Thunderbird is dead!!
rjstep3
but it is wonderful. Just try Outlook 2007 - it even handles IMAP
folders (as Outlook never did before) which was one of the reasons I
kept Thunderbird.
And of course it does all the usual things you would expect - like
synchronise with your calendar and contacts, and with your Windows
Mobile device. So no need to (unreliably) migrate contacts from Outlook
to Thunderbird.
It's a shame, it would be wonderful to believe that Thunderbird could do
it, but it needs an overhaul badly, what are the plans? With Outlook
this good, there had better be something miraculous in the pipeline.
Sorry to sound negative, but those are the facts.
Boris
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
if you don't like Thunderbird the way it is, then there's nothing
stopping you from acquiring the code and developing it to something that
suits you!
--
Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
http://www.bcdb.com/cartoon/46347-Peter_Potamus_Show.html
http://www.toonarific.com/show.php?s_search=Potamus&Button_Update=Search&show_id=2778
Please do not email me for help. Reply to the newsgroup only. Thanks
rjstep3
>
> if you don't like Thunderbird the way it is, then there's nothing
> stopping you from acquiring the code and developing it to something that
> suits you!
>
Actually there is - I am not a programmer. That is the fundamental
problem with open source: it assumes that by making everything public we
will all beaver away and come up with awesome software. We won't. I
couldn't even program the Psion when it was around. I don't want to, I
haven't got the time - I run my own business and I pay people to do that
sort of thing.
Plus: why should I develop something when there is now something on the
market that is PERFECTLY suitable?
Hate to rain on your parade ...
Boris.
pop
--
(^\pop/^) (not bob, qoq or dod)
I Stopped to think but forgot to start again.
--
rjstep3
> then why are you using TB to post to this newsgroup?
>
because it is still on my PC - which it won't be for long I'm afraid.
Tho I might still use it for newsgroups, it's a toss-up between TB and
xnews.
sorry
Boris
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
> Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
>
>>
>> if you don't like Thunderbird the way it is, then there's nothing
>> stopping you from acquiring the code and developing it to something
>> that suits you!
>>
>
> Actually there is - I am not a programmer.
you can either do it yourself, hire someone to do it for you.
Brian Heinrich
<snip />
> if you don't like Thunderbird the way it is, then there's nothing
> stopping you from acquiring the code and developing it to something that
> suits you!
That's a bit glib, I must say.
/b.
--
String quartets don't march very well.
--Donald Barthelme, /The Dead Father/
rjstep3
I have got to get some sleep - and a big meeting tomorrow and lots of
work afterwards - but don't let it stop you - or anyone - posting
replies, I will have a look as soon as I can.
Experience of Outlook 2007 desirable.
Boris.
Andrew DeFaria
First of all - troll! If you like Outlook then great. Use it. Have fun. How much does that cost again? Oh yeah - $$$!
And there is no need to post that you don't like TB. I like TB. I don't like Outlook. Do I go to the Outlook newsgroups and post that Outlook sucks? No. 'Cause I'm not a troll like you.
I have just migrated to Office 2007 - for years I have been a M$ hater - but it is wonderful. Just try Outlook 2007 - it even handles IMAP folders (as Outlook never did before) which was one of the reasons I kept Thunderbird.
And of course it does all the usual things you would expect
- like synchronise with your calendar and contacts, and with your Windows Mobile device. So no need to (unreliably) migrate contacts from Outlook to Thunderbird.
It's a shame, it would be wonderful to believe that Thunderbird could do it, but it needs an overhaul badly, what are the plans? With Outlook this good, there had better be something miraculous in the pipeline.
Sorry to sound negative, but those are the facts.
Brian Heinrich
If Outlook does what you want it to do, then use it -- especially if you
have an Exchange server (altho', after a recent conversation with a friend,
I'd be inclined recommend against Exchange, at least till I find out why he
-- and a buncha people using the same server -- aren't receiving their mail).
(One reason I would be hesitant about Outlook 2007, BTW, is that in addition
to all the bloat of Word HTML, it now uses Word as it's HTML viewer.)
Different people have different needs. In addition to Tb (and SM), I
currently have Evolution, KMail, Claws, and Pine installed on my Linux
partition. Of those, the one that best suits my needs is Tb.
There are other issues, of course, some philosophical, others not. But
'Peter''s response in glib in the extreme.
I don't think you've actually identified anything meaningful in your
assumptions about Open Source, since I don't believe the underlying
assumption is that everyone has the skills or the time to be actively
involved in programming.
In fact, that's precisely how bug bounties came about: People who don't
have the skills or the time pony up money so that someone who does will fix
a bug that, to them, is in some way or show-stopper or a utility/usability
issue.
All of which said, I'm not sure I understand what your original point was.
What do you mean in stating that Tb 'needs an over-haul badly'? Are you
talking about address-book migration? are you talking about sync'ing with a
Windows mobile device? -- both? neither? something else?
rjstep3
> rjstep3 wrote:
>
> First of all - troll! If you like Outlook then great. Use it. Have fun.
> How much does that cost again? Oh yeah - $$$!
cheapskate. (well if you call me troll ...)
>
> And there is no need to post that you don't like TB. I like TB. I don't
> like Outlook. Do I go to the Outlook newsgroups and post that Outlook
> sucks? No. 'Cause I'm not a troll like you.
Actually, when there was something about Outlook I didn't like I was
very happy to vent. I am not a fanatic about one thing only.
>> I have just migrated to Office 2007 - for years I have been a M$ hater
>> - but it is wonderful. Just try Outlook 2007 - it even handles IMAP
>> folders (as Outlook never did before) which was one of the reasons I
>> kept Thunderbird.
> TB has had IMAP folders from the start, as had Mozilla and Netscape
> before it. BFD.
I know it had IMAP folder facilities - that is why I used it. but that
advantage has now gone. (as long as you are not a cheapskate).
>> And of course it does all the usual things you would expect
> Funny, it works in very unexpected ways whenever I'm forced to used it...
>> - like synchronise with your calendar and contacts, and with your
>> Windows Mobile device. So no need to (unreliably) migrate contacts
>> from Outlook to Thunderbird.
>>
>> It's a shame, it would be wonderful to believe that Thunderbird could
>> do it, but it needs an overhaul badly, what are the plans? With
>> Outlook this good, there had better be something miraculous in the
>> pipeline.
> TB has an addressbook so there's the contacts. It also has support for
> LDAP servers. And with Lightning it has a calendar too. Finchsync
> (http://finchsync.com) synchronizes with WM 5.0.
I hdan't heard of this one, thanks for the link. What calendar does it
sync with?
>> Sorry to sound negative, but those are the facts.
> There are lots of facts. You appear to have been ignorant about some of
> them.
I didn't know about finchsink, that much I concede, but I am pretty
savvy about software, and TB needs an overhaul. What is to stop me
expressing my opinion?
As I said in my post, I am - probably like you - a M$ hater, but I have
to to concede when they (or anyone else) does something good. Time to
take a look and learn from what they have done.
Over to you TB developers: can you come up with something that provides
email, contacts, calendar, notes, synchronised with your mobile device,
as opposed to just a capable email client? Because people these days
need the former, not the latter.
> --
> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
> Why do we drive on parkways and park on driveways?
thanks for your views, Andrew
Boris
Piperson
> I have just migrated to Office 2007 - for years I have been a M$ hater -
> but it is wonderful. Just try Outlook 2007 - it even handles IMAP
> folders (as Outlook never did before) which was one of the reasons I
> kept Thunderbird.
And now that you are using the great new email client, how are you
reading these newsgroups?
DevilsPGD
<pps...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>rjstep3 wrote:
>> I have just migrated to Office 2007 - for years I have been a M$ hater -
>> but it is wonderful. Just try Outlook 2007 - it even handles IMAP
>> folders (as Outlook never did before) which was one of the reasons I
>> kept Thunderbird.
>
>Who are you kidding? Outlook 2003 has IMAP. I use it every day.
It's not especially stable if your connection is moderately unreliable,
or oddly enough, too fast (less then 1ms latency)
--
Insert something clever here.
Chris Ilias
Cross-posting and follow-up set to mozilla.feedback.
Seeing as you aren't really looking for any user support, but just
providing feedback, I think your post best belongs in mozilla.feedback. :-)
--
Chris Ilias <http://ilias.ca>
List-owner: support-firefox, support-thunderbird
mozilla.test.multimedia moderator
(Please do not email me tech support questions)
caver1
If you want to stay open source there are Linux programs that will do
all that and more. I agree that Windows at this pointin time is easier.
Linux is catching up rapidly. But at the same time Windows ease makes it
very vulnerable. And true you have to learn Linux but at one point you
had to learn windows. You don't have to be a programmer.
Hate to rain on your parade......
Brian Heinrich
> Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>> rjstep3 wrote:
>>
>> First of all - troll! If you like Outlook then great. Use it. Have
>> fun. How much does that cost again? Oh yeah - $$$!
>
> cheapskate. (well if you call me troll ...)
In all seriousness, however, some of us who either don't have the money or
don't want to spend the money.
One thing that I do find interesting is that Microsoft has abandoned OE in
favour of Windows Mail, which is a sub-set of Windows Live Mail Desktop.
It sounds like what they're doing is finally moving in the direction of the
thin clients that were so trumpeted at the time of Windows XP and .NET.
<snip />
> I know it had IMAP folder facilities - that is why I used it. but that
> advantage has now gone. (as long as you are not a cheapskate).
Or can afford it.
I'm not sure how the fact that Outlook apparently handles IMAP better than
it has in the past (ironically OE's IMAP handling was better than O's,
perhaps because O is in a sense intended to work in conjunction with
Exchange. In fact, realistically, I would have to say that there's
absolutely no reason to shell out the money for, let alone use, O if you
aren't accessing an Exchange server) suddenly means it's a better client
than Tb -- bearing in mind, of course, that Tb is a mail/news client whilst
O is a PIM.
<snip />
> I didn't know about finchsink, that much I concede, but I am pretty
> savvy about software, and TB needs an overhaul. What is to stop me
> expressing my opinion?
Because, as currently expressed, you opinion is without meaning. You've
written that Tb needs an over-haul, but what does that mean? Does it mean
that -- as you indicate below -- it's !(O)?
> As I said in my post, I am - probably like you - a M$ hater, but I have
> to to concede when they (or anyone else) does something good. Time to
> take a look and learn from what they have done.
Actually, I have yet to hear a good thing about Outlook 2007; the best I've
heard about Office relates to Word, and even /that/'s been a mixed bag.
> Over to you TB developers: [ . . . ]
Er, I take it you missed the 'support' in the NG name? :-P
> [ . . . ] can you come up with something that provides
> email, contacts, calendar, notes, synchronised with your mobile device,
> as opposed to just a capable email client? Because people these days
> need the former, not the latter.
I won't go into details, but I'd say that Tb is currently the best e-mail
client I've ever used -- and God knows I've tried a lot of them over the
years, some 30 or 40.
The question, finally, is this: is Tb to be a full-featured PIM? I'm quite
happy with it as a solid e-mail client, and all the clutter of a PIM (which
I don't currently need) would drive me away from Tb. If I want to use O,
I'll use it; if I want to use Evolution, I'll use it. If I don't use them,
it's not just 'cos I can't justify throwing any more money Microsoft's way;
it's because it's more than I need.
