A Windows XP help forum. PCbanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PCbanter forum » Windows 10 » Windows 10 Help Forum
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

MS unwanted updates tonight...



 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #76  
Old March 14th 18, 05:41 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
ultred ragnusen
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 248
Default MS unwanted updates tonight...

Mayayana wrote:

| So Windows Update was bypassing Windows Update.
|
| Agreed that it's getting harder to control your own software.

Apropos of that, this just in.... Woops.

https://www.bleepingcomputer.com/new...sers-to-v1709/


That's interesting that MS updated people who had paused their updates.

I have mine paused until March 18th.
http://i.cubeupload.com/6YIhAl.jpg

It hasn't updated since February 24th.
http://i.cubeupload.com/zWRoEQ.jpg

So I don't think I was affected.

One of my goals, although not a top priority, is to figure out which set of
settings caused the updates to back out every time for more than two years.

I don't remember all the switches I hit, unfortunately. Plus I used WinAero
and Classic Menu, which I'm refraining from using now as I'm just going to
have to learn how to make that horrid Windows 10 start tile work properly.
Ads
  #77  
Old March 14th 18, 07:20 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
...w¡ñ§±¤ñ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 79
Default MS unwanted updates tonight...

Mayayana wrote:
"...w¡ñ§±¤ñ" wrote

| Good points. When Google faced a class action
| lawsuit from non-gmail users their defense was
| that the people had no case because they should
| know that Google is a spyware company, therefore
| they had no "expectation of privacy".
|
| Matera vs. Google, Northern California District Court
|
| Your above statement is false and quite hilarious

I don't get why you meet everything with
LOL or "hilarious".

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-email-lawsuit

"Gmail users have no "reasonable expectation" that their communications are
confidential, the internet giant has said in a court filing."

It's easy enough to find other links. Yet you didn't
provide any link yourself.



Why was your statement hilarious.
- Your comments on what Google used in their defense in the class
action suit never appears in the court documents or transcripts of the
case - thus false. Opinionated comment, yes, but never claimed or used
in defense.
You said it not I. Included in case you forgot
"When Google faced a class action
lawsuit from non-gmail users their defense was
that the people had no case because they should
know that Google is a *spyware company, therefore
they had no "expectation of privacy"*.

As noted before, court records exist for the Matera-Google suit
including Judge Koh's comments on the original(rejected the plaintiff
agreement, not Google's to settle) settlement and final approved
settlement. Transcripts, while available, are not entirely for public
disclosure but accessible as long as credentials are met. The FOIA
route is too early for request nor may it ever meet the Federal and
State of California's FOIA requirements/guidelines. You'll have to wait
and read later if publicly available.

You're just digging a whole. Providing a company statement about GMail
users to substantiate the companies defense position or comment relative
to a class action suit(about **non-Gmail users**)...well that's even
more hilarious than the last one.

Next.


--
....w¡ñ§±¤ñ
msft mvp 2007-2016, insider mvp 2016-2018
  #78  
Old March 14th 18, 07:33 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
...w¡ñ§±¤ñ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 79
Default MS unwanted updates tonight...

Paul wrote:
Scott wrote:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 04:29:14 -0400, "HB" wrote:

....wiped out OE6. It's still there but will not work anymore. So now
I have a laptop I can't use for email. I don't understand why the
hell MS would give a &^%$ that someone would want to use OE.

And what really eats my lunch is these updates are FORCED on us.
Our choice was taken away.

There has to be a way to stop them, maybe in the regestry. Someone
on this group must know how to stop these updates.

I want ALL Microsoft updates :-)
I do not have the IT skills to make any informed decision about what
to install and what not to install.


You don't have to understand how the weather works,
to read a weather forecast.

Same goes with updates. You wait until someone else
tests them, if they "smell bad", you hold off on installing
them. Usually, in a week or two, they're fixed (re-released)...
and ready to install. The idea is not to be in a rush, and
"be first" to try them.

Paul

Waiting is usually a good idea.

Surprisingly Tuesday's release including all Office updates took less
than 5 minutes to download and install and that included ~less than 2
min for the Restart process and the logon screen prompt.

At least another Stack Update wasn't included like last and the prior
months.



