Windows Live Mail

On 3/8/14 8:46 AM, Char Jackson wrote:
On Thu, 06 Mar 2014 09:43:59 -0700, Ken Springer
wrote:

On 3/6/14 3:04 AM, Bob Henson wrote:

If any of the few people that have the problem find it really annoying,
switching to using plain text might be a workaround?

Maybe. But, that means you are moving back in time rather than forward.
Sort of like insisting on driving that 1989 car instead of a modern
vehicle. G

Just in case you're referring to Usenet, bear in mind that Usenet *is* plain
text.

Hi, Char,

No, I was referring to just email, not the Usenet. Although, I wish
more of the Usenet groups were binary, so if you want to refer to an
image file, attach a file, or something, you didn't have to use some
server somewhere to store that data, have an account, etc. and then post
a link to it.


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 25.0
Thunderbird 24.3.0

Ken Springer wrote:
No, I was referring to just email, not the Usenet. Although, I
wish more of the Usenet groups were binary, so if you want to
refer to an image file, attach a file, or something, you didn't
have to use some server somewhere to store that data, have an
account, etc. and then post a link to it.

You've just described the biggest advantage of non-binary groups!

--
XS11E, Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project:
http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/

On Sat, 08 Mar 2014 08:49:00 -0600, Char Jackson
wrote:

On Thu, 6 Mar 2014 00:22:31 +0000 (UTC), "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
wrote:

Ken Blake wrote:

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
BillW50 wrote:
That is because you don't try all of the features and your kind make
lousy testers. How do you know what the software can do if you never
test the limits?

You have no idea how I use the software, so stop making **** up. Though
if you didn't, you wouldn't have much to post...

LOL! A reply I almost never use, but I'll do it this time:

+1

Thank you for the support.

I see in _his_ reply to your above post, he is still making **** up. Says
I called myself "blind as a bat." False. Said he can "find it on my
machine in 30 seconds." That's false, too. He knows nothing about my
machine.

Every village has one, and you have met ours.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_idiot


LOL! And calling this newsgroup a village is a good metaphor.

On 3/8/14 9:27 AM, XS11E wrote:
Ken Springer wrote:
No, I was referring to just email, not the Usenet. Although, I
wish more of the Usenet groups were binary, so if you want to
refer to an image file, attach a file, or something, you didn't
have to use some server somewhere to store that data, have an
account, etc. and then post a link to it.

You've just described the biggest advantage of non-binary groups!

To modify a common platitude, one person's advantage is another person's
disadvantage.

I get tired of having to open the browser, or a new tab in a browser, to
view a component part of a message. Darned computers were supposed to
decrease the things I have to do, not increase them. BG


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 25.0
Thunderbird 24.3.0

Ken Springer wrote:
On 3/8/14 9:27 AM, XS11E wrote:
Ken Springer wrote:
No, I was referring to just email, not the Usenet. Although, I
wish more of the Usenet groups were binary, so if you want to
refer to an image file, attach a file, or something, you didn't
have to use some server somewhere to store that data, have an
account, etc. and then post a link to it.

You've just described the biggest advantage of non-binary groups!

To modify a common platitude, one person's advantage is another person's
disadvantage.

I get tired of having to open the browser, or a new tab in a browser, to
view a component part of a message. Darned computers were supposed to
decrease the things I have to do, not increase them. BG



It's a matter of attack surface. If USENET switched over to
a binary format, complete with executables and dancing monkeys,
the computer would end up infested with malware. There is still
an exposure, as it stands now. It's possible to craft messages
in such a way, they get past the filters.

Paul

On 3/8/14 12:32 PM, Paul wrote:
Ken Springer wrote:
On 3/8/14 9:27 AM, XS11E wrote:
Ken Springer wrote:
No, I was referring to just email, not the Usenet. Although, I
wish more of the Usenet groups were binary, so if you want to
refer to an image file, attach a file, or something, you didn't
have to use some server somewhere to store that data, have an
account, etc. and then post a link to it.

You've just described the biggest advantage of non-binary groups!

To modify a common platitude, one person's advantage is another person's
disadvantage.

I get tired of having to open the browser, or a new tab in a browser, to
view a component part of a message. Darned computers were supposed to
decrease the things I have to do, not increase them. BG



It's a matter of attack surface. If USENET switched over to
a binary format, complete with executables and dancing monkeys,
the computer would end up infested with malware. There is still
an exposure, as it stands now. It's possible to craft messages
in such a way, they get past the filters.

