Re[2]: I want to clarify I few things here
Hello Thomas, Thursday, January 23, 2003, 11:02:38 PM, you wrote: V2 is being developed in C++. However, Stefan works on v1.xx, and that was written in Delphi 6. I don't know whether you can mix these and write new modules for a Delphi 6 program in C++ and link the object codes at compile time, so I don't know which language he is using. I would think for updates/bugfixes on existing modules, he would have to stick to Delphi, as otherwise efforts in rewriting the code in C++ for V2 are being duplicated, and we would be getting aplha versions of v2 rather than bugfixes of v1.xx. You are correct in assuming that for bug fixes and updates to existing sections, he would have to continue using Delphi. Unless, he is rewriting the corresponding code in C++ and linking the object library with the Delphi source code. If version 2 is being totally developed in C++, then my guess is that it is a rewrite and that is not a short process. Even though, the Delphi language resembles C++ up to a point, it's still not easy to convert Delphi to C++. It takes time and especially lots of testing. In doing a rewrite, it is possible that they caught a lot of the bugs, since they have to touch all of the code. I've coded with C++ and I prefer Delphi because I find it easier to work with. So if they are rewriting the code in C++, my hats off to the developers for their hard work. -- Best regards, Daniel Rail Senior System Engineer ACCRA Group Inc. (www.accra.ca) ACCRA Med Software Inc. (www.accramed.ca) Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I want to clarify I few things here
Saturday, January 18, 2003, 8:07:13 AM, Daniel wrote: Knowing the programming language, Delphi, that RitLabs is using major snippage It's been a hellish week, and I'm still 305 emails from being caught up in my TBUDL reading, so perhaps this has been addressed... I thought I had read that V2 development was being done in C++. Did I misread/misunderstand? -- Dave Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/3 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: I want to clarify I few things here
Hello Dave, Thursday, January 23, 2003, 22:55:39, you wrote: DG I thought I had read that V2 development was being done in C++. DG Did I misread/misunderstand? This is correct to my knowledge... -- Best regards, Ricardo van Eck The Netherlands Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/5 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I want to clarify I few things here
Hello Dave, On Thu, 23 Jan 2003 15:55:39 -0600 GMT (24/01/03, 04:55 +0700 GMT), Dave Gorman wrote: Knowing the programming language, Delphi, that RitLabs is using major snippage I thought I had read that V2 development was being done in C++. Did I misread/misunderstand? V2 is being developed in C++. However, Stefan works on v1.xx, and that was written in Delphi 6. I don't know whether you can mix these and write new modules for a Delphi 6 program in C++ and link the object codes at compile time, so I don't know which language he is using. I would think for updates/bugfixes on existing modules, he would have to stick to Delphi, as otherwise efforts in rewriting the code in C++ for V2 are being duplicated, and we would be getting aplha versions of v2 rather than bugfixes of v1.xx. -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. Just because you're not paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you. Message reply created with The Bat! 1.63 Beta/5 under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I want to clarify I few things here
Saturday, January 18, 2003, 10:12:56 AM,Robert wrote: RS do not stamp your feet and send a plain message to friend or RS potential client. Interestingly, I send all my mails to my customers in plain text and none seem to mind. :-) -- Cheers, Anne Using The Bat! v1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows 98 4.10 Build Visit The Bat! Users' Unofficial Help Forum http://the-bat-forums.donzeigler.com Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I want to clarify I few things here
Saturday, January 18, 2003, 10:12:56 AM,Robert wrote: RS Many people like html mail I feel that part of the reason that people *like* html is that is because in the main it's what they have always used. Like a pair of old slippers - comfie. To change to a new mail client means having to discard something they can use, and learn something new (and not everyone wants or is able to do this). If Microsoft had designed Outlook Express to write only plain text mails we'd not be having this discussion methinks? ;-) -- Cheers, Anne Using The Bat! v1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows 98 4.10 Build Visit The Bat! Users' Unofficial Help Forum http://the-bat-forums.donzeigler.com Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I want to clarify I few things here
Hello Greg, Other things I think would be a Kill a sub-thread. How many times have I received email on this list that goes off on a tangent that I'm not interested? Quite a few times. I don't think this functionality should only apply to a news reader. I'm trying to find some time to set up a web page explaining how my Kill/Ignore filter works :) How about manual re-threading. How many times have I received an email where the sender was actually starting a new topic in a reply message? Quite a few times. I don't think this functionality should only apply to a news reader. Or the reply not being threaded because the e-mail client used does not (or isn't configured to) include the In-Reply-To or References header? I will also explain how I do this now on the page mentioned above... when I have the time to do it. -- Best regards, Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain) Using The Bat! v1.61 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I want to clarify I few things here