--
....w¡ñ§±¤ñ
msft mvp 2007-2016, insider mvp 2016-2018
  #79  
Old March 14th 18, 08:34 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
HB[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 179
Default MS unwanted updates tonight...


"...w¡ñ§±¤ñ" wrote in message
news
HB wrote:

What other alternative is there where the kids can play their games
created
to run on Windows, or the wife's interior design software created for
windows, or music editing software my son uses, the image editing
software
my daughter uses... all this software would be useless on a Mac or other
system. And we all used OE6 and WindowsMail before that.


Not really a reason since none of those(games, design software, music and
video editing) require OE.


This isn't about OE6 - It's about the suggested alternative OS's out there.




--
...w¡ñ§±¤ñ
msft mvp 2007-2016, insider mvp 2016-2018



  #80  
Old March 14th 18, 08:45 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
HB[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 179
Default MS unwanted updates tonight...


"Mayayana" wrote in message
news
"HB" wrote

| It worked fine until the updates. No problem with protocols. Check the
net
| and you will see plenty of mention of MS killing OE6 on people's PCs.
The
| updates also killed the reinstaller made by Runasxp. I found the entire
OE6
| folder moved from Programs to the desk top.
|

| I bet the day comes when people will have
| to pay MS by the month to use Windows. Something like we pay our ISPs by
the
| month.
|

Or ads. Or both. They've been moving in small steps.
There's Office 365 rental, which is apparently successful.
Or at least that's the way they're painting it.
Right now there are little ads in the "Metro" tiles, or
pushiness about using MS products, which many don't
even see as ads. I imagine the form it takes will depend on
how things work out: If people buy lots of "apps" and
tolerate ads then it might be more profitable to give
away Windows. They could also do things that are less
obvious. For instance, loading ads into webpages visited,
which is something ISPs have experiemented with.

But I suppose their preference would be all of the above:
Rent Windows for a high price, show ads, and still sell
stuff through the Windows Store. Once you accept that
it's their computer, the sky's the limit.

And then there's the ISP wrinkle: Without net neutrality,
Internet access begins to look more like a cable TV plan
rather than a phone plan. We don't have ads for antacids
and happy pills interrupting our phone conversations, but
we do have them on TV, and increasingly part of the screen
is an ad. And there's product placement in shows.

Without net neutrality, companies like Apple and Microsoft
might enter into contracts with Comcast and Verizon, as
well as Facebook, Google and Twitter, all cooperating to milk
customers.

| Greed. Otherwise why the hell should MS care that millions want and are
| using OE6 and other older email clients.
|
It could be both. OE doesn't support later encryption
than TLS 1.0, which has been phased out because it's
been cracked. At the same time there's a push to use
encryption everywhere. (Google Chrome is starting to
warn people when a website isn't using encryption.) So
OE may be viewed as unsafe software.

On the other hand, if they're trying to protect you
then it would be common sense that they'd provide some
kind of explanation and alternatives, not just "throw a
grenade into Program Files". That really is bizarre behavior.
Perhaps they just figured that if they break your email
you'll switch to webmail.

| Honestly, I feel like I
| would if a stranger came into my home and went through my desk, my
wallet,
| my closets.
|

Indeed. It amazes me that more people don't
feel that way. Just the principle of it is outrageous --
that someone thinks they have a right to trespass
that way simply because you bought something
from them. And in this case even that's a stretch.
If you buy a Windows computer it's an OEM license.
Microsoft define Dell or HP as the licensor, and
that's who you have to go to for support. You
didn't do business with MS any more than you
negotiated with an author for the last book you
bought.

I think one reason more people don't complain is
because we've created a sleazy environment on
both sides: The sleazy tech company holds out a free
bauble and tries to pick your pocket as you grab that
bauble. The customer hopes to grab the bauble while
protecting their wallet. We want free. Neither side is
being honest. And now the sleaze has become
institutionalized.

Google were making billions on ads *before* they
started spying, just by connecting ads with search
terms. But they saw a way to make more and few
people complained.

Another reason is that the logistics are mostly invisible.
I was reading recently that car companies are now
looking at selling personal data collected from things like
built-in GPS used for in-car services. What gives them
the right to be a corporate peeping Tom? It's crazy.
But that kind of exploitation is not something you can
see and measure. You're unlikely to be aware of it unless
you happen to see an article somewhere. Without laws
there's not much to stop it.


