OT Windows 7 and Email Client

[DavidM]

This is a bit OT but I know that there are people here with experience
of PCs and usually very helpful.

My old XP PC is starting to play up and I'm planning on replacing it
in the next few weeks. Currently looking at machines from the
Chillblast range as they seem to get consistently good reports. A
couple of areas where I'd appreciate and views and/or recommendations:

Version of W7.
Most of the systems I'm looking at come with Windows Home Premium, but
with a cost option to have Windows Professional. Win Prof has XP
compatibility, which I might/will need for some older programs I use
which aren't (and may never be) compatible with W7. There doesn't seem
to be any other advantage to me for Win Prof, but someone may think
differently?

Mail client.
I currently use Outlook Express, which isn't available on W7, so I
need an alternative. Outlook is a possible alternative but has many
features I'll never use (and will cost). Windows Live mail may do the
job but I played with early versions and wasn't impressed with it's
reliability - it may be ok now.

Mandatory requirements are: support POP/SMTP and IMAP from multiple
email providers; allow two or more email accounts for different users
of PC with privacy; allow downloaded email to be left on the providers
server (where supported eg Hotmail), allow at least basic filtering to
direct incoming mail to different folder, support dlists or address
groups.

Desire able: allow import of old emails from OE (the wife and I have
quite a lot of emails that we need to retain and have access to; allow
import of addresses from OE address book.

Any advice gratefully received (but I'm not going the Unix route, so
please don't waste your time suggesting this option, though I know
that some prefer it!).

[The Natural Philosopher]

just use teh full mozilla suite of firefox and thunderbird on any
platform you care to install.

And you know already but have rejected what the best one would be..




--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

[PAJ]

I swapped last year from XP to Windows 7 and had to go down the Pro
root to run some programmes. It is a bit of a pain with printers and
devices as it runs in the Windows virtual machine but it does work
after some effort. I use Windows Live and imported my O.E. mails and
stuff without a problem.

Peter

[Jethro_uk]

Given what you have said, my advice would be get a powerful PC, install
*nix, install VMBox. Install XP to a virtual machine, and just run the
virtual machine.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article
<27e4f661-9180-423c...@d17g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>,

If you actually own both versions rather than them being supplied with the
machine, a dual OS system works fine for the odd occasion you'll need XP.
And is free - Win7 seems to be designed to cope with this.

--
*The hardness of the butter is proportional to the softness of the bread *

Dave Plowman da...@davenoise.co.uk London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

[Graham.]

On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 12:13:58 +0100, DavidM

The "XP Mode" is just a virtual machine session albeit with a little
more intergration into the host W7 OS. And you don't pay extra for the
XP licence.
To be honest I wouldn't bother just for an OE6 replacement, Live Mail
IS crap but there is always Thunderbird, I use that for mail but
prefer Agent for groups.

--
Graham.
%Profound_observation%

[stuart noble]

I've got a dual boot (Win7/XP) machine, mainly because my scanner
doesn't have Win7 drivers.
My overall impression after 6 months or so is that Win7 is bloody awful,
and what they've done to Office 2007 is worse still. I thought I'd get
used to it all but I haven't

[Tim Watts]

Thunderbird.

--
Tim Watts

[Dave Plowman (News)]

In article <4u2yr.659106$EQ.3...@fx18.am4>,

stuart noble <stuart...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
> I've got a dual boot (Win7/XP) machine, mainly because my scanner
> doesn't have Win7 drivers.
> My overall impression after 6 months or so is that Win7 is bloody awful,
> and what they've done to Office 2007 is worse still. I thought I'd get
> used to it all but I haven't

I'm happy enough with Win7 after XP - but then I don't use OE or IE or MS
Office.

--
*Lottery: A tax on people who are bad at math.

