHOULD prevent the user from using excessively
long signatures, or at least warn the user against it. A widely
accepted standard is the so-called McQuary limit: up to 4 lines, each up
to a maximum of 80 characters.
Rationale: Being confronted with (possibly excessively long) signatures
repetitively is, or can be, annoying to many. Being able to separate
the main text and the signature clearly is important, not only to
prevent the possible mistake of misinterpreting a signature, but also to
enable automatic signature suppression for those who wish to do so.
<quote>
The Older Gentleman
> The 2.8.2 version of MacSOUP is available.
<Does happy dance>
--
BMW K1100LT 750SS CB400F CD250 CB125 SL125
GAGARPHOF#30 GHPOTHUF#1 BOTAFOT#60 ANORAK#06 YTC#3
BOF#30 WUSS#5 The bells, the bells.....
Paul Fuchs
I think 4 times 80 characters is a reasonable limit to signatures. I
really don't want theses or long tirades either. Do you know offhand
what the limit of characters is to MacSoup. It may be as small as 72
characters, but I am not sure.
Jamie Kahn Genet
Jamie Kahn Genet
What's wrong with the current name? I think it's silly to try and
rebrand at this point, and what would you call it instead? MacSOUP may
not be understood in it's historical context by noobs, but so what? Most
product names are meaningless anyway!
Regards,
Jamie Kahn Genet
Jamie Kahn Genet
> On 2007-11-12, Stefan Haller <s...@snafu.de> wrote:
> >
> > If I ever get around to writing a successor of MacSOUP, it will behave
> > more reasonable with regard to this and many other user interface
> > oddities; however, I won't spend time to do any such changes to the old
> > MacSOUP codebase.
>
> Can I just reiterate that I would be very happy to pay for a new version of
> MacSOUP that was fully Cocoa-ised (given that Carbon seems to be being
> pushed gently out of the door).
>
> If you set the price at, say, 30UKP I'd be happy to pay half now, half when
> finished. Just a thought.
>
> Jim
Just don't drop the email client, please Stefan. It's the only thing
that makes mailing lists tolerable for me! :-)
Jamie Kahn Genet
Damn straight! It's freaking annoying. In fact it would be nice to be
able to kill based on sig length! :-D Would that actually be practical
(in terms of helping to filter out annoying posts), d'ya think? Heh.
Regards,
Jamie Kahn Genet
D.M. Procida
> > If I ever get around to writing a successor of MacSOUP, it will behave
> > more reasonable with regard to this and many other user interface
> > oddities; however, I won't spend time to do any such changes to the old
> > MacSOUP codebase.
>
> Can I just reiterate that I would be very happy to pay for a new version of
> MacSOUP that was fully Cocoa-ised (given that Carbon seems to be being
> pushed gently out of the door).
>
> If you set the price at, say, 30UKP I'd be happy to pay half now, half when
> finished. Just a thought.
Me too. I paid something like $20 for MacSOUP about 11 years ago, and
have used it almost daily since then. It does exactly what it says on
the tin (UK popular culture joke), without fuss or annoyances. I can't
think of any other software that has been used that much or cost me so
little.
Daniele
D.M. Procida
> : However, it may not have to be a strict requirement but rather only a
> : strong warning, allowing you to use longer signatures if you really
> : feel you must. I might change this some day (no promises though).
No, make it even less. And do it because of Paul, so everyone it will be
his fault and everyone will blame him.
Daniele
Peter Ceresole
> > If you set the price at, say, 30UKP I'd be happy to pay half now, half when
> > finished. Just a thought.
>
> Me too. I paid something like $20 for MacSOUP about 11 years ago, and
> have used it almost daily since then. It does exactly what it says on
> the tin (UK popular culture joke), without fuss or annoyances. I can't
> think of any other software that has been used that much or cost me so
> little.
GraphicConverter gets close; cost more but I've been using it for
longer.
I'd be willing to pay again for a major new version of MacSOUP (as I did
for the OS10 version of GraphicConverter), except that I'm very happy
with the SOUP the way it is.