I suspect you're over-generalising when you suggest that people these days
need contacts, calendar, notes, mobile sync'ing, &c, in addition to e-mail.
However, I do like the way in which KMail, KOrganiser, KAddressBook,
Kontact, &c, are separate but related apps, and I suspect such a model would
work in the case of Tb -- that is, rather than the all-in-one bloat of
Outlook and Evo, different apps (Firefox, Sunbird, Thunderbird, an app that
expands address-book functionality, a note-taking app /à la/ KNotes or
Tomboy, improved sync'ing functionality (both to servers and otherwise), &c)
would co-operate with each other and that would use open -- and, presumably,
Web-based -- standards (rather than rely on proprietary server software) for
their functionality.
Just a tho't. . . .
Brian Heinrich
<snip />
> If you want to stay open source there are Linux programs that will do
> all that and more. I agree that Windows at this pointin time is easier.
> Linux is catching up rapidly. But at the same time Windows ease makes it
> very vulnerable. And true you have to learn Linux but at one point you
> had to learn windows. You don't have to be a programmer.
> Hate to rain on your parade......
Things have gotten to the point where l'users don't need to learn the ins
and out of Linux any more than they do the ins and outs of Windows.
I've had hopeless computer illiterates -- the kinds of people who would tell
me 'the server's down' when they meant the Internet connexion was down and
would blithely download things or open e-mail that clearly had a viral
payload -- with no more complaint than they had to remember the ridiculous
root password I'd chosen in order to change some things. (Well, at least
they never logged on as root!)
Certainly, there would appear to be more options under Linux than under Windows.
On the flip side, the guy who ported The GIMP to Windows is also porting Evo
to Windows, tho' it's still early on in its development; see
<http://shellter.sourceforge.net/evolution/>.
Crash
Apart from it being pointless to post TB/Outlook comparisons (as you see them)
in a TB support ng, I believe TB is intended to compete with Outlook Express
rather than Outlook. Outlook has been traditionally focussed on business needs
(unsurprising - it costs and is part of the Office product) whereas TB is free
and focussed towards personal use.
Crash.
Andrew DeFaria
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo wrote:
if you don't like Thunderbird the way it is, then there's nothing stopping you from acquiring the code and developing it to something that suits you!Actually there is - I am not a programmer.
That is the fundamental problem with open source: it assumes that by making everything public we will all beaver away and come up with awesome software. We won't. I couldn't even program the Psion when it was around. I don't want to, I haven't got the time - I run my own business and I pay people to do that sort of thing.
Plus: why should I develop something when there is now something on the market that is PERFECTLY suitable?
Hate to rain on your parade ...
Andrew DeFaria
Andrew DeFaria wrote:
rjstep3 wrote:cheapskate. (well if you call me troll ...)
First of all - troll! If you like Outlook then great. Use it. Have fun. How much does that cost again? Oh yeah - $$$!
And there is no need to post that you don't like TB. I like TB. I don't like Outlook. Do I go to the Outlook newsgroups and post that Outlook sucks? No. 'Cause I'm not a troll like you.Actually, when there was something about Outlook I didn't like I was very happy to vent. I am not a fanatic about one thing only.
I know it had IMAP folder facilities - that is why I used it. but that advantage has now gone. (as long as you are not a cheapskate).I have just migrated to Office 2007 - for years I have been a M$ hater - but it is wonderful. Just try Outlook 2007 - it even handles IMAP folders (as Outlook never did before) which was one of the reasons I kept Thunderbird.TB has had IMAP folders from the start, as had Mozilla and Netscape before it. BFD.
Outlook has been a known target for exploits and viruses for quite some time - I love you!
TB handles anything thrown at it - Outlook often has problems.
Outlook has piss poor quoting capabilities.
Outlook doesn't have much flexibility like TB's extensions.
Outlook doesn't do NNTP.
Need I go on?
IOW I use TB for valid reasons and with a price of $0 it's just icing on the cake.
I hdan't heard of this one, thanks for the link. What calendar does it sync with?And of course it does all the usual things you would expectFunny, it works in very unexpected ways whenever I'm forced to used it...
- like synchronise with your calendar and contacts, and with your Windows Mobile device. So no need to (unreliably) migrate contacts from Outlook to Thunderbird.TB has an addressbook so there's the contacts. It also has support for LDAP servers. And with Lightning it has a calendar too. Finchsync (http://finchsync.com) synchronizes with WM 5.0.
It's a shame, it would be wonderful to believe that Thunderbird could do it, but it needs an overhaul badly, what are the plans? With Outlook this good, there had better be something miraculous in the pipeline.
I didn't know about finchsink, that much I concede, but I am pretty savvy about software, and TB needs an overhaul.Sorry to sound negative, but those are the facts.There are lots of facts. You appear to have been ignorant about some of them.
What I need is a good email client that works well under various OSes, loads and shit thrown at it. I also need to read Usenet news. TB fits the bill for me and many others in all of these aspects.
What is to stop me expressing my opinion?
As I said in my post, I am - probably like you - a M$ hater,
but I have to to concede when they (or anyone else) does something good. Time to take a look and learn from what they have done.
Over to you TB developers: can you come up with something that provides email, contacts, calendar, notes, synchronised with your mobile device, as opposed to just a capable email client? Because people these days need the former, not the latter.
thanks for your views, Andrew
Bob Henson
Hash: SHA256
rjstep3 wrote
Does it integrate fully with GnuPG? no? Ah, shame - bin Outlook 2007 then.
Regards,
Bob
- --
Remove "x" from address to reply by email.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iQEVAwUBRdvv73K0TX9bVQu/AQiJgQf/egJ3QE25bgvcznrBD9wNATPzHJo6zyw9
sQIV96P9E0xqHjH1zjBzKmEm7wzLo0XlZ1GJBeW6E5f1keVJY/uj31Uq5gawDqcX
KRAKfiwA94aWvsdBgnhCZXoUVFquyp/Y92SGwOEGxpn0VOBECB7bI0PKbg4zDpGQ
LBDJRQAuw15fg1zZAjDFNCIEyHtQzzctpk0rmBeCGAi5/y7d4Pd3S9Jl2fmNS3K1
e3aaTUO9vCa2W7vbbeVHFHB99WpDJNOsXmfqoneeTtmbduJ+G9p/mVvsIDvZefPF
MPc25ifyWSJdw+r4fFI32CnEnQORhw+XXAlt51L73A2WhDWtVKGhfA==
=djY/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Brian Heinrich
<snip />
> Does it integrate fully with GnuPG? no? Ah, shame - bin Outlook 2007 then.
If it meets the guys needs, it meets his needs.
At one point, I would've considered S/MIME support to be adequate in an
e-mail client; now, I'd prefer that it support S/MIME and OpenPGP. But
that's me, and very few of the people I know feel that security
(signing/encryption) is that important.
Again, bear in mind that Tb is focussed primarily on e-mail, tho' it does do
news and can pull RSS feeds, whereas O is a full PIM, much like Evo (which
does support OpenPGP), so in a sense this entire thread is apples and
oranges. . . .
Ron Hunter
And you paid how much for Office 2007? And how much for Thunderbird?
--
Ron Hunter rphu...@charter.net
Chris Barnes
> It's a shame, it would be wonderful to believe that Thunderbird could do
> it, but it needs an overhaul badly, what are the plans? With Outlook
> this good, there had better be something miraculous in the pipeline.
Ok, I'll feed the troll. At least just a little.
MAYBE if you compare OL (or OE, or Pegasus, or Eudora, or....) to
Thunderbird as it comes out of the box, you MIGHT have an argument.
Honestly, I doubt it, but you might.
But the fact that TB allows extensions, and that there are hundreds of them
out there to choose from, makes TB the hands-down winner in "email client
of choice". It is so good, I use it *despite* TB having a horrible
addressbook...
--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Chris Barnes AOL IM: CNBarnes
ch...@txbarnes.com (also MSN IM) Yahoo IM: chrisnbarnes
Chris Barnes
> because it is still on my PC - which it won't be for long I'm afraid.
> Tho I might still use it for newsgroups, it's a toss-up between TB and
> xnews.
So are you saying OL2007 still doesn't do newsgroups, despite people
complaining literally for YEARS on the msnews.microsoft.com news server in
the Outlook groups?
What a lame program!
Chris Barnes
> you can either do it yourself, hire someone to do it for you.
....or....
mention the need here and see if someone who is a programmer will write the
extension for the rest of the world.
It's called "providing feedback". And frankly, the TB developers are much,
much better at taking and using feedback than the OL developers.
And I would know - I have spent YEARS on the msnews.microsoft.com newsserver...
Chris Barnes
> Actually, I have yet to hear a good thing about Outlook 2007; the best
> I've heard about Office relates to Word, and even /that/'s been a mixed
> bag.
Let me add a datapoint to you.
I plan on putting of the migration to Office2007 as long as I possibly can.
It - not just OL but the Office suite, is very much geared to offices
which use an exchange server. In fact, it is my opinion that the changes
are a deliberate attempt by M$ to force folks into using Exchange (which
just happens to be a gawd-awful expensive piece of bloatware).
What's worse, the user-interface changes are so dramatic that there is no
way I will subject the secretarial staff in the department to it. It would
cost me a fortune just in user-support time to sit down trying to show them
where "File | Save" is (not to mention I'll have to find it all myself).
And then there is the whole issue of OL using Word as it's HTML rendering
engine instead of IE7 (for the record, I actually like IE7). I seriously
hope someone at M$ got fired over that dim-wit decision...
> I won't go into details, but I'd say that Tb is currently the best
> e-mail client I've ever used -- and God knows I've tried a lot of them
> over the years, some 30 or 40.
40 huh? Hmm...
Thunderbird/Netscape/Mozilla/SeaMonkey, Outlook, Outlook Express,
Groupwise, MS Mail, Pegasus, Eudora, AOL, TheBat, Incredimail, Entourage,
Opera, RiceMail (vm/cms), vax/vms client?, pine, PC Pine, elm, mail(x),
mutt, squirrelmail, horde/imp, gmail/yahoo/hotmail,
I guess I'm not worthy - I could only come up with 27 (or 21, depending on
how you count)
Zak Hipp
> I have just migrated to Office 2007 - for years I have been a M$ hater -
> but it is wonderful. Just try Outlook 2007 - it even handles IMAP
> folders (as Outlook never did before) which was one of the reasons I
> kept Thunderbird.
>
> And of course it does all the usual things you would expect - like
> synchronise with your calendar and contacts, and with your Windows
> Mobile device. So no need to (unreliably) migrate contacts from Outlook
> to Thunderbird.
>
> it, but it needs an overhaul badly, what are the plans? With Outlook
> this good, there had better be something miraculous in the pipeline.
>
>
> Boris
I have just migrated to 'Thunderbird'. For years I have been a 'Moz-Zero$' hater, but its wonderful. Just try
'Thunderbird' it handles IMAP folders (as 'Outlook' has just achieved), which was one, of many, reasons I never kept
'Outlook'.