[tony sayer]

In article <4n7hs79q39p6l156k...@4ax.com>, DavidM
<davidm_...@hotmail.com> scribeth thus

>This is a bit OT but I know that there are people here with experience
>of PCs and usually very helpful.
>
>My old XP PC is starting to play up and I'm planning on replacing it
>in the next few weeks. Currently looking at machines from the
>Chillblast range as they seem to get consistently good reports. A
>couple of areas where I'd appreciate and views and/or recommendations:
>

What's up with it?, if its all failing then you could get a younger one
and re install XP which is a decent programme:)..

>Version of W7.
>Most of the systems I'm looking at come with Windows Home Premium, but
>with a cost option to have Windows Professional. Win Prof has XP
>compatibility, which I might/will need for some older programs I use
>which aren't (and may never be) compatible with W7. There doesn't seem
>to be any other advantage to me for Win Prof, but someone may think
>differently?

I've used WIN 7 Pro and all in its quite good. There are a few things
what you might want to customise or turn off, but you can get it
looking a bit like XP if required;)..

>
>Mail client.
>I currently use Outlook Express, which isn't available on W7, so I
>need an alternative. Outlook is a possible alternative but has many
>features I'll never use (and will cost). Windows Live mail may do the
>job but I played with early versions and wasn't impressed with it's
>reliability - it may be ok now.

All in Thunderbird is good and free..

>
>Mandatory requirements are: support POP/SMTP and IMAP from multiple
>email providers; allow two or more email accounts for different users
>of PC with privacy; allow downloaded email to be left on the providers
>server (where supported eg Hotmail), allow at least basic filtering to
>direct incoming mail to different folder, support dlists or address
>groups.
>

Yes does all of those.. You can of course download it on your present
machine and run it and see what you think.

>Desire able: allow import of old emails from OE (the wife and I have
>quite a lot of emails that we need to retain and have access to; allow
>import of addresses from OE address book.
>
>Any advice gratefully received (but I'm not going the Unix route, so
>please don't waste your time suggesting this option, though I know
>that some prefer it!).

Well it does too work fine but if thats your view then fine too;)..
--
Tony Sayer

[Rod Speed]

DavidM <davidm_...@hotmail.com> wrote

> This is a bit OT but I know that there are people here
> with experience of PCs and usually very helpful.

> My old XP PC is starting to play up and I'm planning on replacing
> it in the next few weeks. Currently looking at machines from the
> Chillblast range as they seem to get consistently good reports.

I still assemble my PCs from parts with all except laptops and netbooks.

You do need to know what you are doing more tho.

> A couple of areas where I'd appreciate
> and views and/or recommendations:

> Version of W7.
> Most of the systems I'm looking at come with Windows Home Premium,

Yeah, that's pretty typical now.

> but with a cost option to have Windows Professional. Win Prof has
> XP compatibility, which I might/will need for some older programs
> I use which aren't (and may never be) compatible with W7.

Yes, that's the main reason for home users
to go with Pro instead of Home Premium.

The virtual XP has one real downside tho, particularly you don't have
any control over the screen resolution in the virtual XP and I don't
find that Outlook Express is really viable readability wise with that.

I'd try virtual box if I did want to run XP on a Win7 system for OE.

> There doesn't seem to be any other advantage to
> me for Win Prof, but someone may think differently?

That's correct.

> Mail client.
> I currently use Outlook Express, which isn't
> available on W7, so I need an alternative.

The main alternative is Windows Live Mail 14.

Not the latest version because that doesn't even bother to
quote usenet posts when replying to them, but 14 does fine
and is very close to Outlook Express and does fix some of the
quirks in OE that never did get fixed like the spelling checker.

One downside with WLM is that it has a separate inbox
for each POP3 email account which makes searching in
your old emails not as convenient as with OE. And you
cant run QuoteFix anymore with WLM wither.

> Outlook is a possible alternative but has
> many features I'll never use (and will cost).

It doesn't do usenet.

> Windows Live mail may do the job but I played with early versions
> and wasn't impressed with it's reliability - it may be ok now.

Its actually moved on to Windows Live Mail now
for Win7 and 14 is very decent reliability wise.