--
Peter
Doc O'Leary
pe...@cara.demon.co.uk (Peter Ceresole) wrote:
> Doc O'Leary <drolear...@4q2007.subsume.com> wrote:
>
> > You'd think a decade would be enough time to get things done right.
> > You'd think it would eventually dawn on the developer that when "e-mail
> > capabilities are somewhat rudimentary" it might not make a whole lot of
> > sense to make that the *first* thing you're prompted to configure.
>
> So it'd be okay if it asked those questions second?
No, it's rather a particularly egregious example of giving the highest
priority to an admittedly low quality feature. It shouldn't be prompted
for *at all* unless the user actually goes out of their way to set up
MacSOUP as an email client.
> I find your reasoning extremely.... strange. But if you really are so
> thrown by a simple setup sequence that seems to you to be out of
> sequence, that you then refuse to try what is a uniquely capable news
> client, that's your privilege. But strange.
As I said, I'm not troubled in the least. I'm merely pointing out that
there are some very obvious reasons why MacSOUP might be less appealing
to people who haven't been using it since the 1.0 days. There's nothing
strange at all about me keeping my eyes wide open.
Doc O'Leary
nos...@ab-katrinedal.dk (Niels Jørgen Kruse) wrote:
> Stefan Haller <s...@snafu.de> wrote:
>
> > If I ever get around to writing a successor of MacSOUP, it will behave
> > more reasonable with regard to this and many other user interface
> > oddities; however, I won't spend time to do any such changes to the old
> > MacSOUP codebase.
>
> What would you call a successor? SOUP is obsolete right?
Perhaps a richer soup is called for. One that, like Usenet, might have
a large number of crabs as a key ingredient. I vote for Gumbo. :-)
Doc O'Leary
bu...@mindstorm-inc.com (Burt Johnson) wrote:
> Doc O'Leary <drolear...@4q2007.subsume.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <1i7d6ku.1npyzprkv8y3iN%bu...@mindstorm-inc.com>,
> > bu...@mindstorm-inc.com (Burt Johnson) wrote:
> >
> > > You don't like it or want to use it. So what? use whatever tickles your
> > > fancy. I don't see why you are making such a big deal about it.
> >
> > I'm not making a big deal out of it, but rather I'm simply pointing out
> > things about MacSOUP that might be off-putting. I was responding to
> > someone who wondered aloud why more people don't use it. If you want to
> > "So what?" anyone, that's the person deserving your distain. Here, let
> > me help you out and go back to see who it was. It appears it was Burt
> > Johnson. Funny.
>
> Yes, it was, and your first response was completely appropriate. It is
> the turning of this into a monster thread that seems out of whack to me.
> You seem rather emotionally involved with hating the setup for some
> reason...?
If it seems like I'm stuck on the same point, it's merely because you
haven't been able to refute it. I have zero emotional investment, let
alone hate, in pointing out a bad design decision. In doing so, I'm
more interested in seeing things done better in the future. If the
thread has gotten larger than you'd like it's only because it appears
you weren't sincerely interested in seeing MacSOUP being used more
widely.
> There is software that I have tried and not liked. When it get discussed
> here, I make a single post (or maybe two, if someone asks for more
> details) stating why I don't use it. I then let the thread evolve for
> those that DO like it, to say why, and to try and convince others to
> come join the party.
You flatter me by implying that I alone control the evolution of all the
threads on this subject. No, people are welcome to post (and I'd be
more than happy to see them do so) about what makes a Usenet client
great. The sad state of Usenet these days, however, has certainly left
me feeling that no currently client that is out there has really evolved
to fit in with other messaging apps like iChat and Mail.
> Your reasons for not liking MacSoup were made clear up front. The rest
> of us don't agree. Rather than making so much effort to stomp on
> Stefan's work, why not let others just discuss why it is good (with your
> contrary points made), so others will come and join the fun?
Since when did writing a few sentences expressing dissatisfaction become
"so much effort"? I'm much more interested in the truth and the
potential of seeing MacSOUP be made better than I am in putting up a
facade of "fun".