Amen on that. I agree and believe you're right. Where will it end? I'm
afraid to contemplate.....


  #81  
Old March 14th 18, 08:49 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
HB[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 179
Default MS unwanted updates tonight...


"CRNG" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 09:59:43 -0400, "Mayayana"
wrote in

"HB" wrote

| ....wiped out OE6.
| There has to be a way to stop them, maybe in the regestry. Someone on
this
| group must know how to stop these updates.
|


Check out ShutUP10

O&O ShutUp10 means you have full control over which comfort functions
under Windows 10 you wish to use, and you decide when the passing on
of your data goes too far. Using a very simple interface, you decide
how Windows 10 should respect your privacy by deciding which unwanted
functions should be deactivated.

O&O ShutUp10 is entirely free and does not have to be installed - it
can be simply run directly and immediately on your PC. And it will not
install or download retrospectively unwanted or unnecessary software,
like so many other programs do these days!

https://www.oo-software.com/en/shutup10


Tomorrow I'll download this when I'm on the W-10 machine. I'm willing to try
anything to stop MSs invasion of my PC.


--
Web based forums are like subscribing to 10 different newspapers
and having to visit 10 different news stands to pickup each one.
Email list-server groups and USENET are like having all of those
newspapers delivered to your door every morning.


Exactly!


  #82  
Old March 14th 18, 02:20 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default MS unwanted updates tonight...

"...w¡ñ§±¤ñ" wrote

| You're just digging a whole. Providing a company statement about GMail
| users to substantiate the companies defense position or comment relative
| to a class action suit(about **non-Gmail users**)...well that's even
| more hilarious than the last one.

You obviously didn't even read my link, or
you would have seen the first part of the
sentence I quoted from. It's the very first
sentence!

"People sending email to any of Google's 425 million

[Gmail users have no "reasonable expectation" that
their communications are confidential, the internet
giant has said in a court filing.]"

I'm not going to argue with you. People can
read the link and research if they're interested,
and draw their own conclusions.

For some of us there's an important distinction
between paying for an honest product and using
a sleazy, targetted-ad product. I think it's
worthwhile clarifying that distinction, given that
a spyware Internet has become socially normalized
to an extreme degree. Maybe that distinction is
what gets your goat, given that you're an official
cheerleader for a company that makes a spyware
OS? Or maybe you just like to argue.


  #83  
Old March 14th 18, 04:38 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Frank Slootweg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,226
Default MS unwanted updates tonight...

....w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:

If not, then I don't consider it to be an alternative, because it's
totally different and offers no migration/import part from OE/WM.

IMAP for many email accounts has been the easiest migration route to
Windows 10 Mail client since both OE and Vista, like Windows 10, support
IMAP.


IMAP is neither needed nor easy (except is the simplest of cases).

The other optional route for email accounts was available from 2008
through the fall of 2016 for MSA(Microsoft Accounts).
That migration route was DeltaSync for Outlook.com, Hotmail, Live, and
MSn accounts in Windows Live Mail which was an installable client on XP
and Vista.
- One need not use the WLM client thereafter but the route to 'push'
your mail and contacts to Outlook.com(fka Hotmail, Live. Msn.com) was
the method MSFT provided. Whether one like the approach or not, it
'was' available and is still available today, once installed[1] since
WLM12 still has the ability to import OE and WM mail into WLM for
copy/move into any email account supporting IMAP. While not all email
accounts support IMAP, the majority do provide IMAP and POP3 support.


I went from OE to WM to WLM, so I'm aware of what they can (not) do.

The bottom line, if you really needed to migrate the options were/are
available...but to do so the underlying requirement and expectedly so
was the need for a MSA account(Outlook/Live/Hotmail/MSn.com or 3rd party
registered email address as an MSA) or the use of IMAP.


Nope, because:

[...]

3. Windows Live Mail is another choice. I also think that's a poor
choice, but it too is a choice.

See my other response. WLM is bug-ridden, bordering on unuseable.

*If* WLM would be a realistic migration path, I would still be on it.

WLM has never been everyone's cup of tea, but when migration is the
concern - it was MSFT provided route. Not using then or now[1] doesn't
negate the option being available from MSFT.


You 'overlooked' my "WLM is bug-ridden, bordering on unuseable."
comment.

