Email Info BackUp ?!

In message , Char Jackson
writes:
On Wed, 7 Nov 2018 00:52:09 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

I think Outlook comes/came as part of Office, some editions;

Funny.

I don't
even know if you _can_ get it separately, unless you're a big corporate
and buying into an Outlook server too (where it works reasonably well).

Exchange server, not Outlook server, and it works very well. Actually,

Yes, sorry, that's what I meant. Indeed, in the corporate case, it -
along with the calendaring and other things that come with it - did seem
to work very well when I was an employee.

Outlook is an excellent email client even if it's not being used with an
Exchange server. I've been using it (all of the versions except 2007)
since OfficeXP was current. I looked at Pegasus, OE, TB, and a few
others, but nothing comes close to Outlook. OE is awful, which is always
worth pointing out.
[]
I disagree. At least when used with OE-quotefix, I think OE is
reasonable. I never used it myself (except as a news client at work many
years ago), but watching others use it, it has seemed acceptable to me -
and possibly even the original of the layout most clients use nowadays.

(One thing I miss from Outlook is the ability to edit stored emails -
[which I used to] snip bits out of the body, and especially alter the
subject line. I was surprised it let you do those, as it could be
misused.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

31.69 nHz = once a year. (Julian Thomas)

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| OE is awful, which is always
| worth pointing out.

| I disagree. At least when used with OE-quotefix, I think OE is
| reasonable. I never used it myself (except as a news client at work many
| years ago), but watching others use it, it has seemed acceptable to me -

I've never understood the animosity toward OE.
I've always used it. TB has never been attractive
enough to make me want to change. MS Office
products are ridiculously expensive and bloated.
And OE basically does what I want.

I've never used Outlook and have no use for an
onscreen calendar, but that might be something that
some people like about Outlook. Frankly I've never
even seen people use onscreen calendars, so I'm
not clear how that works.

Though frankly I just don't see the big deal about
these choices. Maybe it's just that people who use
MS Office and get Outlook with it are used to the
MSO integration and like that they can send email
from MS Word? (Horribly corrupted email, full of
made-up HTML, but still email.) I don't know. Or
maybe these are the same people who write a note
or recipe in MS Word, so accustomed to operating
inside the complexity of MS Office that they're actually
not familiar with plain text as a medium and file type.

I keep a script
on my desktop for those people, so that when they
send me two sentences in a DOC, to announce airline
flight times or party plans, I don't have to save a 100
KB file and rouse Libre Office Writer when I want to
read it.

Microsoft cleverly loads the fantastically bloated
MS Office programs into memory at startup, so for
people who use Word it doesn't seem like a hog. It
can appear to be just as lean as Notepad. Just as
IE starts up quickly because most of it is already in
memory. The MSO files are now also zipped as part of
the *x MS Office format. So the extreme complexity
and bloat of Office doc vs text is, to a great extent,
hidden from the average person.

Char and Ken are both
using Forte Agent for newsgroups, so that leaves
email. There's no reason for anyone to allow HTML
email in most cases, so we're talking about a text
editor for sending messages. Even if people allow
HTML email, I assume Outlook and OE are using
the same rendering. So how many differences can
there be? I have about 10 email addresses that
I handle, with filters, in OE. It's relatively easy to
back up email, and I made myself a utililty using
an MSI database to create a searchable archive
from those backups. I can't think of another feature
I'd want, save one: OE can't handle TLS 1.1+
encryption, which is now the standard.

With usenet I think the picture is different. Many
of the oldtimers like to view posts in the pre-treeview,
Win95 style, reading one post at a time rather than
seeing a threadview. It's a very persistent habit,
despite the obvious advantages of threadview to
actually see the discussion structure. Those oldtimers
tend to like the specialty newsgroup readers that
are designed for their habit. Those are the people who
have tantrums about formatting. (I think Char is still
blocking my posts because he didn't like my formatting
several years ago.

But, as said, we're not talking about usenet here.
Which means the complaint about quoting is not
relevant. So what does Outlook do for email that OE
doesn't, aside from having a calendar? I'm curious.

In message , Mayayana
writes:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| OE is awful, which is always
| worth pointing out.

| I disagree. At least when used with OE-quotefix, I think OE is
| reasonable. I never used it myself (except as a news client at work many
| years ago), but watching others use it, it has seemed acceptable to me -

I've never understood the animosity toward OE.
I've always used it. TB has never been attractive
enough to make me want to change. MS Office
products are ridiculously expensive and bloated.
And OE basically does what I want.

I've never used Outlook and have no use for an
onscreen calendar, but that might be something that
some people like about Outlook. Frankly I've never
even seen people use onscreen calendars, so I'm
not clear how that works.