> If they
> also turn off to hate the setup so terribly, you can say "I told you
> so," but I see no valid reason for you to try so fervently to convince
> them to not even try.
Two straw men in one sentence; quite a feat. Nowhere have I said my
desire was to go "I told you so", and I have directly said that trying
all the different Usenet clients is what makes it so easy to move on to
the next one over a setup issue with MacSOUP. So instead of engaging in
logical fallacies, consider actually addressing the issues I've raised.
If you can't, simply say so and you'll have ended the discussion with an
answer firmly in hand as to why more people aren't using MacSOUP.
Frank Slootweg
> Frank Slootweg <th...@ddress.is.invalid> wrote:
>
> > Paul Fuchs <paulfuchs@porkain'tkosher.oink> wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Well, of course you are right Stefan (as I wipe the egg of my face.)
> > > Should have rechecked your message in my archives. My only excuse is
> > > that I am old and my memory is failing. Looks like the decision is
> > > unanimous against my opinion regarding length of signatures.
> >
> > It's not an "unanimous decision" (i.e. of this audience), but a
> > long-standing de-facto standard. As it's part of the GNKSA (Good
> > Net-Keeping Seal of Approval), any sane newsreader complies.
> >
> > FYI, this is what the GNKSA (<http://www.gnksa.org>) says about it:
> >
> > </quote>
> > <quote>
>
> I think 4 times 80 characters is a reasonable limit to signatures. I
> really don't want theses or long tirades either. Do you know offhand
> what the limit of characters is to MacSoup. It may be as small as 72
> characters, but I am not sure.
Sorry, I don't know. I'm not a Mac[SOUP] user. I am reading this in
alt.usenet.offline-reader and just responded to this generic sig length
issue.
Burt Johnson
That has been said many times. The setup is what it is. There is clearly
nothing anyone in this thread can do to change it, except Stefan.
We have also pointed out that this is a one-time issue that is resolved
in roughly 30 seconds. As such, it is a pretty trivial issue to hang an
entire app on.
For some reason, in your mind, that one trivial aspect means the entire
program is full of sh*t. That falls way short of being "logical." If
there were a MacWorld/MacLife/MacWhatever review, it would show all the
wonderful things about MacSoup, and then have a one or two sentence
comment about the setup being a nuisance. That would then be a partial
sentence in the "-" column of the summary. It would not be the entire
review, as you try to make it become...
Tim Gowen
Are you in any way related to Klaus Fuchs?
Tim
--
Tim Gowen
Paul Fuchs
> >Paul Fuchs <paulfuchs@porkain'tkosher.oink> wrote:
>
> Are you in any way related to Klaus Fuchs?
>
>
> Tim
The famous Los Alimos spy? He was my grandson.
David Horne, _the_ chancellor (*)
> Stefan Haller <s...@snafu.de> wrote:
>
> > The 2.8.2 version of MacSOUP is available. It is now compatible with
> > Leopard.
> >
> > This is a bugfix release, it fixes the following problems:
> >
> > - Fixed problems when running under Leopard (Mac OS X 10.5):
> > - Very low data rates when connecting to the server
> > - Bogus error message when clicking in the All Groups or New Groups
> > window - Fixed possible crash with the address completion window.
> >
> >
> > Available from:
> >
> > <http://home.snafu.de/stk/macsoup/>
>
> Thanks for the quick work! I have no idea why more people don't use
> MacSoup. I have been a loving user of it since 1.0. :-)
I can think of one reason, or maybe I'm doing something wrong. I don't
like having to manually rewrap long lines (from other posters) when
following up to posts. Is there no way of doing this automatically?
--
(*) ... of the royal duchy of city south and deansgate
http://www.davidhorne.net - real address on website
"He can't be as stupid as he looks, but nevertheless he probably
is quite a stupid man." Richard Dawkins on Pres. Bush"
Burt Johnson
> I can think of one reason, or maybe I'm doing something wrong. I don't
> like having to manually rewrap long lines (from other posters) when
> following up to posts. Is there no way of doing this automatically?
Select the offending text and type command-R. it auto-wraps the text
for you.
