No email on W-7

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 03:05:21 -0700, "RH Breener"
wrote:

I've had no problem sending some pretty large files to people through email.

And that's the problem, that it's too easy to send huge files via
email. Email isn't really designed for large file transfers, but the
other thing is that people have stopped caring about their recipients.
Just attach and let them fly, I guess. Let the recipient(s) deal with
it.

Personally, I'd much rather receive a *link* via email so that I can
choose whether I want to visit, and if so, what I want to download.

--

Char Jackson

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 04:10:52 -0700, "RH Breener"
wrote:


"Char Jackson" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:24:02 -0700, "RH Breener"
wrote:

After the last 48 hours I will have no choice since WLM (not WM) keeps
downloading the same old DELETED messages from the gmail server from last
year, no matter how many times I delete them. And despite what someone
said,
I can't delete more than 3 at a time and there are scads of them. I
wanted
to get WindowsMail, not WLM to work on W7. I can't. I'm just an average
Joe, not a computer tech. It just got too damn complicated and trying to
wade through all the Permission, Trusted Installer and Administrator BS
wore
me out.

I see that as a Good Thing, and hopefully one day you'll be able to
look back at this time and agree.

I worked with Thunderbird today and dislike it as much as the last time I
tried it. I wasted hours today looking through the helpfiles, and never
found the information I was looking for. I don't see this as a good thing.
It wont work for usenet, that's for sure.

TB works fine for Usenet. See what I mean about missing the basics?

--

Char Jackson

Char Jackson wrote:

VanguardLH wrote:

Or use a free online file storage service (e.g., MediaFire,
Megashares, MegaUpload, Sendspace, Spread-it, TransferBigFiles).

Megaupload has been in the news recently. They've been shut down.
Details at http://www.megaupload.com/.

Looks like Spread-It also changed (in not letting you upload any file
you want there to make accessible to others). I just gave a sampling of
free online file storage services. A Google search would find even more
of them, as in:

http://www.google.com/search?q=free+online+file+storage

Currently I use aDrive because of its large disk quota (50 GB storage,
2GB per file). I find my ISP's personal web page disk quota of 25 GB
(already included in my account there) also handy to distribute files
rather than bloat my e-mails.

RH Breener wrote:

VanguardLH wrote ...

RH Breener wrote:

WLM is no improvement over WM.

Did Windows Mail have the Live integration features of Windows Live
Mail? WLM will integrate with Skydrive to let you store files up
there, like putting your attachments up there and linking to them in
your e-mail.

No, but who cares? How many people are using Skydrive? I never even
heard of it before you just mentioned it. No one I know ever
mentioned it.

That new features aren't important to YOU doesn't obviate that there are
new features in WLM that are *not* available in WM or OE. There was
improvement (change) but it wasn't anything you cared about.

You might be using MS Word or MS Exchange and they have had improvement
with successive versions and you may have upgraded but it is very likely
there is a lot of those product's features that you don't use so you
don't care about them. There are lots of features in those products
that I don't know about or haven't heard about - until I need to use
them. I'm pretty sure a lot of software you installed has features you
don't know about or don't use so you don't care about them. That
doesn't preclude them from improvement over successive versions.

That "WLM is no improvement over WM" was the issue that I addressed, not
whether you know of the improvements, like them, or use them.

That way, you don't assault your recipients with huge-sized e-mails
that consume their bandwidth and disk space and they can decide
whether or not to go get your attachment.

That would apply to businesses, not people with PCs at home, for home
use.

Oh, you really would appreciate everyone you know and don't know that
sends you e-mails to attach 20 GB of attachments to them? You don't
care that senders create e-mails to you that consume lots of bandwidth
to download them, consume your disk quota at your e-mail account,
consume local disk space in the message store for whatever e-mail client
you happen to use, and for attachments you may not even want to see?

Remember why you started this discussion?

Why would the average person need all those features? If they were so
popular people wouldn't be trying to get WM to work on W7.