> Mandatory requirements are: support POP/SMTP
> and IMAP from multiple email providers;

That last is where Outlook gets a bit tricky.

> allow two or more email accounts for different users of PC with
> privacy; allow downloaded email to be left on the providers server
> (where supported eg Hotmail), allow at least basic filtering to direct
> incoming mail to different folder, support dlists or address groups.

WLM 14 does all of that fine and does usenet too.

And the user interface is pretty close to OE so you
are unlikely to have a major problem there too.

> Desire able: allow import of old emails from OE (the wife and
> I have quite a lot of emails that we need to retain and have
> access to; allow import of addresses from OE address book.

WLM 14 does all of that fine.

> Any advice gratefully received (but I'm not going the
> Unix route, so please don't waste your time suggesting
> this option, though I know that some prefer it!).

I'd go WLM 14 in your case, on Home Premium.

In fact I have done that myself when I moved from XP.

I do run Win7 Ultimate tho for reasons that arent relevant to your choice.

I doubt you will regret the move to Win7,
its got quite a few useful improvements on XP.

I choose to run an 8GB ram system running 64 bit Win7 and
have had no regrets. While you may not use your system as
intensively as I do, the extra 4GB of ram costs peanuts.

[Rod Speed]

Dave Plowman (News) <da...@davenoise.co.uk> wrote

> PAJ <d...@pjones0.wanadoo.co.uk> wrote:

>> I swapped last year from XP to Windows 7 and had to go down
>> the Pro root to run some programmes. It is a bit of a pain with
>> printers and devices as it runs in the Windows virtual machine
>> but it does work after some effort. I use Windows Live and
>> imported my O.E. mails and stuff without a problem.

> If you actually own both versions rather than them being supplied with the
> machine, a dual OS system works fine for the odd occasion you'll need XP.

It isnt the odd occasion with an email client.

> And is free - Win7 seems to be designed to cope with this.

But isnt as convenient to use as the virtual XP or virtual box and virtual
box is free too.

[Rod Speed]

stuart noble <stuart...@ntlworld.com> wrote

I feel the exact opposite, much prefer Win7. It does have a few
quirks, being much more secure with file sharing between multiple
machines, but that's about it and that's easy enough to fix.

> and what they've done to Office 2007 is worse still. I thought I'd get
> used to it all but I haven't

Office 2003 runs fine on Win7 and has the traditional UI.

[geoff]

In message
<27e4f661-9180-423c...@d17g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>, PAJ
<d...@pjones0.wanadoo.co.uk> writes

>I swapped last year from XP to Windows 7 and had to go down the Pro
>root to run some programmes. It is a bit of a pain with printers and
>devices as it runs in the Windows virtual machine but it does work
>after some effort.

You don't need pro to run the virtual machine

and you don't need windows VP to run an XP shell

> I use Windows Live and imported my O.E. mails and
>stuff without a problem.
>
>Peter

--
geoff

[Rod Speed]

Dave Plowman (News) <da...@davenoise.co.uk> wrote

> stuart noble <stuart...@ntlworld.com> wrote

>> I've got a dual boot (Win7/XP) machine, mainly
>> because my scanner doesn't have Win7 drivers.

>> My overall impression after 6 months or so is that Win7
>> is bloody awful, and what they've done to Office 2007
>> is worse still. I thought I'd get used to it all but I haven't
>
> I'm happy enough with Win7 after XP

I actually prefer it myself. Quite a bit of stuff like
bluetooth to the phone etc is much better done
and the toolbar in spades.

> - but then I don't use OE or IE or MS Office.

I do with all of those and much prefer Win7.

Office is trivially fixed by running 2003 instead of 2007, works fine on
Win7.