Hence WLM was *not* the "MSFT provided route". WLM was not even
adapted to work correctly on Windows 8[.1]. For example not looking at
Contacts and not being backed up by File History (because the WLM Store
Folder is in the wrong place).

WLM is also broken in other areas, such as FUBARring the structure
of imported WM folders and - as I mentioned before - not removing
expired messages from the POP server.

And these are only the WLM bugs which I can somewhat easily recollect
after some three years. There are probably others which I've forgotten.

[1] WLM while no longer available for download from MSFT's servers it
can be obtained via 3rd party hosting sites.


WLM no longer being available from Microsoft is probably a good thing.

[...]

Thus stating that no migration path was/is available from MSFT would be
in error especially since the option was available for over 8 years,
more than sufficient time for OE/WM users implementation.

Was it the best and easiest route? No.
Was/Is a migration route available? Yes


A 'migration route' which ends up with a broken MUA FUBARring your
existing mail, isn't one. Period.


[Dodging each and every argument duly noted.]

You missed the point. The methods for migration was/is available. Not
perfect but available - which was the basis of your point.


I did 'miss' any point, mainly because there *was* no 'point'.

You are clearly unable to counter the arguments, 'so' you shoot the
messenger. So I repeat:

A 'migration route' which ends up with a broken MUA FUBARring your
existing mail, isn't one. Period.


Unfortunately, if still waiting for migration from a a 21 year old
application(OE) or 14 yr old(Vista WM) - it's not going to be something
provided from MSFT's end - development and resources for those programs
ended 12 yrs. ago.


Don't move the goalposts, by rewriting history! WLM was broken from
the time that WM on Vista was still a current and supported product and
that support ended only (slightly less than) *one* year ago.

But feel free to keep riding that dead horse, that saddle isn't going
anywhere.


Feel free to be a Microsoft apologist who can't be bothered by facts
or arguments and has no other 'ammunition' than denial, belittlement,
shooting the messenger, etc..
  #84  
Old March 14th 18, 07:38 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Scott[_10_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 372
Default MS unwanted updates tonight...

On Tue, 13 Mar 2018 19:53:02 -0400, Paul
wrote:

Scott wrote:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 04:29:14 -0400, "HB" wrote:

....wiped out OE6. It's still there but will not work anymore. So now I have
a laptop I can't use for email. I don't understand why the hell MS would
give a &^%$ that someone would want to use OE.

And what really eats my lunch is these updates are FORCED on us. Our
choice was taken away.

There has to be a way to stop them, maybe in the regestry. Someone on this
group must know how to stop these updates.

I want ALL Microsoft updates :-)

I do not have the IT skills to make any informed decision about what
to install and what not to install.


You don't have to understand how the weather works,
to read a weather forecast.

Same goes with updates. You wait until someone else
tests them, if they "smell bad", you hold off on installing
them. Usually, in a week or two, they're fixed (re-released)...
and ready to install. The idea is not to be in a rush, and
"be first" to try them.

If the problem is urgent, I prefer the solution to be urgent also. I
cannot assess whether the problem is urgent so I follow the
precautionary principle.
  #85  
Old March 14th 18, 07:53 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default MS unwanted updates tonight...

"Scott" wrote

| If the problem is urgent, I prefer the solution to be urgent also. I
| cannot assess whether the problem is urgent so I follow the
| precautionary principle.

That makes sense, but it's not as simple as it
might seem:

https://www.infoworld.com/article/28...meltdowns.html

The URL explains the link. (The page is faulty. It's set up
as some kind of idiotic slideshow. If you don't see the article
try View - Style - No Style.)

In other words, it makes sense to always fix problems
as soon as possible, but that assumes what you apply
is actually a fix. Often they're not. (Sometimes "fixes"
are cosmetic.) And it assumes the fix doesn't create its
own problems. Often they do. Sometimes quite serious.
So it's actually quite dangerous to just let Microsoft
deliver a dripfeed of system changes and to assume that
it's all "e-goodness".

Further complicating things, Microsoft want everyone
to allow them to alter the system at will. With that in
mind, they've become even more opaque about details
of patches than they used to be. So it's not easy to know
what patches are doing.