Of course it does all the usual things you would expect - like NNTP, multiple profiles, resistance to attack, high
customisation, expandability, multi-platform, can be run from USB sticks and taken with you, *free*, RSS, simple copy
backups, multitudes of extensions, runs on wide machine specifications, themes, easy to make relatively secure,
scrutinised code, I must have mentioned *free*, etc. etc. etc.
Want a calendar? Just bolt one on.
Want a reminder? Just bolt one on.
Want a...? Just bolt one on.
It's a shame, but it would be wonderful to believe that 'Outlook' could do it, but it needs an overhaul badly. What are
the plans? With 'Thunderbird' this good, there had better be something miraculous in the pipeline.
Sorry to sound negative, but those are the facts.
Zak Hipp
Brian Heinrich
<snip />
> It [Tb] is so good, I use it *despite* TB having a horrible addressbook...
*ROTFL!!*
OK, I gotta ask: I've never been thrilled with the address books in most of
the apps I've used -- in fact, I'd have to say that the best address books
I've come across have been in Evolution and KMail -- , but what is it that
you find so horrible about Tb's address book?
Andrew DeFaria
On 2007-02-21 09:02 (-0700 UTC), Chris Barnes wrote:
<snip />
It [Tb] is so good, I use it *despite* TB having a horrible addressbook...
*ROTFL!!*
OK, I gotta ask: I've never been thrilled with the address books in most of the apps I've used -- in fact, I'd have to say that the best address books I've come across have been in Evolution and KMail -- , but what is it that you find so horrible about Tb's address book?
From http://www.jwz.org/hacks/mork.pl:
# And Now, The Ugly Truth Laid Bare: # # In Netscape Navigator 1.0 through 4.0, the history.db file was just a # Berkeley DBM file. You could trivially bind to it from Perl, and # pull out the URLs and last-access time. In Mozilla, this has been # replaced with a "Mork" database for which no tools exist. # # Let me make it clear that McCusker is a complete barking lunatic. # This is just about the stupidest file format I've ever seen. # # http://www.mozilla.org/mailnews/arch/mork/primer.txt # http://jwz.livejournal.com/312657.html # http://www.jwz.org/doc/mailsum.html # http://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=241438 # # In brief, let's count its sins: # # - Two different numerical namespaces that overlap. # # - It can't decide what kind of character-quoting syntax to use: # Backslash? Hex encoding with dollar-sign? # # - C++ line comments are allowed sometimes, but sometimes // is just # a pair of characters in a URL. # # - It goes to all this serious compression effort (two different # string-interning hash tables) and then writes out Unicode strings # without using UTF-8: writes out the unpacked wchar_t characters! # # - Worse, it hex-encodes each wchar_t with a 3-byte encoding, # meaning the file size will be 3x or 6x (depending on whether # whchar_t is 2 bytes or 4 bytes.) # # - It masquerades as a "textual" file format when in fact it's just # another binary-blob file, except that it represents all its magic # numbers in ASCII. It's not human-readable, it's not hand-editable, # so the only benefit there is to the fact that it uses short lines # and doesn't use binary characters is that it makes the file bigger. # Oh wait, my mistake, that isn't actually a benefit at all. # # Pure comedy.
Terry
<snip>
> How about the semi weekly corruption and non-standard yet crazy file
> format? I just had it corrupt on me again. I've also lost quite a number
> of entries...
<snip>
I have never experienced a corruption of any of my 12 TB address books.
But because I was used to it happening with the Corel Address book
with regularity, I now immediately export any address book after a
modification is made, just in case. But its never happened in TB, in
any version.
--
Terry
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
Andrew DeFaria
I have never experienced a corruption of any of my 12 TB address books.
But because I was used to it happening with the Corel Address book with regularity, I now immediately export any address book after a modification is made, just in case. But its never happened in TB, in any version.
In any event not trusting your addressbook to the point where you need to back up after every modification is, by definition, a broken format!
Terry
> Terry wrote:
>> I have never experienced a corruption of any of my 12 TB address books.
<br><br> inserted for andrew
> Great and that's wonderful.... FOR YOU. However I've had at least 3
> times of major corruption which, of course, has lead me to find that
> stuff about mork.
<br><br> inserted for andrew
>> But because I was used to it happening with the Corel Address book
>> with regularity, I now immediately export any address book after a
>> modification is made, just in case. But its never happened in TB, in
>> any version.
<br><br> inserted for andrew
> Then again you aren't using FinchSync which may very well be causing the
> corruption (though I had indeed seen various smaller corruptions of my
> addressbook through the years).
>
> In any event not trusting your addressbook to the point where you need
> to back up after every modification is, by definition, a broken format!
3 times is far from "semi-weekly", unless you're a new user (which
you're not). I don't read about address book corruption with any
regularity, so you're kind of out there on your own on this one (of
course you may have answered your own statement by it being caused by an
extension).
After losing a hard drive many many years ago, I now have 3 on my system
with redundant backups. So no, I don't trust anything with my data
really. And if taking a few seconds to create a backup might save me
from losing valuable information, I do it.
Brian Heinrich
> Brian Heinrich wrote:
>> Actually, I have yet to hear a good thing about Outlook 2007; the best
>> I've heard about Office relates to Word, and even /that/'s been a
>> mixed bag.
>
> Let me add a datapoint to you.
> I plan on putting of the migration to Office2007 as long as I possibly
> can. It - not just OL but the Office suite, is very much geared to
> offices which use an exchange server. In fact, it is my opinion that
> the changes are a deliberate attempt by M$ to force folks into using
> Exchange (which just happens to be a gawd-awful expensive piece of
> bloatware).
As I indicated in another post, I honestly don't see the point of using
Outlook /unless/ you're using Exchange. Of course, the flip-side of that is
that it can cause grief to those who /aren't/ -- winmail.dat, anyone?
I have a friend who runs his own Exchange server and has for a dozen years.
I don't think he has any particular attachment to it; rather, I suspect
that he's used it for so long, has so much e-mail stored on it (12 GB), has
it so integrated into how he uses e-mail (he has several accounts through
several providers, as well as several webmaster@ accounts, that all get
filtered and ultimately forwarded to that server), and become so accustomed
to it -- and he will at times take decisions based on ease, so that he can
spend his time doing other things -- that it's easier for him just to stick
with it than to try to redo everything.
On the other hand, the local university spent a schwack of money on Exchange
servers this past summer, which finally went on-line late last year (around
the time, FWIU, the person who'd spent the money got canned). Students are
still using SquirrelMail (tho' I don't know what the server back-end is),
but most faculty and staff have been migrated over to Exchange.
Yet, despite assurances (in the useless FAQ provided at
<http://www.uleth.ca/exchange/>), at least one friend of mine -- who may or
may not be using the server (he's with the Students' Union) -- has had
significant issues with e-mail not getting through since the Exchange server
went on line (including not receiving e-mail from me), while another -- who
is staff, yet who's still using the SquirrelMail Web interface -- seems not
to have had any problems.
These are the kinds of conundra posed by Microsoft/Windows software that can
make one's brain explode.
> What's worse, the user-interface changes are so dramatic that there is
> no way I will subject the secretarial staff in the department to it. It
> would cost me a fortune just in user-support time to sit down trying to
> show them where "File | Save" is (not to mention I'll have to find it
> all myself).
*LOL!* -- The UI changes (in Word in particular) seem to be why it's getting
such mixed reviews: on the one hand, some of the new features are
apparently time-saving productivity aids (I say 'apparently' because I've
always had difficulty getting Word to do what /I/ want it to do rather than
what /it/ wants to do); on the other, some of the changes to previous
functionality (including changes to the UI) are baffling.
I should say I've not used Office/Word 2007; this is just what I've been
able to abstract from the handful of reviews I've read.
> And then there is the whole issue of OL using Word as it's HTML
> rendering engine instead of IE7 (for the record, I actually like IE7).
> I seriously hope someone at M$ got fired over that dim-wit decision...
I agree that it's dimwitted -- why they didn't just embed Trident within
Office seem baffling, especially in light of how God-awful Word HTML is -- ,
but some have suggested that might be a consequence of allegedly decoupling
IE from the operating system; personally, I suspect that the decision was
taken in the name of tighter integration between Office/Outlook and Exchange.
<conspiracy>
And, of course, if you're increasing that integration, you're making life
difficult for others who are /not/ using Office/Outlook and Exchange.
</conspiracy>
>> I won't go into details, but I'd say that Tb is currently the best
>> e-mail client I've ever used -- and God knows I've tried a lot of them
>> over the years, some 30 or 40.
>
> 40 huh? Hmm...
> Thunderbird/Netscape/Mozilla/SeaMonkey, Outlook, Outlook Express,
> Groupwise, MS Mail, Pegasus, Eudora, AOL, TheBat, Incredimail,
> Entourage, Opera, RiceMail (vm/cms), vax/vms client?, pine, PC Pine,
> elm, mail(x), mutt, squirrelmail, horde/imp, gmail/yahoo/hotmail,
>
> I guess I'm not worthy - I could only come up with 27 (or 21, depending
> on how you count)
Several years ago, in large part because of all the kvetching about
Mozilla's inadequacies as an e-mail client, I went on a hunt for the best
(Windows) e-mail client I could find.
I can't even /remember/ most of them -- I 'tested' just over 30 (so that
wouldn't include apps I'd tried earlier: MS Mail, Outlook 97, &c), and have
tried a few more since then -- , but I did come to the conclusion that,
over-all, Mozilla Mail (Tb was still Phoenix at the time) was the sanest and
most functional client of the bunch.
If you include Web interfaces, I've also used/tried: Canada.com, Horde/IMP
(including two customisations), Gmail, Hotmail (when it was still known as
HoTMaiL as well as later), MyMail.ch, Netscape.net, Novonyx (MyRealBox),
SquirrelMail, and USA.net. There were a few others as well, the names of
which escape me. Ultimately, I've not been that happy with any of them,
finding them more awkward and cumbersome than using a desktop e-mail client.
I'd say that anyone who's looked at, tried out, or used more than a handful
of e-mail clients for reasons other than /that's what they use at work/
definitely has an interest in how he or she uses and interacts with her or
his e-mail client. . . .
Ron Hunter
> rjstep3 wrote:
>> because it is still on my PC - which it won't be for long I'm afraid.
>> Tho I might still use it for newsgroups, it's a toss-up between TB and
>> xnews.
>
>
> So are you saying OL2007 still doesn't do newsgroups, despite people
> complaining literally for YEARS on the msnews.microsoft.com news server
> in the Outlook groups?
>
> What a lame program!
>
least THIS USER) complaining for over 10 years!
No one program satisfies all needs for all users.
--
Ron Hunter rphu...@charter.net
Ron Hunter
> Brian Heinrich wrote:
>> Actually, I have yet to hear a good thing about Outlook 2007; the best
>> I've heard about Office relates to Word, and even /that/'s been a
>> mixed bag.
>
> Let me add a datapoint to you.
> I plan on putting of the migration to Office2007 as long as I possibly
> can. It - not just OL but the Office suite, is very much geared to
> offices which use an exchange server. In fact, it is my opinion that
> the changes are a deliberate attempt by M$ to force folks into using
> Exchange (which just happens to be a gawd-awful expensive piece of
> bloatware).