Probably. But, you'll read a lot of personal security articles where
they say to limit your use of the internet to protect yourself. But
each time you go to some site like imageshack, Dropbox, etc., aren't you
simply adding to your exposure?

To all, this is a discussion, not a fight. LOL



--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 25.0
Thunderbird 24.3.0

In ,
Char Jackson typed:
On Thu, 6 Mar 2014 00:22:31 +0000 (UTC), "Beauregard T. Shagnasty"
wrote:

Ken Blake wrote:

Beauregard T. Shagnasty wrote:
BillW50 wrote:
That is because you don't try all of the features and your kind
make lousy testers. How do you know what the software can do if
you never test the limits?

You have no idea how I use the software, so stop making **** up.
Though if you didn't, you wouldn't have much to post...

LOL! A reply I almost never use, but I'll do it this time:

+1

Thank you for the support.

I see in _his_ reply to your above post, he is still making **** up.
Says I called myself "blind as a bat." False. Said he can "find it
on my machine in 30 seconds." That's false, too. He knows nothing
about my machine.

Every village has one, and you have met ours.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_idiot

What's the problem Char? You can't understand how I can perform such a
feat? It is quite simple really. All it is just a straightforward logic
problem and all you have to do is to follow the logic. I know your
memory isn't as great as it used to be. And you keep forgetting how many
machines I have here and all. And you forgot about all of the logic that
brought me to this conclusion, but I digress.

Plus I know the make and model of the computer doesn't matter. So
knowing the machine in question or how they use it is totally
irrelevant. And just by following uncomplicated logic, I can cause the
problem to appear and disappear on any machine of the TB versions I have
tested. I also know it isn't there in TB v1.5.08. So at least not all
versions are affected.

So I will rephrase my claim so that even any village idiot can
understand. Thus given enough training, even Char Jackson could cause
the problem to occur and disappear on any machine in less than 30
seconds. Well we could cut Char some slack, since he can be a bit slow
at times, so let's give him 60 seconds. ;-)

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core2 Duo T5600 1.83GHz - 4GB - Windows XP SP2

In ,
Char Jackson typed:
On Wed, 5 Mar 2014 17:37:20 -0600, "BillW50" wrote:

OE6 and WLM are easily fixable with a simple macro. Thunderbird isn't
easy or very useful! Nor can you fix Thunderbird's problems with a
simple macro. Try to find replies to your posts sometime with
Thunderbird. What a piece of junk!

Is that why you post all of the stupid stuff that you post? Just to
see if you can get replies?

Nope, the people who I am currently helping get first priority. Those
that prefer to name call and slander, such as yourself gets the
lowest priority.

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era) - OE-QuoteFix v1.19.2
Centrino Core2 Duo T5600 1.83GHz - 4GB - Windows XP SP2

"BillW50" wrote in :

In ,
Char Jackson typed:
On Wed, 5 Mar 2014 17:37:20 -0600, "BillW50" wrote:

OE6 and WLM are easily fixable with a simple macro. Thunderbird isn't
easy or very useful! Nor can you fix Thunderbird's problems with a
simple macro. Try to find replies to your posts sometime with
Thunderbird. What a piece of junk!

Is that why you post all of the stupid stuff that you post? Just to
see if you can get replies?

Nope, the people who I am currently helping get first priority. Those
that prefer to name call and slander, such as yourself gets the
lowest priority.


Well, that was rude.

On 3/8/14 2:15 PM, Zaky Waky wrote:
"BillW50" wrote in :

In ,
Char Jackson typed:
On Wed, 5 Mar 2014 17:37:20 -0600, "BillW50" wrote:

OE6 and WLM are easily fixable with a simple macro. Thunderbird isn't
easy or very useful! Nor can you fix Thunderbird's problems with a
simple macro. Try to find replies to your posts sometime with
Thunderbird. What a piece of junk!

Is that why you post all of the stupid stuff that you post? Just to
see if you can get replies?

Nope, the people who I am currently helping get first priority. Those
that prefer to name call and slander, such as yourself gets the
lowest priority.


Well, that was rude.

