Windows Live Mail??

On a new installation of Win7 Home, is there somewhere left to get a real
copy of Windows Live Mail?

Maybe I'm looking it up wrong, but seems MS has none available at this
point.

Jess Fertudei wrote:
On a new installation of Win7 Home, is there somewhere left to get a real
copy of Windows Live Mail?

Someplace like filehippo or softonic.

Maybe I'm looking it up wrong, but seems MS has none available at this
point.

There are lots of things that WLM won't do anymore, so MS dc/d it.

What are you planning on doing with it? You are posting with OE here; I
wouldn't do that with WLM.

--
Mike Easter

just use a client... The communist are trying to railroad
everyone into online email, and for that reason, you need to use
a client. Unless, you like what communism does to you?

Thunderbird
Many use this one,

But, they are like a dime a dozen... Just download from any
software freeware, like top4download site.. Any email client, Then
punch in email client.... The rest, you configure after its running
with whatever servers you want. |You may also want to keep an eye
on Retro Share, its a multiple server type device, so to rid the world
of communism by these FCC corporations. You will find that under the
search engine as well.... Its time to stop the clown from owning us.
Once you have a client, you can use a private IP, or even a proxy server
to check your email, instead of being slave to your ISP... Then you
become more private as in, no one can watch you.....

WE do suggest also, you change out the firewall of gates, its a railroad
you thing....



On 4/23/2017 3:48 PM, Jess Fertudei wrote:
On a new installation of Win7 Home, is there somewhere left to get a real
copy of Windows Live Mail?

Maybe I'm looking it up wrong, but seems MS has none available at this
point.

Jess Fertudei wrote:

On a new installation of Win7 Home, is there somewhere left to get a real
copy of Windows Live Mail?

Maybe I'm looking it up wrong, but seems MS has none available at this
point.

WLM went legacy many years ago. Legacy means unsupported aka
discontinued. Its installer might also check for a range of supported
Windows version and balk when you try to install on a Windows version it
doesn't support.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_Live_Mail

Wave 5 (version 2012) is what you need to install on Windows 7. Since
WLM is long dead, you won't find a download at Microsoft. Some download
sites still have it, like:

http://www.softpedia.com/get/Interne...ive-Mail.shtml

You won't be able to use the Deltasync protocol coded in WLM to connect
to your Hotmail/Live/Outlook.com. Microsoft dropped Deltasync from
their servers. So you can only use POP, IMAP, and SMTP with WLM. You
can still use those to access a Hotmail/Live/Outlook.com account but
just for e-mail (Deltasync, and its Exchange ActiveSync replacement,
also support contact and calendar sync). Unless you use MS Outlook for
EAS support, any POP/IMAP/SMTP client will work.

Windows Live Mail was NEVER bundled in any distro of Windows. So you
always had to go elsewhere to get a copy to install. Windows Mail is
not the same as Windows Live Mail.

On Sun, 23 Apr 2017 18:48:37 -0400, "Jess Fertudei"
wrote:

On a new installation of Win7 Home, is there somewhere left to get a real
copy of Windows Live Mail?

I see Windows Live Mail Version 2012 (16.4.3505) at

http://www.oldversion.com/

In message , Monty
writes:
On Sun, 23 Apr 2017 18:48:37 -0400, "Jess Fertudei"
wrote:

On a new installation of Win7 Home, is there somewhere left to get a real
copy of Windows Live Mail?

I see Windows Live Mail Version 2012 (16.4.3505) at

http://www.oldversion.com/

Note that any version from - I think it was - 15 onwards, screws up
quoting, to the extent that in many newsgroups I take, people even
killfiled those using it.

--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

Look out for #1. Don't step in #2 either.

"Jess Fertudei" wrote in message
...
On a new installation of Win7 Home, is there somewhere left to get a real
copy of Windows Live Mail?

Maybe I'm looking it up wrong, but seems MS has none available at this
point.


A little late but may help someone. Try he
http://filehippo.com/download_window...ail/tech/8305/

Cheers,
Ted

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote:

Monty WROTE:

"Jess Fertudei" wrote:

On a new installation of Win7 Home, is there somewhere left to get a
real copy of Windows Live Mail?

I see Windows Live Mail Version 2012 (16.4.3505) at
http://www.oldversion.com/

Note that any version from - I think it was - 15 onwards, screws up
quoting, to the extent that in many newsgroups I take, people even
killfiled those using it.

Yep, version 15, and later, have quoting not just screwed up but
completely missing. WLM users, just like OE users, are a lazy lot and
will not assume the responsibility for proper quoting (prefix quote
characters, indentation). They just accept whatever their client does.