>
> What's worse, the user-interface changes are so dramatic that there is
> no way I will subject the secretarial staff in the department to it. It
> would cost me a fortune just in user-support time to sit down trying to
> show them where "File | Save" is (not to mention I'll have to find it
> all myself).
>
> And then there is the whole issue of OL using Word as it's HTML
> rendering engine instead of IE7 (for the record, I actually like IE7).
> I seriously hope someone at M$ got fired over that dim-wit decision...
>
>
I also hope someone at MS is looking for work for making the IE7 user
interface virtually impossible to customize.
>> I won't go into details, but I'd say that Tb is currently the best
>> e-mail client I've ever used -- and God knows I've tried a lot of them
>> over the years, some 30 or 40.
>
> 40 huh? Hmm...
> Thunderbird/Netscape/Mozilla/SeaMonkey, Outlook, Outlook Express,
> Groupwise, MS Mail, Pegasus, Eudora, AOL, TheBat, Incredimail,
> Entourage, Opera, RiceMail (vm/cms), vax/vms client?, pine, PC Pine,
> elm, mail(x), mutt, squirrelmail, horde/imp, gmail/yahoo/hotmail,
>
> I guess I'm not worthy - I could only come up with 27 (or 21, depending
> on how you count)
>
--
Ron Hunter rphu...@charter.net
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
(Fat Mac) that people said Apple would be dead in a Year. Now its 2007.
WE Have IntelMac capable of running with the help of a Program called
Parallels Mac OSX and Windozes XP and soon to be the latest and
Greatest. IN addition it can run certain versions of UNIX and Linux with
out a Helper program.
And for those that still linger with OS9 there is a Project called
sheepshaver that also OS( to run on Intel Mac.
And If you bought one of the desktop Intel Mac's you can plugin
internally (use I said Plugin) up to 4 500 Gb SATA Drives and the
Machine can address every byte of it (excepting for the area used by Hd
Drive Driver file).
So this Talk of This is dead or that is Dead. Is True only when it is.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET http://www.vpea.org
If it's "fixed", don't "break it"! mailto:pjo...@kimbanet.com
http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew DeFaria
On 2/21/2007 1:57 PM On a whim, Andrew DeFaria pounded out on the keyboard
Terry wrote:<br><br> inserted for andrew
I have never experienced a corruption of any of my 12 TB address books.
Great and that's wonderful.... FOR YOU. However I've had at least 3 times of major corruption which, of course, has lead me to find that stuff about mork.
<br><br> inserted for andrew
But because I was used to it happening with the Corel Address book with regularity, I now immediately export any address book after a modification is made, just in case. But its never happened in TB, in any version.
<br><br> inserted for andrew
Then again you aren't using FinchSync which may very well be causing the corruption (though I had indeed seen various smaller corruptions of my addressbook through the years).3 times is far from "semi-weekly", unless you're a new user (which you're not).
In any event not trusting your addressbook to the point where you need to back up after every modification is, by definition, a broken format!
I don't read about address book corruption with any regularity, so you're kind of out there on your own on this one (of course you may have answered your own statement by it being caused by an extension).
After losing a hard drive many many years ago, I now have 3 on my system with redundant backups. So no, I don't trust anything with my data really. And if taking a few seconds to create a backup might save me from losing valuable information, I do it.
Note FinchSync synchronizes a TB address book with my PPC phone (which is why I decided to look at TB's addressbook for the missing contact - IOW why didn't it sync?) Well FinchSync keeps up to 10 backup copies of the addressbook in TB's profile so I go back and look through these placing them in place (i.e. stop TB; cp abook.mab-1.bak abook.mab; start TB; look at addressbook; etc) and wham, all 10 copies are corrupted in some way. OK so none of the 10 were good and my backup's are only for the last 7 days. Wonderful!
Andrew DeFaria
Chris Barnes wrote:
rjstep3 wrote:Yeah, but then TB doesn't do multi-part binaries, despite users (at least THIS USER) complaining for over 10 years!
because it is still on my PC - which it won't be for long I'm afraid. Tho I might still use it for newsgroups, it's a toss-up between TB and xnews.So are you saying OL2007 still doesn't do newsgroups, despite people complaining literally for YEARS on the msnews.microsoft.com news server in the Outlook groups?
What a lame program!
No one program satisfies all needs for all users.
rjstep3
celestial) point in shelling out for Office 2007 just for the admin
staff to do all your work. The interface changes are nothing short of
miraculous - apart from my first post, I really hate M$, and have used
office 97 as long as poss. and latterly Office 2000. The latest
incarnation is intended for people who use computers, not people who
dictate and expect their secretaries to do their typing. Office 2007 is
a sheer waste of money if you work like that. It genuinely helps you
become more productive.
I work on my own - I am trying to turn digital, and need a system that
enables me to do that. Otherwise, I am spending £1000 -£2000 a year on
print toner. As against which, a super monitor and a copy of Office 2007
is cheaper by far in the space of one year.
I am no cheapskate or a spendthrift either - but this product is the
most exciting thing since .... the first Apple MAC?
The trouble with open source - and I would love to see the concept
succeed - is that there is no-one to bring it together. I need a PIM,
not just an email client, most business people do. So there is no point
offering an email client and the information that there are plugins out
there. I want someone to pull it all together. TB could do it, but
someone need to "productise" it so that business people like me could
just take a package off the virtual shelf and simply use it. Like Office
2007.
Oh - and looking at some of these posts, does Finchsink actually
synchronise, or does it in fact corrupt data? That is the problem for
someone like me: do I entrust my valuable data to a bit of shareware
that someone suggested on a newsgroup?
Think about it ... Productise!!
Boris
Andrew DeFaria
The trouble with open source - and I would love to see the concept succeed - is that there is no-one to bring it together.
I need a PIM, not just an email client,
most business people do.Define business people then. I am a business. I don't need a PIM. PIM is a Personal Information Manager not a Group Information Manager. Businesses may (and that's debatable) need a Group Information Manager, something to inform a group of people about say a meeting, but not a number of PIMs. People may need or desire a PIM and you can do that easily by using Sunbird.
So there is no point offering an email client and the information that there are plugins out there.
I want someone to pull it all together.
TB could do it, but someone need to "productise" it so that business people like me could just take a package off the virtual shelf and simply use it. Like Office 2007.
Personally less meeting and more working is what most companies need! Reminds me of a saying: When all is said and done, more is said than done!
Oh - and looking at some of these posts, does Finchsink actually synchronise, or does it in fact corrupt data?
FinchSync synchronizes. What I believe is happening is that TB was written not thinking at all that any other program might write/re-write or otherwise change its files. So it's not inconceivable that TB may read in the addressbook at the start of the program and keep it in memory. Then FinchSync changes the addressbook file. Then say when TB closes it overwrites the changes. IOW there isn't really a defined API to provide multi process access to the addressbook. Ditto for calendar files.
That is the problem for someone like me: do I entrust my valuable data to a bit of shareware that someone suggested on a newsgroup?
Andrew DeFaria
A bus station is where a bus stops. A train station is where a train stops. On my desk, I have a work station... Go figure!
Chris Ilias
> The trouble with open source - and I would love to see the concept
> succeed - is that there is no-one to bring it together. I need a PIM,
> not just an email client, most business people do.
Thunderbird is intended for business environments? Someone should tell
the project leaders that. :-) As has been pointed out elsewhere in this
thread, that's not the intent of Thunderbird.
If you're looking to turn it into a PIM, the Mozilla Calendar project is
working on a Thunderbird add-on, called Lightning.
<http://www.mozilla.org/projects/calendar/lightning/>
> Think about it ... Productise!!
This is a user support newsgroup.
Think about it ... mozilla.feedback!!
--
Chris Ilias <http://ilias.ca>
List-owner: support-firefox, support-thunderbird
mozilla.test.multimedia moderator
(Please do not email me tech support questions)
Brian Heinrich
> Brian Heinrich wrote:
>> On 2007-02-21 09:02 (-0700 UTC), Chris Barnes wrote:
>>
>> <snip />
>>
>>> It [Tb] is so good, I use it *despite* TB having a horrible
>>> addressbook...
>>
>> *ROTFL!!*
>>
>> OK, I gotta ask: I've never been thrilled with the address books in
>> most of the apps I've used -- in fact, I'd have to say that the best
>> address books I've come across have been in Evolution and KMail -- ,
>> but what is it that you find so horrible about Tb's address book?
>
> How about the semi weekly corruption and non-standard yet crazy file
> format? I just had it corrupt on me again. I've also lost quite a number
> of entries...
I was thinking less of file format than of UI/utility.
I've been quite fortunate in not having any of my address books go corrupt.
> From http://www.jwz.org/hacks/mork.pl:
Yeah, I'm familiar with it, and I agree that Mork format is ridiculous. I
remember once, several years ago, sitting down and figuring it all out, and
thinking to myself, 'Who the f*** had the brain fart that led to this mess?'
Brian Heinrich
> Chris Barnes wrote:
>> rjstep3 wrote:
>>> because it is still on my PC - which it won't be for long I'm afraid.
>>> Tho I might still use it for newsgroups, it's a toss-up between TB
>>> and xnews.
>>
>> So are you saying OL2007 still doesn't do newsgroups, despite people
>> complaining literally for YEARS on the msnews.microsoft.com news
>> server in the Outlook groups?
>>
>> What a lame program!
>>
> Yeah, but then TB doesn't do multi-part binaries, despite users (at
> least THIS USER [ . . . ]
Oh, yeah, I think we /all/ know 'bout that. :-D
>[ . . . ]) complaining for over 10 years!
Wow. For longer than the Mozilla codebase has even existed! :-P
> No one program satisfies all needs for all users.
True 'nuff -- but let's be honest and admit that the newsreader part of
Moz/SM/Tb was never intended for hard-core newsgroup usage. . . .
Brian Heinrich
Umm . . . Phillip? Just WTF you talkin' 'bout? :-\ And what does it have to
do with either Outlook or Thunderbird?
Brian Heinrich
> Terry wrote:
>> On 2/21/2007 1:57 PM On a whim, Andrew DeFaria pounded out on the
>> keyboard
>>
>>> Terry wrote:
>>>> I have never experienced a corruption of any of my 12 TB address books.
>> <br><br> inserted for andrew
> Really? Did not know that!
>>> Great and that's wonderful.... FOR YOU. However I've had at least 3
>>> times of major corruption which, of course, has lead me to find that
>>> stuff about mork.
>>
>> <br><br> inserted for andrew
> Thanks again!
>>>> But because I was used to it happening with the Corel Address book
>>>> with regularity, I now immediately export any address book after a
>>>> modification is made, just in case. But its never happened in TB,
>>>> in any version.
>>
>> <br><br> inserted for andrew
> Be careful. You may just run out of <br>'s! ;-)
Unlike others, I honestly don't care that you post in HTML, but please,
Andrew, be so kind as to leave a blank line both above and below
inter-leaved responses -- as the formatting of your sarcastic comments to
Terry should clearly show, it can make reading your postings a PITA for
those who view only as plain text and makes responding to your posts a PITA
for pretty much anyone. . . .