Why do people get MS Word when they often employ less than a third of
all its features? That someone wants to use an old e-mail client has to
do with their familiarity with that program. It's what they understand,
what they've used, and what they want to continue using. There are
still users of the old crappy FreeAgent newsreader or using Grabit for
discussions which is good at yanking binaries but sucks for discussions.

Just because you don't want a feature or don't use it has no bearing on
what other users want. You're claiming your narrow wants are those of
the majority of other users. Neither you nor I have those statistics to
prove what the "typical user" wants out of WLM. That features exist
within a product that you don't want doesn't mean you have to use them
but they are there.

I know that since there are three gmail accounts on there now, and
they work. One keeps getting the password-rejected error and I've
reinstalled the info several times now. I don't think lack of
familiarity is causing old deleted emails from last year to keep
downloading. I hope it stops because there is no way to delete more
than 3 at a time despite what someone wrote here. And they delete
very slowly.

Need to take those troubles to the WLM newsgroup where its users can
address those issues.

microsoft.public.windows.live.mail.desktop

I suspect some of the suggestions there would be to delete the account
in WLM (not just edit the old one) and recreate a new account that
specifies the problematic Gmail account, disable your anti-virus
software or anything else that interrogates your e-mail traffic, and ask
you to describe what happens when you attempt to select more than 3
messages at a time in WLM.

So how many e-mails are sitting in your Inbox folder when you log into
your Gmail account using their webmail client? Thousands of them? If
so, also mention that to the WLM newsgroup.

how do I get the email to download CLOSED until I click on them to
open them? Closed like in WM so I can delete them quickly or in a
group? They download already OPEN and on or two take up the whole
pane.

If you download an e-mail, your choice may be (depending on the
abilities of the e-mail client) to obtain only the headers or the entire
message (headers + body). If you "download" the e-mail, I have to
assume you download the entire message. It doesn't matter whether you
"open" it or not. That you downloaded it means you got the whole thing.
It's already there in your e-mail client's message store. The bandwidth
already got consumed to retrieve the entire message. Only if you use a
rule (or option in some e-mail clients) to check for a message's size
BEFORE downloading it (so you only get its headers) is how you limit how
much you download. In that case, all you have are the headers. You'll
still have to download the entire message if you want to see its body.

A downloaded e-mail isn't "opened" until you select it. If you don't
want a default message pre-selected in the Preview pane then don't use
the Preview pane. Close the Preview pane and thereafter double-click on
a message that you want to open (but which has already been downloaded
in its entirety). If you use the rule to block the download of e-mails
that exceed the specified maximum size then all you get are the headers.

It looks like what you want WLM to do is not to "open" (preview) an
e-mail when it is selected. That means *not* using WLM's preview pane
(aka reading pane). The same was also true for WM and OE.

"RH Breener" wrote:


"XS11E" wrote in message
...

Fortunately there are several good free email clients several
good newsreaders, none of which come from Microsoft or Mozilla
IMHO.

Which ones are good in your opinion?

I use Pegasus Mail for email and Xnews for Usenet.
Pegasus = http://www.pmail.com/downloads_s3_t.htm

There's a very good support forum on the website.

Xnews = http://xnews.newsguy.com

Any questions can be answered at news.software.readers

Some suggestions:

Pegasus:
Install it into it's own folder rather than the default.

Xnews:
Download the "latest version" and install it in it's OWN FOLDER, NOT
the default. Then, get the "test" version and just drop the executible
file into your Xnews folder to update. Why? Because the 'test'
version is the latest but it's the .exe file only, the older "latest"
version has the installation files. The author, Luu Tran has his own
really weird naming system.

http://twovoyagers.com/blinkynet.net...xnewsrels.html

NOTE: I keep Xnews AND Pmail on a separate partition, that way I can
format drive C:, install a later OS and have my email and news back by
just creating shortcuts in the new OS.

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

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 09:36:52 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 03:05:21 -0700, "RH Breener"
wrote:

I've had no problem sending some pretty large files to people through email.

And that's the problem, that it's too easy to send huge files via
email. Email isn't really designed for large file transfers, but the
other thing is that people have stopped caring about their recipients.
Just attach and let them fly, I guess. Let the recipient(s) deal with
it.