[John Rumm]

On 01/06/2012 12:13, DavidM wrote:

> This is a bit OT but I know that there are people here with experience
> of PCs and usually very helpful.
>
> My old XP PC is starting to play up and I'm planning on replacing it
> in the next few weeks. Currently looking at machines from the
> Chillblast range as they seem to get consistently good reports. A
> couple of areas where I'd appreciate and views and/or recommendations:
>
> Version of W7.
> Most of the systems I'm looking at come with Windows Home Premium, but
> with a cost option to have Windows Professional. Win Prof has XP
> compatibility, which I might/will need for some older programs I use
> which aren't (and may never be) compatible with W7. There doesn't seem
> to be any other advantage to me for Win Prof, but someone may think
> differently?

Pro gets you the legit license for the virtual machine... that's the
main gain from a home users perspective.

> Mail client.
> I currently use Outlook Express, which isn't available on W7, so I
> need an alternative. Outlook is a possible alternative but has many
> features I'll never use (and will cost). Windows Live mail may do the

It also does not do news.

> job but I played with early versions and wasn't impressed with it's
> reliability - it may be ok now.
>
> Mandatory requirements are: support POP/SMTP and IMAP from multiple
> email providers; allow two or more email accounts for different users
> of PC with privacy; allow downloaded email to be left on the providers
> server (where supported eg Hotmail), allow at least basic filtering to
> direct incoming mail to different folder, support dlists or address
> groups.

Thunderbird will do all that.

> Desire able: allow import of old emails from OE (the wife and I have
> quite a lot of emails that we need to retain and have access to; allow
> import of addresses from OE address book.

and that


--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/

[John Rumm]

On 01/06/2012 12:47, Jethro_uk wrote:

> Given what you have said, my advice would be get a powerful PC, install
> *nix, install VMBox. Install XP to a virtual machine, and just run the
> virtual machine.

or just install XP on the new machine and cut out the middle man?

(seems to be adding complexity for no gain in functionality)

[John Miller]

-----------------------
Windows Live Mail handled Newsgroups OK when I used it with W7, but I
eventually binned it and went to Thunderbird because WLM twice deleted
some of itself when applying updates. What made it worse was that it
obviously left some corrupted files as I couldn't delete it or reinstall
it and ended up having to reload the system (from a backup, thankfully!)
Thunderbird has improved immensely from when I last tried it some years
ago and will do everything the OP wants.

John M

[dennis@home]

"DavidM" <davidm_...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4n7hs79q39p6l156k...@4ax.com...

> I currently use Outlook Express, which isn't available on W7, so I
> need an alternative. Outlook is a possible alternative but has many
> features I'll never use (and will cost). Windows Live mail may do the
> job but I played with early versions and wasn't impressed with it's
> reliability - it may be ok now.

OE was replaced by WLM years ago.
There have been no security updates to OE since.
WLM has been fixed and works just like OE for mail.
The latest version of WLM doesn't work well with usenet so don't go later
than V14 (IIRC) if you are using it for usenet.

You download WLM from www.live.com(a Microsoft site) for free.

[John Rumm]

IIRC the older versions did do usenet, but the current one does not I am
led to believe.

> obviously left some corrupted files as I couldn't delete it or reinstall
> it and ended up having to reload the system (from a backup, thankfully!)
> Thunderbird has improved immensely from when I last tried it some years
> ago and will do everything the OP wants.
>
> John M

[F]

On 01/06/2012 12:13 DavidM wrote:

> Mail client.

Thunderbird

--
F

[DavidM]

On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 12:13:58 +0100, DavidM
<davidm_...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Thanks to all who have replied so far.

I use Forte as my news reader, so don't need the email client for
that. The XP on my current machine came pre installed and I don't have
a full installation disc to do an install on a new machine. And I am
NOT going the *nix route!

I do have a few other programs that are not W7 compatible, so looks
like I need W7 Prof, and either WLM or Thunderbird for mail. Think
I'll install Thunderbird on my laptop and have a play with it to see
what it's like.

[Rod Speed]

"John Rumm" <see.my.s...@nowhere.null> wrote in message
news:c8WdnSWW2codblTS...@brightview.co.uk...

They still do, they just don't quote what you are replying to.