It's useful in the work environment: you can set reminders for yourself
about meetings (you don't have to set reminders specifically - just put
things in your calendar and it will remind you, with notice you can
set), and that sort of thing. You can even set up meetings, with it
automatically sending out invites. You can, if they've given you access
to their calendars, see when everybody's free, so when to set up a
meeting, that sort of thing. Since leaving that environment, I've no
longer got a use for these things - although I do (using a third party
tool called System Scheduler from Splinterware - mainly because I
brought it from XP, and find it easier to use than W7's equivalent) have
the computer remind me of various things, such as birthdays, insurance
and ISP renewal, blood-doning and dental appointments, even to take my
steak out of the freezer on Fridays!

Though frankly I just don't see the big deal about
these choices. Maybe it's just that people who use
MS Office and get Outlook with it are used to the
MSO integration and like that they can send email
from MS Word? (Horribly corrupted email, full of
made-up HTML, but still email.) I don't know. Or
maybe these are the same people who write a note
or recipe in MS Word, so accustomed to operating
inside the complexity of MS Office that they're actually
not familiar with plain text as a medium and file type.

Be careful - you're going off on one of your rants again (-:. I agree
with most of what you say, but these days it doesn't actually _matter_
to most people (e. g. that Word makes horribly huge HTML, and I might
_like_ some formatting in any recipe note I write - though I _do_ use
Notepad+ for notes). I agree with most of your rants, just I think mine
are a bit shorter ...
[]
from those backups. I can't think of another feature
I'd want, save one: OE can't handle TLS 1.1+
encryption, which is now the standard.

Do you use stunnel then?
[]
relevant. So what does Outlook do for email that OE
doesn't, aside from having a calendar? I'm curious.

I can't _remember_ anything in particular; I _have_ Offices, so could
load Outlook if I wanted, but - apart from the ability to edit kept
emails (especially the subject lines) - there's nothing it does that
would justify my switching from what I do use (and I CBA just for that).

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

The average age at which a woman has her first child has passed 30.
Jason Cowley, RT 2016/6/11-17

On Tue, 6 Nov 2018 21:33:20 -0500, Stan Brown
wrote:

On Mon, 05 Nov 2018 08:41:05 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:
Yes, and I'll add to that that as far as I'm concerned, webmail is by
far the worst way to do e-mail, for a variety of reasons. Almost any
e-mail program is far better than the worst webmail site.

I agree, but I'm not sure you said what you meant. And if you meant
"Almost any e-mail program is far better than the BEST webmail site"
then I must respectfully disagree. Some are better, certainly; but
some are less good.



Thanks for the correction; yes, that's of course what I meant.

Sorry you disagree, but that's OK; we're all different.

But notice that I said "almost any." I haven't tried every one, so I
wanted to keep open the possibility that there are some for which that
wasn't the case; I don't know of any, but you never know.

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote

| It's useful in the work environment: you can set reminders for yourself
| about meetings (you don't have to set reminders specifically - just put
| things in your calendar and it will remind you, with notice you can
| set), and that sort of thing. You can even set up meetings, with it
| automatically sending out invites.

Thanks. That's something I've never experienced.
I keep my reminders in a 5x7 notebook. Of course
the notebook can't actively remind me, but I don't
work at a computer or use it at dependably regular
hours, so I never thought of using digital reminders.

| from those backups. I can't think of another feature
| I'd want, save one: OE can't handle TLS 1.1+
| encryption, which is now the standard.
|
| Do you use stunnel then?

Stunnel? For now I'm just going without. TLS only
helps en route to my email server. So it's really
man-in-the-middle attacks that it deals with. And
I don't do things like email credit card numbers.

On 11/6/18 12:01 PM, Ken Blake wrote:

[snip]

There is NO BACKUP unless there are at lest TWO independent copies of
the info.

True. Better with at least one offline at all times (can be accomplished
with two sets of media, used alternately).


*Not* true, as far as I'm concerned. Certainly, TWO independent copies
are better than one, and certainly having at least one offline at all
times, is better than not doing that. But saying that without having
two copies it's not backup is nonsense.

What? I'm agreeing with something (as well as adding additional
information). You seem to be agreeing with me (except for the part where
I was agreeing with something).

--
48 days until the winter celebration (Tue Dec 25, 2018 12:00:00 AM for 1
day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"The world holds two classes of men -- intelligent men without religion,
and religious men without intelligence." [Abu'l-Ala-Al-Ma'arri
(973-1057; Syrian poet)]

On 11/6/18 2:10 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:

[snip]

I wish they'd include a simple listing of the relevant settings, as
well as the overcomplicated program-specific ones.