IMO, there's a lot of people active in this thread that are not behaving
in a very stellar manner. :-(


--
Ken

Mac OS X 10.8.5
Firefox 25.0
Thunderbird 24.3.0

Paul wrote:
Ken Springer wrote:
On 3/8/14 9:27 AM, XS11E wrote:
Ken Springer wrote:
No, I was referring to just email, not the Usenet. Although, I
wish more of the Usenet groups were binary, so if you want to
refer to an image file, attach a file, or something, you didn't
have to use some server somewhere to store that data, have an
account, etc. and then post a link to it.

You've just described the biggest advantage of non-binary groups!

To modify a common platitude, one person's advantage is another
person's disadvantage.

I get tired of having to open the browser, or a new tab in a browser,
to view a component part of a message. Darned computers were supposed
to decrease the things I have to do, not increase them. BG



It's a matter of attack surface. If USENET switched over to
a binary format, complete with executables and dancing monkeys,
the computer would end up infested with malware. There is still
an exposure, as it stands now. It's possible to craft messages
in such a way, they get past the filters.

Paul
Not always true...I've been moderating and a member of a private nntp
newsserver/groups that support both plain text, html, stationery,
top/bottom posting and up to 1MB messages size for over a decade and
we've never, ever had one single incident of malicious malware impacting
any user.

One difference...we do moderate all groups and hold users to the terms
of service and guidelines for usage...it's not Usenet, its just better.


--
....winston
msft mvp consumer apps

In message , BillW50
writes:
[]
Yes indeed! Although do you really believe that Microsoft wants to throw
everything away with XP? There must be like millions of business users
and home users still using it. And you think Microsoft is ok with
ignoring all of them? Really?

Yes, probably; what benefit do they bring to Microsoft?
[]
40% that doesn't. And like always in the past, Microsoft will announce
by popular demand, they won't drop XP support totally.

They have already announced that they will: the only back-pedalling has
been that they'll update the files Microsoft Security Essentials uses
for a little while (though MSE itself may not continue to be available,
so get it while you can). [I'm not sure what MSE is - AV software, I
think.] Oh, and they'll continue to _support_ some _paying_ customers
until 2015 (I think) - but that's paid support. There will be no further
enhancements _or bugfixes_.

After all they tried to drop XP support before. Then the netbook craze
came in and they had to extend it. This is their second attempt on
killing XP. I know they wish it to happen, but if enough pressure comes
their way they just won't ignore it. Yes Microsoft maybe many things,

Why - what harm would ignoring it do them?

but one thing they are not is really stupid. At least not yet. ;-)

No, they're not (as a business) stupid. They're stopping support for an
ancient product, for which they're getting negligible income and for
which the support must be costing them money, in favour of new versions
that people have to buy: as a business, which they are, that's not
stupid.

As a _user_, I'm going to stick with XP - with 7 as a backup - for as
long as I can (-:!
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

One death from beef on the bone might be expected every 20 years at the current
rate, but 40,000 people will die falling downstairs in that time. Should we make
bungalows compulsory? ("Equinox" on Risk, April 1999, paraphrased by Polly
Toynbee in Radio Times)

In message , BillW50
writes:
[]
because I have been beta testing for over 30 years and I could careless
what kind of machine you have because I know the bug is there and I know
[]
Actually, I presume you mean you _couldn't_ care less. The "could care
less" variant is gaining currency, especially in leftpondia it seems to
me, but if you think about it, it means the opposite of what you intend.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"I'm not against women. Not often enough, anyway." - Groucho Marx

On 3/09/2014, J. P. Gilliver (John) posted:
In message , BillW50
writes:
[]
because I have been beta testing for over 30 years and I could
careless
what kind of machine you have because I know the bug is there and I
know
[]
Actually, I presume you mean you _couldn't_ care less. The "could
care less" variant is gaining currency, especially in leftpondia it
seems to me, but if you think about it, it means the opposite of what
you intend.

ISTM that on this (left) side of the pond, it supplanted the logical
form of the phrase decades ago :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On 3/9/2014 5:48 AM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , BillW50 writes:
[]
because I have been beta testing for over 30 years and I could careless
what kind of machine you have because I know the bug is there and I know
[]
Actually, I presume you mean you _couldn't_ care less. The "could care
less" variant is gaining currency, especially in leftpondia it seems to
me, but if you think about it, it means the opposite of what you intend.

Yes you are indeed correct. I'll try to be more careful next time. ;-)

--
Bill
Dell Latitude Slate Tablet 128GB SSD ('12 era) - Thunderbird v24.3.0
Intel Atom Z670 1.5GHz - 2GB RAM - Windows 8 Pro