[Graham.]

I'd like to have been a fly on the wall the meeting when Microsoft
decided to retain newsgroup functionality in WLM, but make it even
worse than OE6. What were they thinking?

It's not even that they have a product you pay extra for, so it's not
like, "We'll bundle this crap Wordpad, then everyone will have to buy
the latest Office suite".

--
Graham.
%Profound_observation%

[Jethro_uk]

On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 22:58:25 +0100, John Rumm wrote:

> On 01/06/2012 12:47, Jethro_uk wrote:
>
>> Given what you have said, my advice would be get a powerful PC, install
>> *nix, install VMBox. Install XP to a virtual machine, and just run the
>> virtual machine.
>
> or just install XP on the new machine and cut out the middle man?
>
> (seems to be adding complexity for no gain in functionality)

It's much quicker to roll back a virtual machine than it is revert to a
saved image. And if you intend using XP as your main OS, you should be
prepared to revert to original install every 3 months or so.

[Rod Speed]

"Graham." <m...@privacy.net> wrote in message
news:fpfms7pf8vpkr79pe...@4ax.com...

Presumably someone decided that quoting was one hell
of a mess and decided not to even attempt to quote.

Without actually using usenet so they didn't realise the stupidity of that
approach.

> It's not even that they have a product you pay extra for, so it's not
> like, "We'll bundle this crap Wordpad, then everyone will have to buy
> the latest Office suite".

They will keep improving Wordpad, its quite a bit better
than it used to be and many don't need Office anymore.

[Rod Speed]

"Jethro_uk" <jeth...@hotmailbin.com> wrote in message
news:AWJyr.922656$8q1.4...@fx29.am4...

I never ever had to do that at all and used it much more intensively than
you do.

[John Rumm]

I was searching for a suitable response to that, but the only thing that
comes to mind is bollocks!

[The Natural Philosopher]

John Rumm wrote:
> On 03/06/2012 14:48, Jethro_uk wrote:
>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 22:58:25 +0100, John Rumm wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/06/2012 12:47, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>
>>>> Given what you have said, my advice would be get a powerful PC, install
>>>> *nix, install VMBox. Install XP to a virtual machine, and just run the
>>>> virtual machine.
>>>
>>> or just install XP on the new machine and cut out the middle man?
>>>
>>> (seems to be adding complexity for no gain in functionality)
>>
>> It's much quicker to roll back a virtual machine than it is revert to a
>> saved image. And if you intend using XP as your main OS, you should be
>> prepared to revert to original install every 3 months or so.
>
> I was searching for a suitable response to that, but the only thing that
> comes to mind is bollocks!
>
>

You are right: its something like 6 weeks


--
To people who know nothing, anything is possible.
To people who know too much, it is a sad fact
that they know how little is really possible -
and how hard it is to achieve it.

[MarkG]

On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 12:13:58 +0100, DavidM <davidm_...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>

> Mail client.
> I currently use Outlook Express, which isn't available on W7, so I
> need an alternative. Outlook is a possible alternative but has many
> features I'll never use (and will cost). Windows Live mail may do the

> job but I played with early versions and wasn't impressed with it's
> reliability - it may be ok now.
>
> Mandatory requirements are: support POP/SMTP and IMAP from multiple
> email providers; allow two or more email accounts for different users
> of PC with privacy; allow downloaded email to be left on the providers
> server (where supported eg Hotmail), allow at least basic filtering to
> direct incoming mail to different folder, support dlists or address
> groups.
>

> Desire able: allow import of old emails from OE (the wife and I have
> quite a lot of emails that we need to retain and have access to; allow
> import of addresses from OE address book.
>

> Any advice gratefully received (but I'm not going the Unix route, so
> please don't waste your time suggesting this option, though I know
> that some prefer it!).

Opera will do all this, it's a fine browser too, faster and more feature
complete than Chrome, and without the bloat of Firefox, and free. The
best of all worlds.