I don't delete (killfile) posts from WLM users but I do colorize them.
This alerts me the post was created by WLM and will likely be more
difficult to read. Without the alert, and with a short reply, their
reply goes unnoticed since it melds into the quoted content.

Used to be that I color-flagged posts from OE users. Well, that crowd
died off. When Microsoft left Usenet so did lots of OE users, and MVPs,
too. Microsoft's Answers web-based forums cater to boobs weaned on web
browsers despite the lack of threading to see who said what to whom.
Some OE users still here eventually learned of OE-Quotefix.

There is an Autohotkey macro for WLM to do the proper quoting in a
reply. However, the user has to install Autohotkey, find the macro to
add it to Autohotkey, and then remember to press the hotkey while
composing a reply message. The macro is only applicable in the new
message compose window. If a WLM user is unwilling to perform manual
formatting of the quoted content, they should just configure WLM to not
quote the parent post. I'd rather rely on the threading in a discussion
to see what the parent post said rather than the mess that WLM users
create in their replies.

Nowadays I color-flag the WLM posters. They *rarely* differentiate
their reply from the quoted content. Some might but I cannot remember
when I last saw a WLM user review their post before submitting it and
correcting their quoted content. Some just draw a line (a bunch of
hyphens) to delimit their quoted content from their reply content. Most
just slap their reply content at the same level as the quoted content
because that's how their client does it. They don't even read their own
reply before clicking Send. Well, that means they don't trim, either.

Of course, all of that tirade applies only to when using WLM as an NNTP
client to Usenet. The OP might just want an e-mail client. He never
said how he wants to use it. If he still chooses WLM, its Deltasync
support is unusable for Microsoft e-mail accounts. Microsoft dropped
Deltasync from their e-mail servers. WLM was discontinued long ago
(2012) so there will be no updates to add EAS (Exchange ActiveSync) to
it. WLM can still do POP, IMAP, and SMTP, and NNTP (yeah, with quoting
missing in replies for NNTP).

Microsoft had WebDAV. Dropped it. They moved to Deltasync. Dropped
that, too. Now they want their customers to use EAS. POP, IMAP, and
SMTP can still be used with Microsoft e-mail as well as with many other
e-mail providers who subscribe to the standard e-mail protocols and
eschew the proprietary ones from Microsoft.

On Sun, 23 Apr 2017 18:48:37 -0400, "Jess Fertudei"
wrote:

On a new installation of Win7 Home, is there somewhere left to get a real
copy of Windows Live Mail?

Maybe I'm looking it up wrong, but seems MS has none available at this
point.

You can download the full installer from WayBackMachine:
http://web.archive.org/web/201701121...lsetup-all.exe

--
Gianni

"VanguardLH" wrote in message
...
Windows Live Mail was NEVER bundled in any distro of Windows. So you
always had to go elsewhere to get a copy to install. Windows Mail is
not the same as Windows Live Mail.

It's a great shame that Outlook Express (XP) and Windows Mail (Vista) were
never available for separate installation on all future versions of Windows.

Is the only mail client that MS now support the hideous Mail app that is
built into Windows 10. It is di very cut-down in its features, naff Metro
interface, poor integration with contacts list in that you cannot import and
export contacts by VCF or CSV file.

Sadly Thunderbird has some quirks in terms of not being able to open the
address book and then tick all the entries to whom you want to copy an
email.

Outlook (the component application of the Office suite, not Outlook.com) has
several disadvantages:

- you can't import/export mail account settings to an iaf file

- it stores all the messages in one humungous mess of a pst file, which
means that the whole thing has to be copied again to backup medium even
though one message has been added/changed, whereas with Windows Live Mail
it's only that eml file (plus a few control files) which need to be backed
up.


I liked the user-interface of Outlook Express and Windows Mail. It's a shame
that MS couldn't have evolved this program to include additional protocols
and security, instead of abandoning it and replacing it with an inferior
"toy" app, Mail.

On Windows 7 I use the older version of WLM - the one without the dreaded
ribbon interface and the insistence on trying to send attachments via cloud
storage, rather than attaching them properly as uuencoded or MIME
attachments - so many times I receive emails from my parents who have the
more modern WLM and need to log in (having created an account) to be able to
see the attachments.

On 4/23/2017 6:48 PM, Jess Fertudei wrote:
On a new installation of Win7 Home, is there somewhere left to get a real
copy of Windows Live Mail?

Maybe I'm looking it up wrong, but seems MS has none available at this
point.



I had to search long and hard for the full version vs. the online
installer. Sorry, I have no link to offer.