/b.
<snip />
Brian Heinrich
<snip />
> The trouble with open source - and I would love to see the concept
> succeed - is that there is no-one to bring it together.
I know there are a lot of people out there who hate Novell for having
acquired SuSE and Ximian, but they're one of the few (Red Hat and Ubuntu,
possibly Mandriva, being the others that come to mind) who /could/ pull it
all together -- and, in fact, need to if they're going to survive, since
they can't really go head-to-head with M$ any more. (Consider the recent
announcement of co-operation between the two and the money M$ has sunk into
Novell.)
> I need a PIM,
> not just an email client, most business people do.
Which is kind of where the problem crept in with you comparing O to Tb --
the former's a PIM; the latter an e-mail client.
> So there is no point
> offering an email client and the information that there are plugins out
> there. I want someone to pull it all together.
OK, and I would prefer independent-but-coöperating apps presented as a suite
rather than as a single integrated solution.
> TB could do it, but
> someone need to "productise" it so that business people like me could
> just take a package off the virtual shelf and simply use it. Like Office
> 2007.
But, again, you're looking at Tb from a different perspective and with
different needs and requirements. . . .
Brian Heinrich
<snip />
> The trouble with open source - and I would love to see the concept
> succeed[ . . . ].
BTW, are you suggesting here that 'the concept' of Open Source is
failing/has failed? -- AFAICT, it seems to be gaining ground every year. . . .
/b.
Terry
> Read what I wrote! I wrote "3 times of _major_ corruption(s <- sorry I
> missed typing the s in the original)" *and* (and that and is very
> important) "various smaller corruptions of my addressbook through the
> years". Granted, semi-weekly is an exaggeration (and I do millions of
> exaggerations!) however corruption of any amount in my book is a major
> problem!
<br><br> inserted for andrew
>> I don't read about address book corruption with any regularity, so
>> you're kind of out there on your own on this one (of course you may
>> have answered your own statement by it being caused by an extension).
> FinchSync is not an extension. Look it up. I don't typically complain
> every time it gets corrupted. Suffice to say the mork format is horrible
> and fragile at best.
<br><br> inserted for andrew
>> After losing a hard drive many many years ago, I now have 3 on my
>> system with redundant backups. So no, I don't trust anything with my
>> data really. And if taking a few seconds to create a backup might
>> save me from losing valuable information, I do it.
<br><br> inserted for andrew
> Oh I backup too. Problem is that often you don't notice the problem
> until it's too late. I keep 1 week's worth of backup. More often it goes
> like this: I attempt to call my sister on my phone and notice I don't
> have her listed. That's strange. So I look into my TB addressbook and
> she's not there. Now I know I had it there just 2 weeks ago when she
> visited and I remember changing her phone number as she recently moved.
> Then again, that was 2 weeks ago. When opening up TB I also happen to
> notice that the addressbook is completely empty (In fact this time TB
> popped up a dialog box saying the addressbook was corrupted and it was
> gonna start a new empty one). Great.
>
> Note FinchSync synchronizes a TB address book with my PPC phone (which
> is why I decided to look at TB's addressbook for the missing contact -
> IOW why didn't it sync?) Well FinchSync keeps up to 10 backup copies of
> the addressbook in TB's profile so I go back and look through these
> placing them in place (i.e. stop TB; cp abook.mab-1.bak abook.mab; start
> TB; look at addressbook; etc) and wham, all 10 copies are corrupted in
> some way. OK so none of the 10 were good and my backup's are only for
> the last 7 days. Wonderful!
That is exactly why I started exporting them in additional to backup,
because I know a backup is only as good as the last good data copied to it.
Andrew DeFaria
On 2007-02-21 14:39 (-0700 UTC), Andrew DeFaria wrote:
Brian Heinrich wrote:I was thinking less of file format than of UI/utility.
On 2007-02-21 09:02 (-0700 UTC), Chris Barnes wrote:How about the semi weekly corruption and non-standard yet crazy file format? I just had it corrupt on me again. I've also lost quite a number of entries...
It [Tb] is so good, I use it *despite* TB having a horrible addressbook...
*ROTFL!!*
OK, I gotta ask: I've never been thrilled with the address books in most of the apps I've used -- in fact, I'd have to say that the best address books I've come across have been in Evolution and KMail -- , but what is it that you find so horrible about Tb's address book?
I've been quite fortunate in not having any of my address books go corrupt.
From http://www.jwz.org/hacks/mork.pl:Yeah, I'm familiar with it, and I agree that Mork format is ridiculous. I remember once, several years ago, sitting down and figuring it all out, and thinking to myself, 'Who the f*** had the brain fart that led to this mess?'
Andrew DeFaria
The nice thing about Standards is there are so many to choose from. - Michael Santovec
Andrew DeFaria
/b.I'm not into unnecessary crap like the above. I know you snipped. I was not wondering about it. You need not add this.
<snip />
Andrew DeFaria
That is exactly why I started exporting them in additional to backup, because I know a backup is only as good as the last good data copied to it.
Frank Tabor
> Andrew DeFaria <http://defaria.com>
> Can you be a closet claustrophobic?
> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html>
> <head>
> <meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
> <title></title>
> </head>
> <body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"> Brian Heinrich wrote:
> <blockquote cite="midaJmdnXbcB74Sck...@mozilla.org"
> type="cite">On 2007-02-21 16:07 (-0700 UTC), Andrew DeFaria wrote:
> <br>
> <br>
> <blockquote type="cite">Terry wrote:
> <br>
> <blockquote type="cite">On 2/21/2007 1:57 PM On a whim, Andrew
> DeFaria pounded out on the keyboard
> <br>
> <br>
> <blockquote type="cite">Terry wrote:
> <br>
> <blockquote type="cite">I have never experienced a corruption
> of any of my 12 TB address books.
> <br>
> </blockquote>
> </blockquote>
> <br><br> inserted for andrew
> <br>
> </blockquote>
> Really? Did not know that!
> <br>
> <blockquote type="cite">
> <blockquote type="cite">Great and that's wonderful.... FOR YOU.
> However I've had at least 3 times of major corruption which, of course,
> has lead me to find that stuff about mork.
> <br>
> </blockquote>
> <br>
> <br><br> inserted for andrew
> <br>
> </blockquote>
> Thanks again!
> <br>
> <blockquote type="cite">
> <blockquote type="cite">
> <blockquote type="cite"> But because I was used to it
> happening
> with the Corel Address book with regularity, I now immediately
> export any address book after a modification is made, just in case.
> But its never happened in TB, in any version.
> <br>
> </blockquote>
> </blockquote>
> <br>
> <br><br> inserted for andrew
> <br>
> </blockquote>
> Be careful. You may just run out of <br>'s! ;-)
> <br>
> </blockquote>
> <br>
> Unlike others, I honestly don't care that you post in HTML, but please,
> Andrew, be so kind as to leave a blank line both above and below
> inter-leaved responses -- as the formatting of your sarcastic comments to
> Terry should clearly show, it can make reading your postings a PITA for
> those who view only as plain text and makes responding to your posts a
> PITA for pretty much anyone. . . .
> <br>
> </blockquote>
> Looks great in TB. Your are using TB aren't you. This is a TB support
> group after all...<br>
> <blockquote cite="midaJmdnXbcB74Sck...@mozilla.org"
> type="cite">/b.
> <br>
> <br>
> <snip />
> <br>
> </blockquote>
> I'm not into unnecessary crap like the above. I know you snipped. I was
> not wondering about it. You need not add this.<br> <div
> class="moz-signature">-- <br>
> <a href="http://defaria.com">Andrew DeFaria</a><br> <small><font
> color="#999999">Can you be a closet claustrophobic?</font></small> </div>
> </body>
> </html>
--
Frank Tabor
Q: What do you get when you cross the Godfather with an attorney?
A: An offer you can't understand.
Tim Judd
And all it took Microsoft is over 10 years to make a product that <ONE>
person exclaims about. Thunderbird was founded much later than that,
and has developed faster than the monolithic monopoly, Microsoft. (mmM)
And you had been using Thunderbird as a favorable application until this
new product that hasn't yet been truly tested. Who knows, the entire
Outlook program may have millions of holes to allow people to hack you.
Enjoy!!!!
I don't see your excitement. I see you as the traditional Microsoft
clone that follows the newest product that's offered from the mmM!
Ever since the 1984 Apple commercial that shows the drones and
everything -- I really don't see a benefit to jump off the cliff just
like the other 90% of the world market does.
Of all the PCs I routinely use at home and work, I have 6 BSD-based
boxes, 2 windows, and a test box that can have any HDD installed and
booted in a matter of seconds. The test box has 2 windows drives,
2-BSD, 1 linux all installed. And the stock market has shown ever since
Vista was released, they've not yet made the market share back (they're
LOOSING stock). I'm looking at the big picture, and see Microsoft
taking a leap, weather it helps or hurts them.
Brian Heinrich
<snip />
>> Unlike others, I honestly don't care that you post in HTML, but
>> please, Andrew, be so kind as to leave a blank line both above and
>> below inter-leaved responses -- as the formatting of your sarcastic
>> comments to Terry should clearly show, it can make reading your
>> postings a PITA for those who view only as plain text and makes
>> responding to your posts a PITA for pretty much anyone. . . .
> Looks great in TB. Your are using TB aren't you. This is a TB support
> group after all...
Looks like shit if viewed as or replied to in plain text. :-( Seriously.
Have a look at your postings in plain text, and you'll see what I mean. . . .
Unlike most writing, e-mail truly is interlocutory, so taking into account
that your recipient might not view or compose as you do -- especially in a
newsgroup in which plain text is the norm -- could be considered common
courtesy.
>> <snip />
> I'm not into unnecessary crap like the above. I know you snipped. I was
> not wondering about it. You need not add this.
My background is such (I've done graduate work in English and spent some
time as a newspaper reporter and editor) that explicitly indicating
elisions, omissions, compressions, redactions, and the like is not just
considered good form but is necessary in order to prevent misunderstanding
(or the potential twisting of quotes/cited material).
Since editing a quoted reply is a form of citation, I treat is as such --
all the more so in that we're not talking about a private dialogue between
the two of us, but something that is publicly available.
I apologise if you don't see the utility of the practice, but I'm about as
likely to change it as you are likely to insert appropriate newlines in your
postings -- or post in plain text. :-P
/b.
Tim Judd
[snip]
> Over to you TB developers: can you come up with something that provides
> email, contacts, calendar, notes, synchronised with your mobile device,
> as opposed to just a capable email client? Because people these days
> need the former, not the latter.
[snip]
I don't need the former, nor do I want it. I have tried to get used to
a PIM for years, and (personally...) I can remember stuff without the
need to have some stupid device robotically remind me.
So, you may "need" it, but I don't. Please don't lump me in with your
"needs."
thank you in advance.
Andrew DeFaria
Looks great in TB. Your are using TB aren't you. This is a TB support group after all...Looks like shit if viewed as or replied to in plain text. :-( Seriously. Have a look at your postings in plain text, and you'll see what I mean. . . .