Personally, I'd much rather receive a *link* via email so that I can
choose whether I want to visit, and if so, what I want to download.

It amazes me how hard it is to convince some of my correspondents to do
that :-(

There's one in particular that has trained me not to open his e-mails on
my smartphone.

At least it shows that I am still trainable :-)

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 23:08:54 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:

On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 15:56:01 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 14:51:30 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:

I have had to provide a valid address to most or all of the servers I've
used recently so that they can send me credentials...

Yes, but have any of those NSP's required you to configure your news
client with that valid address, or any valid address? The valid
address is usually limited to what you said, providing you with your
credentials.

I meant what I said, no more than that.

I had to provide the news servers with an address where they could send
me the credentials so I could then log on.

This has nothing to do with the headers I create or cause to be created
when I post.

The context of my reply was a subthread about needing an e-mail address
to establish an account, not the other subthreads about the displayed
e-mail address.

Thanks, we're in full agreement.

Actually, this part of the thread is kind of fun for me.

There seem to be several people who actually agree with each other and
yet get on each other's cases.

Me included :-)

So it kind of keeps me smiling wryly.

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 11:58:05 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 09:36:52 -0500, Char Jackson wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 03:05:21 -0700, "RH Breener"
wrote:

I've had no problem sending some pretty large files to people through email.

And that's the problem, that it's too easy to send huge files via
email. Email isn't really designed for large file transfers, but the
other thing is that people have stopped caring about their recipients.
Just attach and let them fly, I guess. Let the recipient(s) deal with
it.

Personally, I'd much rather receive a *link* via email so that I can
choose whether I want to visit, and if so, what I want to download.

It amazes me how hard it is to convince some of my correspondents to do
that :-(

There's one in particular that has trained me not to open his e-mails on
my smartphone.

My active correspondents are pretty good about it, thankfully. I
mentioned it a couple of times, but didn't beat them up, so maybe
someone else also mentioned it and the cumulative effect was enough.

Another training opportunity came regarding forwarding emails with
multiple recipients in the To header. I don't want my email address
out there, being forwarded hither and yon, (I'm told that it's yon you
have to worry about; hither isn't that bad), so I did a bit of brow
beating to get everyone to use BCC. That was 2-3 years ago and so far,
so good.

At least it shows that I am still trainable :-)

That usually comes with being married.

--

Char Jackson

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 12:29:48 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

There seem to be several people who actually agree with each other and
yet get on each other's cases.

Me included :-)

So it kind of keeps me smiling wryly.


I'm glad you're not riling, Smiley. g

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 13:06:46 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 12:29:48 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

There seem to be several people who actually agree with each other and
yet get on each other's cases.

Me included :-)

So it kind of keeps me smiling wryly.

I'm glad you're not riling, Smiley. g

I really was drinking coffee!

Luckily, I had swallowed the current sip before I saw your post.

Biggest (and fortunately the driest) laugh of the day so far...

--
Gene E. Bloch (Stumbling Bloch)

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 13:54:28 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 13:06:46 -0700, Ken Blake wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 12:29:48 -0700, "Gene E. Bloch"
wrote:

There seem to be several people who actually agree with each other and
yet get on each other's cases.

Me included :-)

So it kind of keeps me smiling wryly.

I'm glad you're not riling, Smiley. g

I really was drinking coffee!

Luckily, I had swallowed the current sip before I saw your post.

Biggest (and fortunately the driest) laugh of the day so far...


Glad you liked it! ;-)

On 6/22/2012 2:26 AM, RH Breener wrote:

"Ken Blake" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 11:24:27 -0700, XS11E
wrote:


It was generally believed nobody could write software WORSE than OE or
WM (which was a VERY tiny improvement on OE)


It goes back a lot of years, but I used to use Outlook Express and,
although I didn't think it was wonderful, I thought it was OK.

I experimented with Windows Mail just a little. I thought it was also
OK, but I have no opinion on how it compared to Outlook Express.