Opera have always been very "pro web standards" and that used to hurt
them, when websites used to just code for IE. Both Chrome and Opera (and
to a lesser degree Firefox) adhere to web standards too, Opera is no
longer at a disadvantage that it used to be.

Their soon to be released Opera 12 is looking REALLY good and well worth
checking out. The mail client is a "views" based, rather than more
simplistic but limiting folder based. For example, you can tag family
holiday emails in both "Family" and "Holiday" views without duplication,
something folders don't allow. Oh, and it's also a newsgroup reader and
IRC client too, along with a RSS reader. And only a 10MB download (1/3rd
the size of the browser-only Chrome)

Browser:
http://www.opera.com/browser/features/

Mail:
http://www.opera.com/mail/



--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

[4783l]

"The Natural Philosopher" <t...@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
news:jqgnf6$f1t$1...@news.albasani.net...

> John Rumm wrote:
>> On 03/06/2012 14:48, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 22:58:25 +0100, John Rumm wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/06/2012 12:47, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Given what you have said, my advice would be get a powerful PC,
>>>>> install
>>>>> *nix, install VMBox. Install XP to a virtual machine, and just run the
>>>>> virtual machine.
>>>>
>>>> or just install XP on the new machine and cut out the middle man?
>>>>
>>>> (seems to be adding complexity for no gain in functionality)
>>>
>>> It's much quicker to roll back a virtual machine than it is revert to a
>>> saved image. And if you intend using XP as your main OS, you should be
>>> prepared to revert to original install every 3 months or so.
>>
>> I was searching for a suitable response to that, but the only thing that
>> comes to mind is bollocks!
>>
>>
> You are right: its something like 6 weeks

Completely off with the fucking fairys, as always.

[Tim Lamb]

In message <jqgnf6$f1t$1...@news.albasani.net>, The Natural Philosopher
<t...@invalid.invalid> writes

>John Rumm wrote:
>> On 03/06/2012 14:48, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>> On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 22:58:25 +0100, John Rumm wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/06/2012 12:47, Jethro_uk wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Given what you have said, my advice would be get a powerful PC, install
>>>>> *nix, install VMBox. Install XP to a virtual machine, and just run the
>>>>> virtual machine.
>>>>
>>>> or just install XP on the new machine and cut out the middle man?
>>>>
>>>> (seems to be adding complexity for no gain in functionality)
>>>
>>> It's much quicker to roll back a virtual machine than it is revert to a
>>> saved image. And if you intend using XP as your main OS, you should be
>>> prepared to revert to original install every 3 months or so.
>> I was searching for a suitable response to that, but the only thing
>>that comes to mind is bollocks!
>>
>You are right: its something like 6 weeks

err... why?

I too have no master disc. Had one been supplied with the m/c it would
not have service pack 2 or 3.

regards

--
Tim Lamb

[John Rumm]

The solution to that is to make a "slipstreamed"[1] disc which rolls up
all the updates onto an install image. Saves hours of patching should
you ever need to do a fresh install. (which I had to do for the second
time in about 11 years on one of my machines recently... pah, all these
people who can't keep it up for more than a few weeks at a time eh ;-)


[1] nlite is a very handy package for this - point it at a folder with
the install CD content in it, and another with the required service
packs etc and it will create the new slipstreamed CD for you in one hit.

[Tim Lamb]

In message <DLGdnTvCXL-OLFHS...@brightview.co.uk>, John
Rumm <see.my.s...@nowhere.null> writes

I have Nero. But what is meant by *slipstreamed*

I suspect this is likely to stretch my ability:-(

Suspect UPS delivery notification today!

regards
>

--
Tim Lamb

[Rod Speed]

"Tim Lamb" <t...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:SC$qV8A7d...@marfordfarm.demon.co.uk...

Puts all the available updates in with the distribution so
it all gets installed in one go from the slipstreamed CD.

> I suspect this is likely to stretch my ability:-(

Not if you use one of the utes that does the slipstreaming for you.