Unlike most writing, e-mail truly is interlocutory, so taking into account that your recipient might not view or compose as you do -- especially in a newsgroup in which plain text is the norm -- could be considered common courtesy.
Besides if you use only plain text then you should be used to ugly by now!
My background is such (I've done graduate work in English and spent some time as a newspaper reporter and editor) that explicitly indicating elisions, omissions, compressions, redactions, and the like is not just considered good form but is necessary in order to prevent misunderstanding (or the potential twisting of quotes/cited material).<snip />I'm not into unnecessary crap like the above. I know you snipped. I was not wondering about it. You need not add this.
Since editing a quoted reply is a form of citation, I treat is as such -- all the more so in that we're not talking about a private dialogue between the two of us, but something that is publicly available.
I apologise if you don't see the utility of the practice, but I'm about as likely to change it as you are likely to insert appropriate newlines in your postings -- or post in plain text. :-P
Brian Heinrich
> Brian Heinrich wrote:
>>> Looks great in TB. Your are using TB aren't you. This is a TB support
>>> group after all...
>> Looks like shit if viewed as or replied to in plain text. :-(
>> Seriously. Have a look at your postings in plain text, and you'll see
>> what I mean. . . .
> Well then stop using plain text... (BTW TB is set up by default to
> render HTML I believe).
So, um, so should why I or anyone else suck your dick? I mean, really?
>> Unlike most writing, e-mail truly is interlocutory, so taking into
>> account that your recipient might not view or compose as you do --
>> especially in a newsgroup in which plain text is the norm -- could be
>> considered common courtesy.
> I post in plain text and HTML. My question to you is after you see the
> plain text reply, why the hell do you bother reading onward?!?
>
> Besides if you use only plain text then you should be used to ugly by now!
Umm, your messages look find if viewed (or replied to) in HTML. They just
happen to look like shit if viewed/replied to in/as plain text.
Unfortunately, given that these are assumed to be plain-text newsgroups,
that would seem to put you in the minority. . . . :-(
Really, it's not that big a fucking deal -- I'm not actually asking you to
do anything that I don't do myself.
So, um . . . well, you know. . . .
<snip />
> I can figure it out - trust me! This is not rocket science ya know!
Umm . . . I'm taking it that you've never seen a reasonably clever copy
editor at work with no such restrictions? :-P
<snip />
Chris Ilias
> Unlike others, I honestly don't care that you post in HTML, but please,
> Andrew, be so kind as to leave a blank line both above and below
> inter-leaved responses -- as the formatting of your sarcastic comments
> to Terry should clearly show, it can make reading your postings a PITA
> for those who view only as plain text and makes responding to your posts
> a PITA for pretty much anyone. . . .
Use of HTML, or not putting a blank line after the quoted text are not
prohibited in these newsgroups. Taking that into account, please take
this to private email or set your follow-up to mozilla.general, as it
does not belong in this newsgroup.
Ron Hunter
I don't believe Vista has been a roaring success. I have looked at it
in the stores, and have been charmed by the little details of the visual
presentation, but don't see any really earth-shattering new interface
technology there. What I would like to see is a real upgrade in my
ability to use the computer that isn't just some added-on features I
don't already have on my current machines, not just eye-candy. As I see
it, had they marketed the new OS at $50 for the upgrade, I might bite.
And that should be for all 3 of my current WinXP SP2 systems.
In short, I'm really not interested in it.
MS isn't into 'leaps', just profits.
--
Ron Hunter rphu...@charter.net
Ron Hunter
I have to agree. I don't have need for a PIM. I can certainly see how
many people DO, but I am not one of them. The phonebook application in
my cellphone (Motorola RAZR) is more than robust enough for my PIM
needs, and I have about 50 entries in it. I DO have need for a robust
email application, however, and TB provides it. I certainly wouldn't
object to a feature that allowed me to trade data with the phone but I
can't see it as a major issue.
--
Ron Hunter rphu...@charter.net
squaredancer
to generate the following:? :
> On 2007-02-21 15:28 (-0700 UTC), Ron Hunter wrote:
>
>
>> Chris Barnes wrote:
>>
>>> rjstep3 wrote:
>>>
>> [ . . . ]) complaining for over 10 years!
>>
>
> Wow. For longer than the Mozilla codebase has even existed! :-P
>
goes to show just how old some people are :-P :-P :-P
>
>> No one program satisfies all needs for all users.
>>
>
> True 'nuff -- but let's be honest and admit that the newsreader part of
> Moz/SM/Tb was never intended for hard-core newsgroup usage. . . .
>
> /b.
>
>
or, as I tend to say... "TB is an eMail client with *limited* NG abilities"
of course, TB as a newsreader is infinitely better than many Newsreaders
still in use, that originate from before even Ron was around (ie
pre-dinosaurier)
reg
squaredancer
>
<<snipped>>
>
>
>
>> I won't go into details, but I'd say that Tb is currently the best
>> e-mail client I've ever used -- and God knows I've tried a lot of them
>> over the years, some 30 or 40.
>>
>
> 40 huh? Hmm...
> Thunderbird/Netscape/Mozilla/SeaMonkey, Outlook, Outlook Express,
> Groupwise, MS Mail, Pegasus, Eudora, AOL, TheBat, Incredimail, Entourage,
> Opera, RiceMail (vm/cms), vax/vms client?, pine, PC Pine, elm, mail(x),
> mutt, squirrelmail, horde/imp, gmail/yahoo/hotmail,
>
> I guess I'm not worthy - I could only come up with 27 (or 21, depending on
> how you count)
>
>
6-8 eMail clients for NS4.* and 7.*. Presumably Opera & Co are the same??
btw - don't you get gmx mail?? :-P "Once upon a time there was..."
Compuserve
reg
Tom Liotta
> I don't believe Vista has been a roaring success.
Heh, I agree. And this is a major part of it all.
Not only is it "Office 2007", it's also an upgrade to or purchase of
WinXP plus SP2 -- at a minimum for MS-supported configuration. And
Vista is another upcoming upgrade. Personally, I have /no/ intention
of ever upgrading any of my systems past Win2K. If it becomes
necessary, those systems will simply be migrated to one Linux or
xxxBSD or another, whatever seems appropriate at the time.
I use Office 200mumble on WinXP at work because it's required there.
The Outlook/Exchange frustrations are barely offset by the utility
of the calendaring (which is effective in many work environments but
could easily be replaced). Apparently, Office 2007 is in my future.
But /only/ wherever it's required by external authority.
TB, FF, OpenOffice,... those are my personal future directions.
--
Tom Liotta
Brian Heinrich
<snip />
> I don't believe Vista has been a roaring success. I have looked at it
> in the stores, and have been charmed by the little details of the visual
> presentation, but don't see any really earth-shattering new interface
> technology there. What I would like to see is a real upgrade in my
> ability to use the computer that isn't just some added-on features I
> don't already have on my current machines, not just eye-candy. As I see
> it, had they marketed the new OS at $50 for the upgrade, I might bite.
> And that should be for all 3 of my current WinXP SP2 systems.
> In short, I'm really not interested in it.
One of the things that has always baffled me is the cost of Windows -- even
if you're buying OEM. For the cost of the Ultimate version of Vista, I
could buy a cheap, semi-disposable box.
/b.
> MS isn't into 'leaps', just profits.
--
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
dead. I am using an analogy. You do know what that is.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, CET http://www.vpea.org
If it's "fixed", don't "break it"! mailto:pjo...@kimbanet.com
http://www.kimbanet.com/~pjones/default.htm
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
That not to far from the full price of a full install of Vista.
ZDnet and cNet news people are actually recommending you do a clean
install of the full program rather than do an upgrade. Its better odds
it will work from the get go, if you do.
Brian Heinrich
<snip />
>> Umm . . . Phillip? Just WTF you talkin' 'bout? :-\ And what does it
>> have to do with either Outlook or Thunderbird?
>
> What its about is tits is the same silly argument in that Thunderbird is
> dead. I am using an analogy. You do know what that is.
The next question, of course, being 'What do tits have to do with any of this?'
:-D
Ron Hunter
back to 1962. The dinosaur in question was an IBM 1620.
--
Ron Hunter rphu...@charter.net
Ron Hunter
available that will even run on your computer with W2K, you will stick
with it? There is no more a guarantee than Linux will be viable in 10
years than there is that Windows apps will still run on W2K then. So
what will you do at that point?
While I am not going to rush out and buy the Vista upgrade (although my
computer is quite able to run any version of it), I am sure that when I
replace a computer in the future, it will come with Vista, and then I
may be motivated to bring this one (most recently purchased), into
alignment with the others.
Perhaps I should explain that I had the same computer from 1986 to 1995,
and upgraded it several times, each time spending money that would
probably have bought another computer. In the end, I had a 10 year old
computer with no support either in hardware or software, from a company
that no longer existed. Strangely, that computer continued to be used
well after 2000, when I lost track of the new owner.
I am not about to allow myself to fall into a backwater again. It's a
lonely feeling.
--
Ron Hunter rphu...@charter.net
Ron Hunter
Gord McFee
> rjstep3 wrote:
>> I have just migrated to Office 2007 - for years I have been a M$ hater -
>> but it is wonderful. Just try Outlook 2007 - it even handles IMAP
>> folders (as Outlook never did before) which was one of the reasons I
>> kept Thunderbird.
>>
>> And of course it does all the usual things you would expect - like
>> synchronise with your calendar and contacts, and with your Windows
>> Mobile device. So no need to (unreliably) migrate contacts from Outlook
>> to Thunderbird.
>>
>> It's a shame, it would be wonderful to believe that Thunderbird could do
>> it, but it needs an overhaul badly, what are the plans? With Outlook
>> this good, there had better be something miraculous in the pipeline.
>>
>> Sorry to sound negative, but those are the facts.
>>
>> Boris
>
> I have just migrated to 'Thunderbird'. For years I have been a 'Moz-Zero$' hater, but its wonderful. Just try
> 'Thunderbird' it handles IMAP folders (as 'Outlook' has just achieved), which was one, of many, reasons I never kept
> 'Outlook'.
>
> Of course it does all the usual things you would expect - like NNTP, multiple profiles, resistance to attack, high
> customisation, expandability, multi-platform, can be run from USB sticks and taken with you, *free*, RSS, simple copy
> backups, multitudes of extensions, runs on wide machine specifications, themes, easy to make relatively secure,
> scrutinised code, I must have mentioned *free*, etc. etc. etc.
>
> Want a calendar? Just bolt one on.
> Want a reminder? Just bolt one on.
> Want a...? Just bolt one on.
>
> It's a shame, but it would be wonderful to believe that 'Outlook' could do it, but it needs an overhaul badly. What are
> the plans? With 'Thunderbird' this good, there had better be something miraculous in the pipeline.
>
> Sorry to sound negative, but those are the facts.
ROTFL! Great post.
--
Best regards
Gord McFee
Tom Liotta
> Tom Liotta wrote:
<snip>
>> Personally, I have /no/ intention
>> of ever upgrading any of my systems past Win2K. If it becomes
>> necessary, those systems will simply be migrated to one Linux or
>> xxxBSD or another, whatever seems appropriate at the time.