Yes, that would be a pain if I had to do it manually.... :-)
David Empson
> Burt Johnson <bu...@mindstorm-inc.com> wrote:
>
> > I have no idea why more people don't use MacSoup. I have been a loving
> > user of it since 1.0. :-)
>
> I can think of one reason, or maybe I'm doing something wrong. I don't
> like having to manually rewrap long lines (from other posters) when
> following up to posts. Is there no way of doing this automatically?
I find the "Rewrap Text" command (select appropriate lines then hit
Command-R) is perfectly OK for this. I almost never have to manually
rewrap anything (as in cut/paste text between lines).
On occasion I'd like a "level adjust" mechanism, e.g. if I want to copy
and paste snippets from multiple posts and then adjust the indentation
level to get everything lined up. This isn't too bad with rewrap - I can
just insert or delete an appropriate number of > characters at the start
of each line, then select the lines and use Cmd-R to clean it up.
--
David Empson
dem...@actrix.gen.nz
David Horne, _the_ chancellor (*)
> David Horne, _the_ chancellor (*) <d4g...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > I can think of one reason, or maybe I'm doing something wrong. I don't
> > like having to manually rewrap long lines (from other posters) when
> > following up to posts. Is there no way of doing this automatically?
>
> Select the offending text and type command-R. it auto-wraps the text
> for you.
>
> Yes, that would be a pain if I had to do it manually.... :-)
That's what I do- it is manual- and it's a bit of a pain. Especially as
so many people set their line lengths (in other newsreaders) too long...
Burt Johnson
> Burt Johnson <bu...@mindstorm-inc.com> wrote:
>
> > David Horne, _the_ chancellor (*) <d4g...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > I can think of one reason, or maybe I'm doing something wrong. I don't
> > > like having to manually rewrap long lines (from other posters) when
> > > following up to posts. Is there no way of doing this automatically?
> >
> > Select the offending text and type command-R. it auto-wraps the text
> > for you.
> >
> > Yes, that would be a pain if I had to do it manually.... :-)
>
> That's what I do- it is manual- and it's a bit of a pain. Especially as
> so many people set their line lengths (in other newsreaders) too long...
Of course, you now realize that MacSoup will do it for you, right?
(I don't mean to be sarcastic. Just that your message was not clear on
that topic, so I want to be sure you understood how to let MacSoup do it
or you.)
David Horne, _the_ chancellor (*)
> David Horne, _the_ chancellor (*) <d4g...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > Burt Johnson <bu...@mindstorm-inc.com> wrote:
> >
> > > David Horne, _the_ chancellor (*) <d4g...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I can think of one reason, or maybe I'm doing something wrong. I don't
> > > > like having to manually rewrap long lines (from other posters) when
> > > > following up to posts. Is there no way of doing this automatically?
> > >
> > > Select the offending text and type command-R. it auto-wraps the text
> > > for you.
> > >
> > > Yes, that would be a pain if I had to do it manually.... :-)
> >
> > That's what I do- it is manual- and it's a bit of a pain. Especially as
> > so many people set their line lengths (in other newsreaders) too long...
>
> Of course, you now realize that MacSoup will do it for you, right?
>
> (I don't mean to be sarcastic. Just that your message was not clear on
> that topic, so I want to be sure you understood how to let MacSoup do it
> or you.)
OK, but I still don't understand why- it would seem an easy enough thing
to implement. It's about the only think that annoys me about the
newsreader.
Burt Johnson
> OK, but I still don't understand why- it would seem an easy enough thing
> to implement. It's about the only think that annoys me about the
> newsreader.
Sorry if I am being optuse, but I don't understand the problem.
MacSoup does not automatically wrap without asking, and I would be upset
if it did. Sometimes there is formatting in the message that would get
royally messed up if it did.
When MacSoup warns me of the long lines, I just look at the longest line
block in the message, select it, and press command-R.
Bingo. Done. Easy as that. Now I close the message, and send it later
along with the others.
Am I missing something in your sitiuaion that is not being covered?