WLM just about stopped working for me several months ago. It's hideous,
timeouts and numerous erros. I switched to Thunerbird. I've never liked
it much but I'm learning to live with it. I really urge you to try it.

NY wrote:
Thunderbird has some quirks in terms of not being able to open the
address book and then tick all the entries to whom you want to copy an
email.

What do you mean? Select however many you want and then Write.

--
Mike Easter

NY wrote:

It's a great shame that Outlook Express (XP) and Windows Mail (Vista) were
never available for separate installation on all future versions of Windows.

OE had the nasty bug that its message store(s) would go corrupt if they
exceeded 2GB in size (and many users never did a manual compact and keep
polluting their message store with messages that were garbage and
should've been deleted). OE would also get slower as its message store
files (.dbx) got larger. It was a crappy database engine.

I've read articles where users extracted the OE files from one host to
install on another. I think there was some DLL putzing involved.

Is the only mail client that MS now support the hideous Mail app that is
built into Windows 10.

From what I remember reading of posts from others on Windows 10, the
mail app there won't work with POP, just IMAP. Some users still want to
use POP. As I recall, there was some problem using the mail app until
contacts had been setup.

It is di very cut-down in its features, naff Metro interface, poor
integration with contacts list in that you cannot import and export
contacts by VCF or CSV file.

Microsoft is just following the long-time trend of pushing users to a
webmail client. Despite that Microsoft's (and no other) webmail client
comes close to the feature set of MS Outlook (Outlook, not OE), e-mail
providers have growing dropped supporting any local clients using their
service. When called, they'll help with using their webmail client.
They don't waste the time and money to train their help staff on the
multitude of ancient and current local e-mail clients.

Used to be everyone I knew or helped used local e-mail clients. Now it
seems we're in the minority and most everyone uses webmail clients.
They don't want to be bothered with installing and maintainin software
and a reduced feature set means a smaller learning curve. They don't
need the local client on every host they happen to use, like when
travelling or accessing personal e-mail from work. They just need a web
browser which is ubiquitous on every operating system.

Sadly Thunderbird has some quirks in terms of not being able to open the
address book and then tick all the entries to whom you want to copy an
email.

I've tried Thunderbird several times. Each time I gave up because of
defects in the product. Didn't help to report the problems because
several already had bugzilla tickets but they were opened over a decade
ago. Mozilla (and now the volunteer dev group) are more interested in
feature bloat than repairing long-time defects in that product. My last
trial of Thunderbird lasted just over 6 months but I gave up and spent
the money to get Office 365 so I could get Outlook.

Outlook (the component application of the Office suite, not Outlook.com) has
several disadvantages:

- you can't import/export mail account settings to an iaf file

- it stores all the messages in one humungous mess of a pst file,

Only for POP accounts. I gave up on POP long ago. IMAP is so much
better to keep my local client in sync with my account up on the server
and access from multiple endpoints for the same account. With POP,
multiple clients (different endpoints) meant deleting an e-mail that
I've read an no longer want will still appear in any other POP client
connecting to the same account. Rather than rely on backing up a local
PST file for recovery, IMAP uses the repository up on the server which
is always backed up.

While IMAP uses an .ost file, that never got very large. I have 2 IMAP
accounts that I've used for so many years that I cannot remember when I
switch them from POP to IMAP. My .ost file for them after many years is
only 16MB in size. I use auto-archiving in Outlook to purge messages
over 5 years old so that 16 MB is 5 years worth of messages. Size would
depend on your volume of e-mail traffic and how lazy you are in not
deleting garbage messages or old messages no longer relevant.

means that the whole thing has to be copied again to backup medium even
though one message has been added/changed, whereas with Windows Live Mail
it's only that eml file (plus a few control files) which need to be backed
up.

WLM uses the file system as its database. A poor database scheme. It
uses one index file to point at all the individual messages each in its
own file. Databases are a lot faster than having to do multiple file
I/O API calls while serially searching through an index file to find the
other files. If you are backup up a PST (or OST) file then why wouldn't
you be backing up the index file along with the multitude of individual
files for all your messages?

On Windows 7 I use the older version of WLM - the one without the dreaded
ribbon interface and the insistence on trying to send attachments via cloud
storage, rather than attaching them properly as uuencoded or MIME
attachments - so many times I receive emails from my parents who have the
more modern WLM and need to log in (having created an account) to be able to
see the attachments.