>> But /only/ wherever it's required by external authority.
>>
>> TB, FF, OpenOffice,... those are my personal future directions.
>>
> I see, so if the computer world moves on, and software is no longer
> available that will even run on your computer with W2K, you will stick
> with it? There is no more a guarantee than Linux will be viable in 10
> years than there is that Windows apps will still run on W2K then. So
> what will you do at that point?
If it comes to that point, I'd probably find it falling under the
"required by external authority" category.
My primary PC is nowadays up to a 512MB 266Mhz Win2K system after
various upgrades. It was quite a screamer when I bought it many
years ago. Its next 'upgrade' will be away from Windows. (I also
still have my Ohio Scientific C4P in working condition, but it's
just another piece in my personal museum. Maybe a dozen other
various machines of different capabilities are also there.)
Because my work has always been essentially other than Windows/UNIX
anyway, generally within the IBM mainframe and midrange areas as a
systems programmer, I don't have a lot of fears about being outside
of Windows. I've got a very nice little iSeries server that will
handle everything I'm going to need during the next 10 years and
more. If IBM goes under in the foreseeable future because Windows
takes over totally and they can no longer honor the support
contracts, I'll possibly cave in for simple convenience's sake.
But I'm not against the computer world moving on. I expect never to
buy another "PC". It's far too easy to put them together myself from
components. The first one I ever did was a Sinclair ZX-80 (and it
still works). The last one I did is not quite ready to become my new
primary PC -- I need to finish a bit of configuration when I decide
to take the time, but it'll probably still be working well in 10
years. And I won't be concerned about how hard it'll be to put my
next one together whenever I decide to take whatever jump is
indicated after 64-bit processors become "old". (And since I've been
working with 64-bit processors for the past dozen years or so,
they're getting a little "old" to me anyway.)
> While I am not going to rush out and buy the Vista upgrade (although my
> computer is quite able to run any version of it), I am sure that when I
> replace a computer in the future, it will come with Vista, and then I
> may be motivated to bring this one (most recently purchased), into
> alignment with the others.
Not me. Mine don't have pre-installed OSes. I install whatever I choose.
> Perhaps I should explain that I had the same computer from 1986 to 1995,
> and upgraded it several times, each time spending money that would
> probably have bought another computer. In the end, I had a 10 year old
> computer with no support either in hardware or software, from a company
> that no longer existed. Strangely, that computer continued to be used
> well after 2000, when I lost track of the new owner.
> I am not about to allow myself to fall into a backwater again. It's a
> lonely feeling.
I agree. I learned that lesson a long time ago when I last bought a
system with a proprietary BIOS from a manufacturer that went out of
business. Never again.
That's not to say that that PC isn't useful anymore, but I couldn't
do with it what I wanted to do. It's now relegated to a couple of
dumb tasks, running drivers for a couple devices that never were
supported in later OS releases. I've got two or three boxes that
could swap in for it. I suspect the devices will die before I have
to think about it. It just hasn't been worth my effort to pay
attention there.
In short, you're right. There are no guarantees. But in the past 35
years of programming, I haven't seen a single shred of evidence that
indicates that choices will disappear.
--
Tom Liotta
Peter.Potamus.t...@gmail.com
> On 2007-02-21 23:33 (-0700 UTC), Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>
> > Brian Heinrich wrote:
Interesting. IF these groups are not moderated, then why are postings
being removed? Five postings from this thread, have disappeared from
the Mozilla.org server, but so far they're still on the google groups
server.
I mentioned this in the general group and I received no answers. If
these groups are not being moderated, then why are postings being
removed, and who's doing it. Is it Dan Miller, Gerv, or Chris I thats
doing this? And why?
Peter Potamus the Purple Hippo
I should add that this isn't the first time this removal has happened.
It has happened several times previously
FU to the general group
--
Peter Potamus & His Magic Flying Balloon:
http://www.toonopedia.com/potamus.htm
http://www.bcdb.com/cartoon/46347-Peter_Potamus_Show.html
http://www.toonarific.com/show.php?s_search=Potamus&Button_Update=Search&show_id=2778
Please do not email me for help. Reply to the newsgroup only. Thanks
Man-wai Chang
> And of course it does all the usual things you would expect - like
> synchronise with your calendar and contacts, and with your Windows
> Mobile device. So no need to (unreliably) migrate contacts from Outlook
> to Thunderbird.
I never need a calendar. Are you really that busy? Or are you just
an addict in un-necessary tools?
--
.~. Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY. http://www.linux-sxs.org
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
/( _ )\ (Ubuntu 6.10) Linux 2.6.20.1
^ ^ 17:36:01 up 20 min 0 users load average: 1.00 1.23 1.12
news://news.3home.net news://news.hkpcug.org news://news.newsgroup.com.hk
Ron Hunter
authority to remove posts, and do, under some circumstances. Just who
they are, and what they consider inappropriate, I don't know. At least
they allow open discussion, with differing opinions, which is more that
I can say for any 'moderated' group I have posted in.
--
Ron Hunter rphu...@charter.net
Ron Hunter
>> And of course it does all the usual things you would expect - like
>> synchronise with your calendar and contacts, and with your Windows
>> Mobile device. So no need to (unreliably) migrate contacts from Outlook
>> to Thunderbird.
>
> I never need a calendar. Are you really that busy? Or are you just
> an addict in un-necessary tools?
>
I don't need a calendar app. either, but there are many people who have
numerous appointments, travel plans, and people to keep track of by
time, and I can easily see that those people would appreciate such a
function as part of their email program. Just because a function isn't
useful to ME doesn't mean it isn't worthy of inclusion in the program.
--
Ron Hunter rphu...@charter.net
squaredancer
>
> <snip />
>
>
>>> Umm . . . Phillip? Just WTF you talkin' 'bout? :-\ And what does it
>>> have to do with either Outlook or Thunderbird?
>>>
>> What its about is tits is the same silly argument in that Thunderbird is
>> dead. I am using an analogy. You do know what that is.
>>
>
> The next question, of course, being 'What do tits have to do with any of this?'
>
> :-D
>
> /b.
>
>
reg
Brian Heinrich
> On 23/02/2007 01:16, CET - what odd quirk of fate caused Brian Heinrich
> to generate the following:? :
>> On 2007-02-22 14:47 (-0700 UTC), Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>>
>> <snip />
>>
>>>> Umm . . . Phillip? Just WTF you talkin' 'bout? :-\ And what does it
>>>> have to do with either Outlook or Thunderbird?
>>>>
>>> What its about is tits is the same silly argument in that Thunderbird
>>> is dead. I am using an analogy. You do know what that is.
>>
>> The next question, of course, being 'What do tits have to do with any
>> of this?'
>>
>> :-D
>
> Brian - Phillip was using a "Figure" of speach!
Or he's just tourettesing. :-D
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
> On 2007-02-22 14:47 (-0700 UTC), Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>
> <snip />
>
>>> Umm . . . Phillip? Just WTF you talkin' 'bout? :-\ And what does it
>>> have to do with either Outlook or Thunderbird?
>>
>> What its about is tits is the same silly argument in that Thunderbird
>> is dead. I am using an analogy. You do know what that is.
>
> The next question, of course, being 'What do tits have to do with any of
> this?'
>
> :-D
>
> /b.
>
That's a typo
supposed to be:
What its about is its is the same silly argument in that Thunderbird is
dead. I am using an analogy. You do know what that is.
guess I had something else on my mind at the same time :-(
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
I tried other hardcore newsreader (Ya-news ...., and others). and none
hold a candle to mozilla products. The only thing possibly we might be
missing is support for binaries and I am not sure that's a deficiency.
It actually may be blessing in disguise.
Terry
the keyboard
> Brian Heinrich wrote:
>> On 2007-02-22 14:47 (-0700 UTC), Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>>
>> <snip />
>>
>>>> Umm . . . Phillip? Just WTF you talkin' 'bout? :-\ And what does it
>>>> have to do with either Outlook or Thunderbird?
>>> What its about is tits is the same silly argument in that Thunderbird
>>> is dead. I am using an analogy. You do know what that is.
>> The next question, of course, being 'What do tits have to do with any of
>> this?'
>>
>> :-D
>>
>> /b.
>>
> Actually nothing :-)
>
> That's a typo
>
> supposed to be:
>
> What its about is its is the same silly argument in that Thunderbird is
> dead. I am using an analogy. You do know what that is.
>
> guess I had something else on my mind at the same time :-(
>
I liked it better before ;-)
--
Terry
Anti-spam measures are included in my email address.
Delete NOSPAM from the email address after clicking Reply.
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
rendering engine. Instead of using the IE html rendering engine. So a
lot of stuff sent over email that can be read by IE and OutLook,But
broken with Word's HTML is now broken in the latest Outlook.
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
The Fact is hi "is" one. Or else he would pop up with occasional
"...this thread is getting off topic follow up is directed to General..".
To me a group that is not moderated, does not have anyone posting any
such even on jokes or occasional humor. So whether Chris wishes to
designate himself as one he is one. :-)
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
my Cell phone a Motto Razor 3C has a built in calendar.
Brian Heinrich
<snip />
> I tried other hardcore newsreader (Ya-news ...., and others). and none
> hold a candle to mozilla products. The only thing possibly we might be
> missing is support for binaries and I am not sure that's a deficiency.
> It actually may be blessing in disguise.
1. Improved filtering capability (including one-click kill-filing and the
ability to kill a branch of a thread).
2. Improved search capability (including either direct or indirect regex
support).
2. Binary support (at least yEnc, regardless of whether or not it's a
'standard').
3. More flexibility in server subscriptions.
That'd be just off the top of my head . . . and I only make light use of
non-binary newsgroups.
Brian Heinrich
<snip />
> Chris is The head honcho Whether his wish to call himself a moderator.
> The Fact is hi "is" one. Or else he would pop up with occasional
> "...this thread is getting off topic follow up is directed to General..".
>
> To me a group that is not moderated, does not have anyone posting any
> such even on jokes or occasional humor. So whether Chris wishes to
> designate himself as one he is one. :-)
As a purely rhetorical question, does this mean that any of us could become
/de facto/ moderators by behaving as Chris does? :-P
Andrew DeFaria
On 2007-02-23 16:48 (-0700 UTC), Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
<snip />
I tried other hardcore newsreader (Ya-news ...., and others). and none hold a candle to mozilla products. The only thing possibly we might be missing is support for binaries and I am not sure that's a deficiency. It actually may be blessing in disguise.1. Improved filtering capability (including one-click kill-filing and the ability to kill a branch of a thread).
2. Improved search capability (including either direct or indirect regex support).
2. Binary support (at least yEnc, regardless of whether or not it's a 'standard').
3. More flexibility in server subscriptions.
That'd be just off the top of my head . . . and I only make light use of non-binary newsgroups.
Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T
> On 2007-02-23 16:59 (-0700 UTC), Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>
> <snip />
>
>> Chris is The head honcho Whether his wish to call himself a moderator.
>> The Fact is hi "is" one. Or else he would pop up with occasional
>> "...this thread is getting off topic follow up is directed to General..".