David Horne, _the_ chancellor (*)
In some posts, there may be a couple of places where I have to manually
rewrap. I'd rather that when I was warned about the long lines- I could
then just request the programme to rewrap them by itself. I don't see
why that would be difficult to automate, and it wouldn't lead to the
problems you mention.
Doc O'Leary
bu...@mindstorm-inc.com (Burt Johnson) wrote:
> We have also pointed out that this is a one-time issue that is resolved
> in roughly 30 seconds. As such, it is a pretty trivial issue to hang an
> entire app on.
That would be true *if* I had no experience with Usenet and *if* there
weren't a dozen other clients I could try. As it stands, it was simply
easier to skip on by MacSOUP.
> For some reason, in your mind, that one trivial aspect means the entire
> program is full of sh*t. That falls way short of being "logical."
I already addressed the point, but you seem to want me to repeat myself
again. It is entirely logical to think that it is a waste to invest
additional time and effort into an app that immediately shows such
muddled design. You wanted to know why MacSOUP wasn't used more, and I
answered. I can't help it if you don't like the answer.
> If
> there were a MacWorld/MacLife/MacWhatever review, it would show all the
> wonderful things about MacSoup, and then have a one or two sentence
> comment about the setup being a nuisance. That would then be a partial
> sentence in the "-" column of the summary. It would not be the entire
> review, as you try to make it become...
I'm not being paid to review Usenet clients. I never pretended to be
doing anything of the sort; you're building more straw men. Bully for
you if you didn't find MacSOUP's first impression to be off putting, but
that has nothing to do with why *other* people don't use it.
Stefan Haller
> I don't like having to manually rewrap long lines (from other posters)
> when following up to posts. Is there no way of doing this automatically?
No, because MacSOUP can't guess reliably enough which lines need to be
rewrapped and which must not. For many messages it may be possible to
do Command-A, Command-R, but for some this would lead to wrong results,
e.g. if the message containes tables or ASCII art.
Consider this paragraph, for example. Here's a short enumeration:
First item
Second item
Third item
Now try Command-A, Command-R on this message and see why the result is
wrong. That's why MacSOUP requires you to select the text that should
be rewrapped.
--
Stefan Haller
Berlin, Germany
http://home.snafu.de/stk/
David Horne, _the_ chancellor (*)
> David Horne, _the_ chancellor (*) <d4g...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > I don't like having to manually rewrap long lines (from other posters)
> > when following up to posts. Is there no way of doing this automatically?
>
> No, because MacSOUP can't guess reliably enough which lines need to be
> rewrapped and which must not.
I can't remember a single instance when it didn't know exactly which
lines had to be rewrapped.
Walter Bushell
Certainly should use the system wide spell checking. Having application
specific spell checkers is a drag. And a pain.
Jamie Kahn Genet
> In article <1i7i98k.wuk9771ljdtj4N%bu...@mindstorm-inc.com>,
> bu...@mindstorm-inc.com (Burt Johnson) wrote:
>
> > We have also pointed out that this is a one-time issue that is resolved
> > in roughly 30 seconds. As such, it is a pretty trivial issue to hang an
> > entire app on.
>
> That would be true *if* I had no experience with Usenet and *if* there
> weren't a dozen other clients I could try. As it stands, it was simply
> easier to skip on by MacSOUP.
Easier than half a minute's config? *blinks* What must the world be like
for someone with such little time and patience?
Kathy Morgan
> Just don't drop the email client, please Stefan. It's the only thing
> that makes mailing lists tolerable for me! :-)
I agree. I use Eudora almost exclusively for my email, but when I need
a threaded view of a mailing list, I open the mailbox for that list
using MacSOUP.
--
Kathy
Kathy Morgan
> My only complaint is that there is a very short limit on signatures.
FWIW, MacSOUP won't stop you from using a very long sig--it just won't
let you automatically include it in every message.