I always disable Windows update and only apply
service packs, well after they're released. But that
also runs a slight risk, of course. On the one hand, I
didn't have my computer bricked last week by
Meltdown/Spectre patches. On the other hand, if
I decide to enable script online I may be at slightly
increased risk due to not having all the latest patches.
While many attacks use 0-days (patches are of no use)
some attacks exploit patched bugs, hoping to snare
people who don't have the patches.
Neither risk is extreme, the risk of dripfeed updates
or the risk of delayed updates, but both are real.


  #86  
Old March 14th 18, 08:09 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Bill Bradshaw
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 282
Default MS unwanted updates tonight...

I updated 3 Windows 10 computers today. Windows 10 64 bit home, 32 bit
home, and 32 bit pro. Using the version of OE6 I pointed you to it works
fine on all three computers. The version I use does not install from a
windows installer but installs from a batch file. I also run OE-QuoteFix
with this.

You do not have to try this version because these are personal computers up
to the point MicroSoft allows them to be.
--
Bill

Brought to you from Anchorage, Alaska

HB wrote:
"Bill Bradshaw" wrote in message
...
I use this to run OE6:

https://sites.google.com/site/simple...look-express-6

Once and a while after Microsoft updates I have to reinstall it. It
only takes a couple of minutes. Hopefully if it stops again
Microsoft has not done something that will not let me reinstall. I
use this on both Windows 10 32 bit and 64 bit.

Bill


I couldn't reinstall it. It screws up the work-around or whatever it's
called created Runasxp. I finally got it reinstalled and got several
kinds of MS popups claiming one thing or another. I don't believe
I'll ever get it to run again and I'm really pi$$ed.

- snip -



  #87  
Old March 14th 18, 08:25 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Paul[_32_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,873
Default MS unwanted updates tonight...

Scott wrote:
On Tue, 13 Mar 2018 19:53:02 -0400, Paul
wrote:

Scott wrote:
On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 04:29:14 -0400, "HB" wrote:

....wiped out OE6. It's still there but will not work anymore. So now I have
a laptop I can't use for email. I don't understand why the hell MS would
give a &^%$ that someone would want to use OE.

And what really eats my lunch is these updates are FORCED on us. Our
choice was taken away.

There has to be a way to stop them, maybe in the regestry. Someone on this
group must know how to stop these updates.

I want ALL Microsoft updates :-)

I do not have the IT skills to make any informed decision about what
to install and what not to install.

You don't have to understand how the weather works,
to read a weather forecast.

Same goes with updates. You wait until someone else
tests them, if they "smell bad", you hold off on installing
them. Usually, in a week or two, they're fixed (re-released)...
and ready to install. The idea is not to be in a rush, and
"be first" to try them.

If the problem is urgent, I prefer the solution to be urgent also. I
cannot assess whether the problem is urgent so I follow the
precautionary principle.


The nice thing about the situation, is there are plenty of
variables, and "one size doesn't fit all". I won't argue with
your decision making process. My main contribution here, is
to encourage people to make backups, as their "Plan B".
There are many "Plan A alternatives", if you have a Plan B.
Your Plan B, helps cover any holes in your Plan A. Even my
Plan A has holes in it.

As part of Plan A on Windows 10, make sure your System Protection
(Restore Points) are enabled. In case you need to back out a change
later. That's one simple thing you can do. An occasional full backup
doesn't hurt, if things go really wrong (such as the bricked
AMD systems back in January or so). The user "Cameo" here, got
to enjoy his bricked AMD-based (Turion???) system, and managed
to figure out a way to fix it. Pretty impressive. Didn't even need
Plan B, just a clever command delivered in an offline repair method.
Plan B for other people, is for when they don't have that
level of skill to fall back on.

The best thing is, you've formed a plan.

Some people can't even manage to have a plan. For them,
there is Geek Squad.

Paul
  #88  
Old March 14th 18, 11:54 PM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
Mayayana
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 6,438
Default MS unwanted updates tonight...

"Mayayana" wrote
.....


A followup to this discussion that may be of interest
to some. I found Google's actual filing for the case I linked.
It's a fascinating piece of pretzel logic:

http://www.dslreports.com/r0/downloa...iss-061313.pdf

Pages 19/20 address the argument that non-gmail
customers have not approved reading their email and
the case that email is assumed to be confidential. Both
apply to the charge of wiretap infringement.