Some ISPs do - though, admittedly, usually below all the
program-specific ones, under a heading such as "other".

Some don't, and it can be difficult to pick out the necessary info from
that mess.

--
48 days until the winter celebration (Tue Dec 25, 2018 12:00:00 AM for 1
day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"The world holds two classes of men -- intelligent men without religion,
and religious men without intelligence." [Abu'l-Ala-Al-Ma'arri
(973-1057; Syrian poet)]

On 11/6/18 3:19 PM, Mayayana wrote:
"Mark Lloyd" wrote

| Once when I helped someone set up an internet connection, the ISP
| insisted she use webmail (likely because of the ads, and they inserted
| spam into every outgoing message). I figured out how to use POP (IIRC,
| prepend 'mail.' to the domain name, and use the normal ports).
|

That's sleazy. I've never seen anything like that.
And the only spam I usually get is the obnoxious
Apple stuff. "Sent from my iPhone." Though I may
have seen some Android spam, too. But I don't
recall ever seeing ISP spam.

It was in 2008, and the ISP was PeoplePC.

--
48 days until the winter celebration (Tue Dec 25, 2018 12:00:00 AM for 1
day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"The world holds two classes of men -- intelligent men without religion,
and religious men without intelligence." [Abu'l-Ala-Al-Ma'arri
(973-1057; Syrian poet)]

On 11/6/18 6:57 PM, J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Mayayana
writes:
"Mark Lloyd" wrote

| Once when I helped someone set up an internet connection, the ISP
| insisted she use webmail (likely because of the ads, and they inserted
| spam into every outgoing message). I figured out how to use POP (IIRC,
| prepend 'mail.' to the domain name, and use the normal ports).
|

Â* That's sleazy. I've never seen anything like that.
And the only spam I usually get is the obnoxious
Apple stuff. "Sent from my iPhone." Though I may

Yes, I've seen that too often )-:. [I think it _can_ be turned off, but
I don't know how, and I'd be surprised if most Idevice owners do either.
(Mind you, I know at least one Android-based device that does it too -
"sent from Frank's BrailleSense".)] But I think we both know that's not
the sort of spam he was talking about (-:.

It's been 10 years, and I don't remember the actual spam. However it was
not that kind.

I have seen "Sent from my iPhone.".

have seen some Android spam, too. But I don't
recall ever seeing ISP spam.

Well, my ISP - PlusNet - does advertise - I've seen their ad.s in places
- though IMO not excessively. But I don't think he meant ISPs
advertising themselves: I suspect he means they sell advertising space
on their webmail UI, to third parties.

I wasn't really objecting to advertising on the web UI, but junk
inserted into outgoing messages (making the user look like a spammer).


--
48 days until the winter celebration (Tue Dec 25, 2018 12:00:00 AM for 1
day).

Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"The world holds two classes of men -- intelligent men without religion,
and religious men without intelligence." [Abu'l-Ala-Al-Ma'arri
(973-1057; Syrian poet)]

"Mark Lloyd" wrote

|I have seen "Sent from my iPhone."

| I wasn't really objecting to advertising on the web UI, but junk
| inserted into outgoing messages (making the user look like a spammer).
|

Or a dumbass AppleSeed.
But I suppose most people who pay $1,000+ for a
cellphone don't mind bragging a bit, even if Apple
might possibly allow them to turn off the spam.

J. P. Gilliver (John) wrote:
In message , Char Jackson
writes:
On Wed, 7 Nov 2018 00:52:09 +0000, "J. P. Gilliver (John)"
wrote:

I think Outlook comes/came as part of Office, some editions;

Funny.

I don't
even know if you _can_ get it separately, unless you're a big corporate
and buying into an Outlook server too (where it works reasonably well).

Exchange server, not Outlook server, and it works very well. Actually,

Yes, sorry, that's what I meant. Indeed, in the corporate case, it -
along with the calendaring and other things that come with it - did seem
to work very well when I was an employee.

Outlook is an excellent email client even if it's not being used with an
Exchange server. I've been using it (all of the versions except 2007)
since OfficeXP was current. I looked at Pegasus, OE, TB, and a few
others, but nothing comes close to Outlook. OE is awful, which is always
worth pointing out.
[]
I disagree. At least when used with OE-quotefix, I think OE is
reasonable. I never used it myself (except as a news client at work many
years ago), but watching others use it, it has seemed acceptable to me -
and possibly even the original of the layout most clients use nowadays.

(One thing I miss from Outlook is the ability to edit stored emails -
[which I used to] snip bits out of the body, and especially alter the
subject line. I was surprised it let you do those, as it could be
misused.)