[John Rumm]

Nero is ok for burning images - but nlite does that and lots more...

Slipstreaming is basically taking a patch or service pack and
integrating it into an install CD = so when you install from it, you get
a ready patched system from the off. Quicker and easier, and also save a
fair bit of disk space.

Say your PC came with WinXP SP1 on CD, rather than reinstall from that -
hence reverting the machine to SP1 and then needing to go through
applying all the patches again to get back to SP3. You can download the
SP3 service pack as a standalone exe from the MS site, and then have it
apply itself to a copy of your original CD - thus making a slipstreamed
SP3 disk. Which you can then use that to reinstall.

The same trick can be used on most MS installation media (not just
operating systems) and with most of the patch and update files)

> I suspect this is likely to stretch my ability:-(
>
> Suspect UPS delivery notification today!
>
> regards
>>
>


--

[Tim Lamb]

In message <GqKdnRglBP34iVDS...@brightview.co.uk>, John
Rumm <see.my.s...@nowhere.null> writes
>>>>

As I thought... technical.

A quick tot up of service packs, security updates and quick fixes is
around 850Mb. I suppose that is not necessarily cumulative but a bit
much for 700Mb discs.

I'll run this by a younger brain when the opportunity occurs.

regards

--
Tim Lamb

[Grimly Curmudgeon]

On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 23:11:50 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
<t...@invalid.invalid> wrote:

>>> It's much quicker to roll back a virtual machine than it is revert to a
>>> saved image. And if you intend using XP as your main OS, you should be
>>> prepared to revert to original install every 3 months or so.
>>
>> I was searching for a suitable response to that, but the only thing that
>> comes to mind is bollocks!
>>
>>
>You are right: its something like 6 weeks

Total tripe.

[Grimly Curmudgeon]

On Sun, 03 Jun 2012 23:45:10 +0100, MarkG <m...@null.com> wrote:

>Opera will do all this, it's a fine browser too, faster and more feature
>complete than Chrome, and without the bloat of Firefox, and free. The
>best of all worlds.

After problems with FF, I installed Opera. I'd used Opera for years,
until version 8, then forgot about it.
Apart from some initial getting used to it, it was fine. Apart from
one killer issue - I have the text size set larger than default and
this screws up many pages; I suspect the pages in question are
probably written with IE in mind, which was always a pita.

[The Natural Philosopher]

Best description of windows XP yet.

keep em coming.

[Graham.]

>
>> It's not even that they have a product you pay extra for, so it's not
>> like, "We'll bundle this crap Wordpad, then everyone will have to buy
>> the latest Office suite".
>
>They will keep improving Wordpad, its quite a bit better
>than it used to be and many don't need Office anymore.

I'm not sure I would go that far.

I have a few forms etc on a memory stick in .rtf format so I can be
sure of being able to print them out on customers machines that often
have nothing better than Wordpad.

--
Graham.
%Profound_observation%

[Rick Hughes]

On 01/06/2012 12:13, DavidM wrote:
where I'd appreciate and views and/or recommendations:
>
> Version of W7.
> Most of the systems I'm looking at come with Windows Home Premium, but
> with a cost option to have Windows Professional. Win Prof has XP

I have 32bit Ultimate ... all of my programs worked fine ... W7
validation tool can be run in advance to check them for you.

>
> Mail client.
> I currently use Outlook Express, which isn't available on W7, so I

I moved to W7 in Jan .... same issue.
So I installed Mozilla Thunderbird .... free and much better that OE
Includes a Newsreader (using it for this) ,... also used import tool to
import all my OE folders & files ... although you can just cut & paste.

I also swapped to Mozilla Firefox and dumped IE ... much faster and
more reliable.

[Rod Speed]

Graham. <m...@privacy.net> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

Sure, but many don't use Office for forms.