>>
>> To me a group that is not moderated, does not have anyone posting any
>> such even on jokes or occasional humor. So whether Chris wishes to
>> designate himself as one he is one. :-)
>
> As a purely rhetorical question, does this mean that any of us could
> become /de facto/ moderators by behaving as Chris does? :-P
>
> /b.
>
became a Moz Champ or actual part of Mozilla I couldn't be one.
I guess I fuss at Chris too much. I know a little bit about the
moderator bit.
I am a co moderator of The Intuit newsgroup on Yahoo-mail it is a big
responsibility. You have to read the post before its actually posted
then decide whether its relevant. So far I haven't had to disapprove
anything yet. I have let a post a too get by that had some light humor
in it. but it never mushroomed out of control though. :-/
Brian Heinrich
> Brian Heinrich wrote:
>> On 2007-02-23 16:59 (-0700 UTC), Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>>
>> <snip />
>>
>>> Chris is The head honcho Whether his wish to call himself a
>>> moderator. The Fact is hi "is" one. Or else he would pop up with
>>> occasional "...this thread is getting off topic follow up is directed
>>> to General..".
>>>
>>> To me a group that is not moderated, does not have anyone posting any
>>> such even on jokes or occasional humor. So whether Chris wishes to
>>> designate himself as one he is one. :-)
>>
>> As a purely rhetorical question, does this mean that any of us could
>> become /de facto/ moderators by behaving as Chris does? :-P
>
> No because his actually part of the Mozilla infrastructure. Unless I
> became a Moz Champ or actual part of Mozilla I couldn't be one.
It was a purely rhetorical question based on your statement that 'whether
Chris wishes to designate himself as one[,] he is one.'
> I guess I fuss at Chris too much. I know a little bit about the
> moderator bit.
>
> I am a co moderator of The Intuit newsgroup on Yahoo-mail it is a big
> responsibility. You have to read the post before its actually posted
> then decide whether its relevant. So far I haven't had to disapprove
> anything yet. I have let a post a too get by that had some light humor
> in it. but it never mushroomed out of control though. :-/
When I was at the station, I was [co-]administrator/owner of three lists.
In that instance, virtually all postings were /à propos/, so the worst of it
was administration -- especially for the music list, where reps from
record/promo companies would change frequently and without notice.
squaredancer
Jones, C.E.T to generate the following:? :
> Brian Heinrich wrote:
>
>> On 2007-02-22 14:47 (-0700 UTC), Phillip M. Jones, C.E.T wrote:
>>
>> <snip />
>>
>>
>>>> Umm . . . Phillip? Just WTF you talkin' 'bout? :-\ And what does it
>>>> have to do with either Outlook or Thunderbird?
>>>>
>>> What its about is tits is the same silly argument in that Thunderbird
>>> is dead. I am using an analogy. You do know what that is.
>>>
>> The next question, of course, being 'What do tits have to do with any of
>> this?'
>>
>> :-D
>>
>> /b.
>>
>>
> Actually nothing :-)
>
> That's a typo
>
> supposed to be:
>
> What its about is its is the same silly argument in that Thunderbird is
> dead. I am using an analogy. You do know what that is.
>
> guess I had something else on my mind at the same time :-(
>
>
dirty-minded asterisks :-(
reg
mozbrother.
> On 2007-02-20 16:19 (-0700 UTC), rjstep3 wrote:
>
>> Andrew DeFaria wrote:
>>> rjstep3 wrote:
>>>
>>> First of all - troll! If you like Outlook then great. Use it. Have
>>> fun. How much does that cost again? Oh yeah - $$$!
>>
>> cheapskate. (well if you call me troll ...)
>
> In all seriousness, however, some of us who either don't have the money
> or don't want to spend the money.
>
> One thing that I do find interesting is that Microsoft has abandoned OE
> in favour of Windows Mail, which is a sub-set of Windows Live Mail Desktop.
>
> It sounds like what they're doing is finally moving in the direction of
> the thin clients that were so trumpeted at the time of Windows XP and .NET.
>
> <snip />
>
>> I know it had IMAP folder facilities - that is why I used it. but that
>> advantage has now gone. (as long as you are not a cheapskate).
>
> Or can afford it.
>
> I'm not sure how the fact that Outlook apparently handles IMAP better
> than it has in the past (ironically OE's IMAP handling was better than
> O's, perhaps because O is in a sense intended to work in conjunction
> with Exchange. In fact, realistically, I would have to say that there's
> absolutely no reason to shell out the money for, let alone use, O if you
> aren't accessing an Exchange server) suddenly means it's a better client
> than Tb -- bearing in mind, of course, that Tb is a mail/news client
> whilst O is a PIM.
>
> <snip />
>
>> I didn't know about finchsink, that much I concede, but I am pretty
>> savvy about software, and TB needs an overhaul. What is to stop me
>> expressing my opinion?
>
> Because, as currently expressed, you opinion is without meaning. You've
> written that Tb needs an over-haul, but what does that mean? Does it
> mean that -- as you indicate below -- it's !(O)?
>
>> As I said in my post, I am - probably like you - a M$ hater, but I
>> have to to concede when they (or anyone else) does something good.
>> Time to take a look and learn from what they have done.
>
> Actually, I have yet to hear a good thing about Outlook 2007; the best
> I've heard about Office relates to Word, and even /that/'s been a mixed
> bag.
>
>> Over to you TB developers: [ . . . ]
>
> Er, I take it you missed the 'support' in the NG name? :-P
>
>> [ . . . ] can you come up with something that provides email,
>> contacts, calendar, notes, synchronised with your mobile device, as
>> opposed to just a capable email client? Because people these days need
>> the former, not the latter.
>
> I won't go into details, but I'd say that Tb is currently the best
> e-mail client I've ever used -- and God knows I've tried a lot of them
> over the years, some 30 or 40.
>
> The question, finally, is this: is Tb to be a full-featured PIM? I'm
> quite happy with it as a solid e-mail client, and all the clutter of a
> PIM (which I don't currently need) would drive me away from Tb. If I
> want to use O, I'll use it; if I want to use Evolution, I'll use it. If
> I don't use them, it's not just 'cos I can't justify throwing any more
> money Microsoft's way; it's because it's more than I need.
>
> I suspect you're over-generalising when you suggest that people these
> days need contacts, calendar, notes, mobile sync'ing, &c, in addition to
> e-mail.
>
> However, I do like the way in which KMail, KOrganiser, KAddressBook,
> Kontact, &c, are separate but related apps, and I suspect such a model
> would work in the case of Tb -- that is, rather than the all-in-one
> bloat of Outlook and Evo, different apps (Firefox, Sunbird, Thunderbird,
> an app that expands address-book functionality, a note-taking app /à la/
> KNotes or Tomboy, improved sync'ing functionality (both to servers and
> otherwise), &c) would co-operate with each other and that would use open
> -- and, presumably, Web-based -- standards (rather than rely on
> proprietary server software) for their functionality.
>
> Just a tho't. . . .
>
> /b.
>
I prefer PocoMail email client.
mozbrother.
>> Man-wai Chang wrote:
>>>> And of course it does all the usual things you would expect - like
>>>> synchronise with your calendar and contacts, and with your Windows
>>>> Mobile device. So no need to (unreliably) migrate contacts from
>>>> Outlook to Thunderbird.
>>> I never need a calendar. Are you really that busy? Or are you just
>>> an addict in un-necessary tools?
>>>
>>
>> I don't need a calendar app. either, but there are many people who have
>> numerous appointments, travel plans, and people to keep track of by
>> time, and I can easily see that those people would appreciate such a
>> function as part of their email program. Just because a function isn't
>> useful to ME doesn't mean it isn't worthy of inclusion in the program.
>>
>>
> If They need one That bad get a Palm PDA or even a Blackberry. Heck even
> my Cell phone a Motto Razor 3C has a built in calendar.
>
mozbrother.
> Just remember one thing in life - no matter where you go - there you are.
what about internet trolls?
mozbrother.
garth
id...@want.com
and my Windows machine is old and slow, especially for things like
Outlook2007 but:
Is there any other Linux mail program where I can use different fonts?
Linux seems to have the ancient teletype thinking when it comes to
such things.
I have used a number of versions of Thunderbird for years, but STILL
it is unable to handle pictures in a sensible way. If I answer a mail
with pictures, the first thing I have to do is to take away all
pictures and then save my reply, to have some chance of producing a
reply. And then as a last thing, I add pictures, and with some luck,
it is sent.
I have autosave on, and if i am not quick enough, suddenly it is just
standing there hacking Attaching attaching to death. Just now I got
mad, even when I add a few text lines and did a save,it started to
attach attach attach...... Even if I just saved the rest with
success.
i use the windows machine in parallel, have switched between
Thunderbird on Linux with Outlook there umpteen times, Outlook always
works, Thunderbird has always had the same problems. And - even if I
am a programmer, I am not that good to start digging for some of these
real basic things.Pictures even seems to be saved in some kind of
internal format i have no idea of.
Brian Heinrich
<snip />
> Is there any other Linux mail program where I can use different fonts?
Anyone that supports HTML will allow you to do so.
> Linux seems to have the ancient teletype thinking when it comes to
> such things.
Less of a teletype thinking than a plain-text thinking.
> I have used a number of versions of Thunderbird for years, but STILL
> it is unable to handle pictures in a sensible way. If I answer a mail
> with pictures, the first thing I have to do is to take away all
> pictures and then save my reply, to have some chance of producing a
> reply. And then as a last thing, I add pictures, and with some luck,
> it is sent.
If the pictures are in-line, they will be included in your reply for the
simple reason that, well, they /are/ part of the message to which you're
replying.
I'm not sure if this goes for multipart/related or not; perhaps Gus or
someone else who frequents one of the multi-media groups could answer that.
> I have autosave on, and if i am not quick enough, suddenly it is just
> standing there hacking Attaching attaching to death. Just now I got
> mad, even when I add a few text lines and did a save,it started to
> attach attach attach...... Even if I just saved the rest with
> success.
That sounds like it's more of a problem with the auto-save function. I've
not encountered the issue, but I rarely get e-mail with in-line images.
> i use the windows machine in parallel, have switched between
> Thunderbird on Linux with Outlook there umpteen times, Outlook always
> works, Thunderbird has always had the same problems.
Could you define 'works' as something more specific than 'behaves in the
fashion I expect'.
> And - even if I
> am a programmer, I am not that good to start digging for some of these
> real basic things.Pictures even seems to be saved in some kind of
> internal format i have no idea of.
Tb should save them in MIME format. Other apps (/e.g./, mail.app) will use
Base64.
I don't know, but there may be an issue with Tb converting Base64 to MIME .
. . but you'd have to query Bugzilla to find out. . . .
Jonas P Eckerman
> I don't know, but there may be an issue with Tb converting Base64 to
> MIME . . .
That sounds strange. There is no way to convert Base64 to MIME.
They are different things.
MIME is used to define the structure of an email, while Base64 is
used to encode content. Base64 is one of the encodings used in
the MIME standard.
Most MIME capable mail apps (Thunderbird included) encodes
pictures with Base64.
/Jonas
--
Jonas Eckerman
http://www.truls.org/