Google claims those charges are invalid. "Any reasonably intelligent
person, savvy enough to be using the Internet..." knows that
their email will be recorded at the destination.
And they claim people have implicitly agreed to Google's terms
simply by sending an email.
They further claim that Federal law exempts them from prosecution
because it "allows providers of email services like Google to “store”
and “access” emails sent to its systems."

The entire case Google makes rests on one, single, half-witted
sleight of hand. Or rather a bald-faced lie:

Asserting that reading email content and storing the email
beyond the required time, even after it's been deleted by the
account owner, is all just part of the basic handling required
to provide an email service. That reading your mail to aid
in ad-targetting comes under the category of unavoidable
recording of the message as part of its transit.

Google actually assert that they can't do their job otherwise.
They attempt to erase the distinction between accessing content
that passes through their servers vs merely handling that passage.
Which is equivalent to a mailman claiming he has to read your
mail in order to deliver it properly, and that, in fact, there's no
difference between him only delivering the mail or also reading it.

In a display of surprising nerve (or fuzzy mindedness) they
actually equate their accessing of private correspondence with
a phone company necessarily needing to know the number you
call on your phone!

Throughout their motion they try to equate "storing a record"
during transmission of email with co-ownership and unrestricted
access to content. In other words, if it touches our server then
"All your data are belong to us". Because? Because it has to
belong to us to touch our server.


  #89  
Old March 15th 18, 11:15 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
...w¡ñ§±¤ñ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 79
Default MS unwanted updates tonight...

Mayayana wrote:

A followup to this discussion that may be of
interest to some. I found Google's actual filing..


It's good to see you digging into the initial document, but not all
applicable since subsequent documents replacing content and position in
the initial filing throughout the court hearing.


Have you finally realized that the 5 year old(2013) Guardian article
that your previously quoted was an editorialized comment from the
Guardian author and not entirely representative of Google's filing.

This case settlement is approved, the rest is just some petty cash
thrown to the plaintiff side - The lawyers got paid(110 x more) than two
class representatives who will receive a few paltry $ for their efforts.

Google still scans incoming and outgoing mail, and exactly as I noted
earlier relative to Metera vs. Google class action.
'A change but marginal since even the Google account holders(including
the non-Gmail users - the class group of the complaint) will continue to
be the source of collected data and recipient of targeted personalized
ads just as all Google account holders have been in the past regardless
or not having a Google Gmail account.
And nowhere, did the final settlement or the District Court judge
infringe upon Google's right to claim data on their server is their
property, the constraint only limits what they can't do with the
collected data.

Good discussion, though..but in the future, prior to quoting something,
please do some research validating the quote and the source. I sure
hope you didn't waste your $ on funding the security of the Guardian's
future.

Finally, in case you haven't figured it out yet...a filing is a
position, not necessarily a defense statement in court, thus quoting
it's content as absolute 'in defense' would be false.

p.s. There are 37 other documents submitted by both parties after the
initial filing g. Should be a few more once all the details, final
paperwork of the settlement agreement are finalized by both parties and
the court.

--
....w¡ñ§±¤ñ
msft mvp 2007-2016, insider mvp 2016-2018
  #90  
Old March 15th 18, 11:53 AM posted to alt.comp.os.windows-10
...w¡ñ§±¤ñ
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 79
Default MS unwanted updates tonight...

Frank Slootweg wrote:
...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:
...w¡ñ§±¤ñ wrote:
Frank Slootweg wrote:

If not, then I don't consider it to be an alternative, because it's
totally different and offers no migration/import part from OE/WM.

IMAP for many email accounts has been the easiest migration route to
Windows 10 Mail client since both OE and Vista, like Windows 10, support
IMAP.

IMAP is neither needed nor easy (except is the simplest of cases).

The other optional route for email accounts was available from 2008
through the fall of 2016 for MSA(Microsoft Accounts).
That migration route was DeltaSync for Outlook.com, Hotmail, Live, and
MSn accounts in Windows Live Mail which was an installable client on XP
and Vista.
- One need not use the WLM client thereafter but the route to 'push'
your mail and contacts to Outlook.com(fka Hotmail, Live. Msn.com) was
the method MSFT provided. Whether one like the approach or not, it
'was' available and is still available today, once installed[1] since
WLM12 still has the ability to import OE and WM mail into WLM for
copy/move into any email account supporting IMAP. While not all email
accounts support IMAP, the majority do provide IMAP and POP3 support.