I'm still using OE and OE Quote-Fix and really enjoy it, for both mail and
news. I have no need for the extra features in Outlook and simply prefer
this over TB. And as I've mentioned before, you can get a customized
version of OE that installs and runs on Windows 7 and above (called OEx), or
an alternative of Outlook Express Classic. I've given the links for OEx and
OE Classic below just for reference:

https://runasxp.com/Topic-Download-O...ows-7-8-and-10

http://www.oeclassic.com/

But I'm still spending most of my time still using Windows XP, so I don't
have to put up with some of the (to me, somewhat undesired) "nuances" of
Windows 7. :-)

On Wed, 7 Nov 2018 10:09:34 -0600, Mark Lloyd
wrote:

On 11/6/18 12:01 PM, Ken Blake wrote:

[snip]

There is NO BACKUP unless there are at lest TWO independent copies of
the info.

True. Better with at least one offline at all times (can be accomplished
with two sets of media, used alternately).


*Not* true, as far as I'm concerned. Certainly, TWO independent copies
are better than one, and certainly having at least one offline at all
times, is better than not doing that. But saying that without having
two copies it's not backup is nonsense.

What? I'm agreeing with something (as well as adding additional
information). You seem to be agreeing with me (except for the part where
I was agreeing with something).



You were agreeing with Zaidy036's statement "There is NO BACKUP unless
there are at lest TWO independent copies of the info." I was
disagreeing with that statement.

But I was agreeing with *your* statement "Better with at least one
offline at all times (can be accomplished with two sets of media, used
alternately)."

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote:
In message , Char Jackson
writes:
[...]
Outlook is an excellent email client even if it's not being used with an
Exchange server. I've been using it (all of the versions except 2007)
since OfficeXP was current. I looked at Pegasus, OE, TB, and a few
others, but nothing comes close to Outlook. OE is awful, which is always
worth pointing out.
[]
I disagree. At least when used with OE-quotefix, I think OE is
reasonable. I never used it myself (except as a news client at work many
years ago), but watching others use it, it has seemed acceptable to me -
and possibly even the original of the layout most clients use nowadays.

(One thing I miss from Outlook is the ability to edit stored emails -
[which I used to] snip bits out of the body, and especially alter the
subject line. I was surprised it let you do those, as it could be
misused.)

What do you use now, for email?

For some email clients, you can save the 'source' ('over-the-wire') of
an email message to a file, edit it and then 'copy' it back into an
email folder. IIRC, I have done that in Outlook Express, Windows Mail
and maybe Windows Live Mail. You can do it in Thunderbird by just
dragging the modified .eml file from [Windowsr|File] Explorer into a TB
folder.

In message , Frank Slootweg
writes:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote:
[]
(One thing I miss from Outlook is the ability to edit stored emails -
[which I used to] snip bits out of the body, and especially alter the
subject line. I was surprised it let you do those, as it could be
misused.)

What do you use now, for email?

Turnpike, for both.

For some email clients, you can save the 'source' ('over-the-wire') of
an email message to a file, edit it and then 'copy' it back into an
email folder. IIRC, I have done that in Outlook Express, Windows Mail
and maybe Windows Live Mail. You can do it in Thunderbird by just
dragging the modified .eml file from [Windowsr|File] Explorer into a TB
folder.

Yes, I can do that with TP too. But I have to Export; delete; close TP;
do the edit; open TP; re-Import, which is a faff. (If I don't delete it,
it just sees it as a duplicate.) In Outlook, I could edit the email in
situ.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I can prove anything with statistics - except the truth.

"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote:
In message , Frank Slootweg
writes:
"J. P. Gilliver (John)" wrote:
[]
(One thing I miss from Outlook is the ability to edit stored emails -
[which I used to] snip bits out of the body, and especially alter the
subject line. I was surprised it let you do those, as it could be
misused.)

What do you use now, for email?

Turnpike, for both.

For some email clients, you can save the 'source' ('over-the-wire') of
an email message to a file, edit it and then 'copy' it back into an
email folder. IIRC, I have done that in Outlook Express, Windows Mail
and maybe Windows Live Mail. You can do it in Thunderbird by just
dragging the modified .eml file from [Windowsr|File] Explorer into a TB
folder.

Yes, I can do that with TP too. But I have to Export; delete; close TP;
do the edit; open TP; re-Import, which is a faff. (If I don't delete it,
it just sees it as a duplicate.)

Can't Turnpike save - instead of export - a single message? And drag
- instead of import - the edited message? And why do you have to close
and re-open Turnpike?

And yes, you of course have to delete the unedited message to prevent

In Outlook, I could edit the email in
situ.

In situ is of course more convenient, but the Thunderbird process I
described is quite easy and I assume you don't edit that many messages.