--
Kathy - If you're reading this in your web browser from Google or
similar forum, NNTP "newsreaders" are a better way to access the
content. <http://www.aptalaska.net/~kmorgan/how-it-works.html>
Links to NNTP newsreaders at <http://www.newsreaders.com/>
Help for new users at <http://www.aptalaska.net/~kmorgan/>
Good Net Keeping Seal of Approval at <http://www.gnksa.org/>
OE-quotefix can fix OE:
<http://home.in.tum.de/~jain/software/oe-quotefix/>
For info about creating or removing Big * groups see
http://www.big-8.org. If your server doesn't have news.groups.proposals,
you can read & post to it at
http://news.killfile.org/?group=news.groups.proposals
Actually, this sig consists of 3 different sigs that I use from time to
time; no one wants to see a sig of more than 4 lines.
Kathy Morgan
> I think 4 times 80 characters is a reasonable limit to signatures. I
> really don't want theses or long tirades either. Do you know offhand
> what the limit of characters is to MacSoup. It may be as small as 72
> characters, but I am not sure.
I'm not certain, but I think it's 4 times the number of characters you
have set in your preferences for the line length.
--
for info about creating or removing Big * groups see
http://www.big-8.org
Richard Steiner
nos...@ab-katrinedal.dk (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Niels_J=F8rgen_Kruse?=)
spake unto us, saying:
>What would you call a successor? SOUP is obsolete right?
Infidel! Prepare the torches! :-)
--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Mableton, GA USA
Mainframe/Unix bit twiddler by day, OS/2+Linux+DOS hobbyist by night.
WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
AWilliamson
Johnson) wrote:
>Thanks for the quick work! I have no idea why more people don't use
>MacSoup. I have been a loving user of it since 1.0. :-)
I would love to learn to use it, but couldn't get it to work on my
mac. I couldn't find any online documents either.
~*~*~*Amy mailto:awillia...@charter.net~*~*~
Save a Tree, Save our Planet, Recycle, Think Organic
________________________________
Thought of the day:
Dollars always do better when accompanied by some sense.
AWilliamson
<drolear...@4q2007.subsume.com> wrote:
> I'm not about to jump through hoops just for another
>"new" client when it's obvious that they can't even get the setup right.
>Am I really expectin
I just got a new mac a month ago. I tried several newsgreader, got
frusterated, bought windows ultimate, put it on my mac, and got my
beloved agent back out. So easy to use, since 1995.
~*~*~*Amy mailto:awillia...@charter.net~*~*~
Save a Tree, Save our Planet, Recycle, Think Organic
________________________________
Thought of the day:
If you throw a cat out a car window, is it kitty litter?
Mark Bestley
> On Wed, 07 Nov 2007 09:03:10 GMT, bu...@mindstorm-inc.com (Burt
> Johnson) wrote:
>
> >Thanks for the quick work! I have no idea why more people don't use
> >MacSoup. I have been a loving user of it since 1.0. :-)
>
> I would love to learn to use it, but couldn't get it to work on my
> mac. I couldn't find any online documents either.
>
In the application there is a pdf. If you have MacSoup in Applications
then path is
/Applications/MacSOUP.app/Contents/Resources/English.lproj/MacSOUP
Manual.pdf
--
Mark
Juan I. Cahis
AWilliamson <see_addres...@invalid.com> wrote:
You can use your beloved Agent in your Mac under Crossover for Mac,
without the need to have a Windows License or Windows installed. It
works like a charm.
Thanks
Juan I. Cahis
Santiago de Chile (South America)
Note: Please forgive me for my bad English, I am trying to improve it!
Rowland McDonnell
> (Burt Johnson) wrote:
>
> >Thanks for the quick work! I have no idea why more people don't use
> >MacSoup. I have been a loving user of it since 1.0. :-)
>
> I would love to learn to use it, but couldn't get it to work on my
> mac. I couldn't find any online documents either.
Launch MacSoup, and look in the Help menu. The manual is accessible
there.
And for those who might be interested, it was created using LaTeX with
hyperref package.
Rowland.
--
Remove the animal for email address: rowland....@dog.physics.org
Sorry - the spam got to me
http://www.mag-uk.org http://www.bmf.co.uk
UK biker? Join MAG and the BMF and stop the Eurocrats banning biking