I went from OE to WM to WLM, so I'm aware of what they can (not) do.

The bottom line, if you really needed to migrate the options were/are
available...but to do so the underlying requirement and expectedly so
was the need for a MSA account(Outlook/Live/Hotmail/MSn.com or 3rd party
registered email address as an MSA) or the use of IMAP.

Nope, because:

[...]

3. Windows Live Mail is another choice. I also think that's a poor
choice, but it too is a choice.

See my other response. WLM is bug-ridden, bordering on unuseable.

*If* WLM would be a realistic migration path, I would still be on it.

WLM has never been everyone's cup of tea, but when migration is the
concern - it was MSFT provided route. Not using then or now[1] doesn't
negate the option being available from MSFT.

You 'overlooked' my "WLM is bug-ridden, bordering on unuseable."
comment.

Hence WLM was *not* the "MSFT provided route". WLM was not even
adapted to work correctly on Windows 8[.1]. For example not looking at
Contacts and not being backed up by File History (because the WLM Store
Folder is in the wrong place).

WLM is also broken in other areas, such as FUBARring the structure
of imported WM folders and - as I mentioned before - not removing
expired messages from the POP server.

And these are only the WLM bugs which I can somewhat easily recollect
after some three years. There are probably others which I've forgotten.

[1] WLM while no longer available for download from MSFT's servers it
can be obtained via 3rd party hosting sites.

WLM no longer being available from Microsoft is probably a good thing.

[...]

Thus stating that no migration path was/is available from MSFT would be
in error especially since the option was available for over 8 years,
more than sufficient time for OE/WM users implementation.

Was it the best and easiest route? No.
Was/Is a migration route available? Yes

A 'migration route' which ends up with a broken MUA FUBARring your
existing mail, isn't one. Period.


[Dodging each and every argument duly noted.]

You missed the point. The methods for migration was/is available. Not
perfect but available - which was the basis of your point.


I did 'miss' any point, mainly because there *was* no 'point'.

You are clearly unable to counter the arguments, 'so' you shoot the
messenger. So I repeat:

A 'migration route' which ends up with a broken MUA FUBARring your
existing mail, isn't one. Period.


Unfortunately, if still waiting for migration from a a 21 year old
application(OE) or 14 yr old(Vista WM) - it's not going to be something
provided from MSFT's end - development and resources for those programs
ended 12 yrs. ago.


Don't move the goalposts, by rewriting history! WLM was broken from
the time that WM on Vista was still a current and supported product and
that support ended only (slightly less than) *one* year ago.

But feel free to keep riding that dead horse, that saddle isn't going
anywhere.


Feel free to be a Microsoft apologist who can't be bothered by facts
or arguments and has no other 'ammunition' than denial, belittlement,
shooting the messenger, etc..

Lol...still not understanding WLM design intent.
_ = For use with syncable(Contacts, Calendar, SkyDrive) MSA accounts
- Live, Hotmail, MSn and temporarily for Outlook.com until the DeltaSync
backend server was shutdown in favor of Office365 backend functionality.

The only OE targeted users were those who were using WebDav for Hotmail
and MSn accounts. WM users were never targeted since WM didn't support
WebDav. POP3 users of Hotmail and MSN were only targeted to switch to
WebDAV.

All of those targeted users were a small subset of the 6-7 Billion
Hotmail and Messenger users on the planet.

As noted earlier...migration options were available, not perfect but
available.

As far as 'not adapted' to Windows 8x. Same approach - MSA account in
WLM and 8x thus support for Contacts, Calendar and e-mail migration -
setup the MSA in 8x(10) Mail app to sync from the web UI MSA People and
Mail features.

I'm sorry you didn't have the foresight to understand MSFT's intent and
direction once OE and WM developlment ended in 2006 - bottom line back
then and still today - Use an MSA account in WLM, 8x, 10.

On the opposite side I do realize than many didn't like that
direction(MSA recommended) but dislike or expecting it to be change or
be provided is wishing for a pipe dream.

--
....w¡ñ§±¤ñ
msft mvp 2007-2016, insider mvp 2016-2018
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off






All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PCbanter.
The comments are property of their posters.