[DavidM]

On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 12:13:58 +0100, DavidM
<davidm_...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>This is a bit OT but I know that there are people here with experience
>of PCs and usually very helpful.
>
>My old XP PC is starting to play up and I'm planning on replacing it
>in the next few weeks. Currently looking at machines from the
>Chillblast range as they seem to get consistently good reports. A

>couple of areas where I'd appreciate and views and/or recommendations:

>
>Version of W7.
>Most of the systems I'm looking at come with Windows Home Premium, but
>with a cost option to have Windows Professional. Win Prof has XP

>compatibility, which I might/will need for some older programs I use
>which aren't (and may never be) compatible with W7. There doesn't seem
>to be any other advantage to me for Win Prof, but someone may think
>differently?
>

>Mail client.
>I currently use Outlook Express, which isn't available on W7, so I

>need an alternative. Outlook is a possible alternative but has many
>features I'll never use (and will cost). Windows Live mail may do the
>job but I played with early versions and wasn't impressed with it's
>reliability - it may be ok now.
>
>Mandatory requirements are: support POP/SMTP and IMAP from multiple
>email providers; allow two or more email accounts for different users
>of PC with privacy; allow downloaded email to be left on the providers
>server (where supported eg Hotmail), allow at least basic filtering to
>direct incoming mail to different folder, support dlists or address
>groups.
>
>Desire able: allow import of old emails from OE (the wife and I have
>quite a lot of emails that we need to retain and have access to; allow
>import of addresses from OE address book.
>
>Any advice gratefully received (but I'm not going the Unix route, so
>please don't waste your time suggesting this option, though I know
>that some prefer it!).

Thanks again for all the replies.

Had a quick look at Thunderbird and it seems to do the job quite well.
Will just have to teach the Mrs how to use it! Import from OE looks
good as well. I guess I need to install TB on the old XP machine to
import all the emails/folders, then copy the database over to the new
machine with TB (or do I need to export in some intermediate format
then import on the new machine?).

I'll probably go for W7 Professional, as I still need the XP
compatibility for a couple of other programs.

Any "gotchas" in XP Prof that I should be aware of, or is it all
fairly straightforward, bearing in mind I'm not upgrading an exisiting
XP system but buying a new system with W7 pre installed?

[The Natural Philosopher]

DavidM wrote:
I guess I need to install TB on the old XP machine to
> import all the emails/folders, then copy the database over to the new
> machine with TB (or do I need to export in some intermediate format
> then import on the new machine?).
>

No. The format of the folder is the same.

Finding where it lives is less than trivial - certainly on Linux.

And is configurable as well.

[John Rumm]

On 08/06/2012 12:19, DavidM wrote:

> Had a quick look at Thunderbird and it seems to do the job quite well.
> Will just have to teach the Mrs how to use it! Import from OE looks
> good as well. I guess I need to install TB on the old XP machine to
> import all the emails/folders, then copy the database over to the new
> machine with TB (or do I need to export in some intermediate format
> then import on the new machine?).

Yup, that will work.

Install a fresh copy on the new machine. Then on the old one open a my
computer window, make sure the address bar is enabled, and type
%appdata% in to the address bar. That will take you to the hidden folder
that contains your various application's data.

look for the thunderbird folder, in which will be a profiles folder, in
which is a oddly named folder called nnnnnnnn.default (where the "nnn"s
will be random). Copy the entire content of that folder to a flash drive
(or share it on your network).

Now on the new machine, make sure thunderbird is not running. Now do the
same %appdata% trick to get to the right folder on Win7 (its different
from XP), and dump the content from the old machine into the similarly
named folder on the win7 machine.

> I'll probably go for W7 Professional, as I still need the XP
> compatibility for a couple of other programs.
>
> Any "gotchas" in XP Prof that I should be aware of, or is it all
> fairly straightforward, bearing in mind I'm not upgrading an exisiting
> XP system but buying a new system with W7 pre installed?

Since you will be reinstalling your apps on the virtual machine, you may
find some which require activation (office etc) could whinge if you have
reinstalled them recently on the old machine - however that can usually
be worked around.