They're about the same. I never had a problem with either of them. I
can't say that about some of the others I've tried over the years.
Thunderbird doesn't have a way that I can see or find to get the next
300 Usnet messages to download

ToolsAccount SettingsServer Settings Check the box "Ask me before
downloading more than {enter your number here} messages.

- there is no "get next headers" button
that I could find.

Get Mail Button

When I tried to reply to someone, did not allow me
to delete some of their text.

High light and click delete, or use the back space key, or use the
delete key, or highlight the text you want to keep and press the left
curve arrow button on the reading pane.

So I still have no working email/news
software on the new W7 computer.

That's your fault, not Thunderbirds.




but WLM is a giant step backwards.


I *completely* agree with you there. I think it's the worst such
program available. There are many better choices, and some of them are
free.

Which would you recommend that's fast and easy to set up and easy to
use? Something like OE or WM. Not the new over-bloated WLM, as that's
the pits. I'm having problems with Thunderbird and some people really
like that software.


--
I do not carry a gun hoping that
I'll be able to shoot someone, anymore than
I carry a jack hoping I'll have a flat
tire.
Me.

"Bob Hatch" wrote in message
b.com...
On 6/22/2012 2:26 AM, RH Breener wrote:

"Ken Blake" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 20 Jun 2012 11:24:27 -0700, XS11E
wrote:


It was generally believed nobody could write software WORSE than OE or
WM (which was a VERY tiny improvement on OE)


It goes back a lot of years, but I used to use Outlook Express and,
although I didn't think it was wonderful, I thought it was OK.

I experimented with Windows Mail just a little. I thought it was also
OK, but I have no opinion on how it compared to Outlook Express.

They're about the same. I never had a problem with either of them. I
can't say that about some of the others I've tried over the years.
Thunderbird doesn't have a way that I can see or find to get the next
300 Usnet messages to download

ToolsAccount SettingsServer Settings Check the box "Ask me before
downloading more than {enter your number here} messages.

- there is no "get next headers" button
that I could find.

Get Mail Button

When I tried to reply to someone, did not allow me
to delete some of their text.

High light and click delete, or use the back space key, or use the delete
key, or highlight the text you want to keep and press the left curve arrow
button on the reading pane.

So I still have no working email/news
software on the new W7 computer.

That's your fault, not Thunderbirds.

This will help w/Thunderbird. So far I got WM to open and work in W7.
Oddly enought it's OE and not the WM that's on Vista. That's fine with me.

"XS11E" wrote in message
...
"RH Breener" wrote:


"XS11E" wrote in message
...

Fortunately there are several good free email clients several
good newsreaders, none of which come from Microsoft or Mozilla
IMHO.

Which ones are good in your opinion?

I use Pegasus Mail for email and Xnews for Usenet.
Pegasus = http://www.pmail.com/downloads_s3_t.htm

There's a very good support forum on the website.

Xnews = http://xnews.newsguy.com

Any questions can be answered at news.software.readers

Some suggestions:

Pegasus:
Install it into it's own folder rather than the default.

Xnews:
Download the "latest version" and install it in it's OWN FOLDER, NOT
the default. Then, get the "test" version and just drop the executible
file into your Xnews folder to update. Why? Because the 'test'
version is the latest but it's the .exe file only, the older "latest"
version has the installation files. The author, Luu Tran has his own
really weird naming system.

http://twovoyagers.com/blinkynet.net...xnewsrels.html

NOTE: I keep Xnews AND Pmail on a separate partition, that way I can
format drive C:, install a later OS and have my email and news back by
just creating shortcuts in the new OS.

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

Thank you for this information. In case WM doesn't keep working on W7 I'll
start checking them out.

On Fri, 22 Jun 2012 10:23:45 +0100, John Williamson wrote:

RH Breener wrote:

I worked with Thunderbird today and dislike it as much as the last time
I tried it. I wasted hours today looking through the helpfiles, and
never found the information I was looking for. I don't see this as a
good thing. It wont work for usenet, that's for sure.

What won't it do on usenet that you want it to?

Valorie's mind is made up. Don't confuse her with your rational
thinking.

--
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
Shikata ga nai...