Way too many users think e-mail is a substitute for FTP. E-mail was
never intended to be a file delivery scheme. In the past, a polite user
would upload a huge file to some online file storage provider and then
provide a link to the file. Instead of sending a huge e-mail to the
recipient, they get just a link and then THEY can decide whether or not
to download the huge file. Sending huge e-mails eat up more bandwidth
and disk storage than uploading (and later optionally downloading) a
file to a server. All e-mails get sent as plain text. ALL of them.
HTML is text with tag strings. Attachments get encoded into a long text
string. That encoded bloats the original size of the file to 133%, or
often quite more. Many users still have a quota maximum (how much
storage they get). Getting a huge e-mail can consume so much of that
quota that their account is locked up: no further e-mails can be
accepted until the recipient gets rid of that rude e-mail. There are
almost always a restriction on the maximum message size, too. A link
saves bandwidth, doesn't waste disk space, doesn't lock up accounts,
doesn't stall delivery waiting for a huge download, and lets the
recipient choose whether or not to get the file instead of the sender
ramming it down their throat in an e-mail.

Since polite users provide a link to a large file uploaded to a server,
WLM (and Outlook) provide an easy scheme to do that for the sender. The
recipient get an extremely smaller e-mail with just the link.

As to logging in, excuse me but just how are the recipients going to get
your huge e-mail with large file attachment(s) without having to login?
They have a magic Internet service that does not require Internet
access? I'd like to know how that works. When they login to check for
new e-mails, they will get a link in a small e-mail and can immediately
logout to save on bandwidth quota (for those still on dial-up or quota
accounts). By sending them a huge e-mail with a large file attached,
they have to stay online until that entire e-mail gets downloaded.
There is no resume function in e-mail to do partial retrieves. With a
link, THEY can decide if they want to spend the time to retrieve that
large file. With a large attachment, they can't get your e-mail until
all of gets downloaded whether they want that large file or not. Also,
since encoding into a plain text string bloats the size, they would have
to wait longer for the huge e-mail to download than of waiting for a
file to download from a server. Also, e-mail servers are throttled per
connection to provide responsiveness to the huge number of concurrent
connections. Effective downstream bandwidth from file server is much
faster.

As far as WLM and other e-mail clients, I've yet seen one that forced me
to upload a file to put a link in the message. If I use their Insert
feature to add a file, it gets created as a MIME part containing the
bloated text string. It's been a long time since I used WLM. As I
recall, the sender had the *option* of sending a huge e-mail with a file
attached (bloated due to conversion to a text string) or sending a small
e-mail with a link and uploading the file to a server so the recipient
could choose whether or not to retrieve the smaller file (no bloating
due to conversion to a text string). Isn't there an option in WLM
dictating which method to use by default? I don't recall ever being
forced to send a link instead of attaching the file.

On Mon, 24 Apr 2017 11:43:30 +0100, "NY" wrote:

"VanguardLH" wrote in message
...
Windows Live Mail was NEVER bundled in any distro of Windows. So you
always had to go elsewhere to get a copy to install. Windows Mail is
not the same as Windows Live Mail.

It's a great shame that Outlook Express (XP) and Windows Mail (Vista) were
never available for separate installation on all future versions of Windows.


We all have different likes and dislikes of course, but to me, Outlook
Express was OK, but not great. And Windows Mail (Vista) was poor.

Windows Live Mail is terrible, as far as I'm concerned.



Is the only mail client that MS now support the hideous Mail app that is
built into Windows 10.


Hideous? That wouldn't be my choice of words, but I agree with you;
it's terrible. But it's *not* the only mail client that MS now
supports; they continue to support Outlook.



But my view is very different from yours. I don't care what Microsoft
supports. There are lots of other choices from third-parties, and some
of them are very good. I think everyone should choose what he likes
best, without any regard for what is a Microsoft product and what is
not.

VanguardLH wrote:

You won't be able to use the Deltasync protocol coded in WLM to connect
to your Hotmail/Live/Outlook.com. Microsoft dropped Deltasync from
their servers. So you can only use POP, IMAP, and SMTP with WLM. You
can still use those to access a Hotmail/Live/Outlook.com account but
just for e-mail (Deltasync, and its Exchange ActiveSync replacement,
also support contact and calendar sync). Unless you use MS Outlook for
EAS support, any POP/IMAP/SMTP client will work.

EAS is deprecated[1] for Outlook desktop. Exchange is now necessary for
email, contact and calendar sync in the Outlook desktop client.
Smartphone apps using EAS are not affected by the change.

[1] EAS support for Outlook was retained only until the end of the
Outlook.com email account migration from the old server to the new
backend server which runs on Exchange(Office 365 platform). For those
using EAS in Outlook, the account must be removed and reset up using
Exchange via auto-account setup).


--
....winston
msft mvp windows insider, windows experience