Hello Miguel, On Sun, 19 Jan 2003, at 12:33:01 GMT +0100 (1/19/2003, 5:33 AM -0500 GMT here), you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: I'm trying to find some time to set up a web page explaining how my Kill/Ignore filter works :) Great! How about manual re-threading. How many times have I received an email where the sender was actually starting a new topic in a reply message? Quite a few times. I don't think this functionality should only apply to a news reader. Or the reply not being threaded because the e-mail client used does not (or isn't configured to) include the In-Reply-To or References header? I did NOT think of this, but now that you mention it. I have some lists where a very large number of users are using clients or posting from the web that these headers do NOT exist. In these cases it better to thread by subject. I will also explain how I do this now on the page mentioned above... when I have the time to do it. Great -- Best regards, Greg Strong TB! v1.63 Beta/4 on Windows XP Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
I want to clarify I few things here
Editing in HTML and sending Emails in HTML is expected in this century. Yes Text messages have their place too, however, do not stamp your feet and send a plain message to friend or potential client. Many people like html mail This why the smartest setting on Email is both html and text outbound and if you never want to see HTML just set your receive mode to accept only the text part of an html email or bounce the message, however, do not deprive other users from HTML mail which still has its place. A client of mine is just the oposite. Hates text plain messages. Loves HTML which is why she does not care for the BAT. Also it makes a product look hoky when graphics com up as square [X] instead of what it should have. I do agree Javascript should be a security feature enabled or disabled by the user. I completely disagree about the let the browser do the work. People like convenience. i use Opera at times and find it to open fast so this is less of an issue for me now, but would not it be nice to down arrow each message seeing a preview displayed without the [X} graphics and render the actual page with or without script or applet/active X or flash enable?? Take a look at HotMetal which embeds explorer code. I think something like that can be done and give you the control while using a dll interface from the browser vendor to more quickly render the web page clearly and securely. Again these features should be configurable I think News groups are an important part of an Email client as well. TB needs to match the Eudora capbilities while leaving out the security flaws and inefficiencies, but provide the capability to display messages and edit messages in HTML. Again I think a simple switch when installing should nicely take care of the Mr. Text onlys who hate HTML email. News groups are important and so is the ability to edit HTML and receive and display it. Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I want to clarify I few things here
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Robert, Saturday, January 18, 2003, 5:12:56 AM, you wrote: Editing in HTML and sending Emails in HTML is expected in this century. Yes Text messages have their place too, however, do not stamp your feet and send a plain message to friend or potential client. Many people like html mail This why the smartest setting on Email is both html and text outbound and if you never want to see HTML just set your receive mode to accept only the text part of an html email or bounce the message, however, do not deprive other users from HTML mail which still has its place. A client of mine is just the oposite. Hates text plain messages. Loves HTML which is why she does not care for the BAT. Also it makes a product look hoky when graphics com up as square [X] instead of what it should have. Sounds like you really meant to type instead of how a web browser would have displayed it. The Bat isn't a web browser. There is no reason for it to behave like such. I do agree Javascript should be a security feature enabled or disabled by the user. I completely disagree about the let the browser do the work. People like convenience. i use Opera at times and find it to open fast so this is less of an issue for me now, but would not it be nice to down arrow each message seeing a preview displayed without the [X} graphics and render the actual page with or without script or applet/active X or flash enable?? The idea behind not downloading images files on web servers is that doing so opens the client up to spammer tricks involving things like web bugs. HTML messages which include the graphics as part of the e-mail do render properly. Take a look at HotMetal which embeds explorer code. I think something like that can be done and give you the control while using a dll interface from the browser vendor to more quickly render the web page clearly and securely. I shudder at the thought of Internet Explorer being called secure. Embeding Internet Explorer in an application introduces all of it bugs and there are a lot of them. Again these features should be configurable I think News groups are an important part of an Email client as well. I disagree. Being a News Reader is not the responsibility of an e-mail client. TB needs to match the Eudora capbilities while leaving out the security flaws and inefficiencies, but provide the capability to display messages and edit messages in HTML. Again I think a simple switch when installing should nicely take care of the Mr. Text onlys who hate HTML email. News groups are important and so is the ability to edit HTML and receive and display it. I absolutely agree, News groups are important. I read them all the time myself. The ability to edit HTML and being able to receive and display it is also good. They just don't belong in an e-mail client. - -- Best regards, Jonathan Chattin -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32) iD8DBQE+KTvbryIAwRrDgYwRAlFWAKDd8c7POMRLJI2FM2BnyHzCRFRn2QCgvJ8n eOWT/tSh0NTMWdEkDYP8IQ8= =8Bzm -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I want to clarify I few things here
On 18 January 2003, 10:12, Robert Silver wrote: Also it makes a product look hoky when graphics com up as square [X] ~~~ Strange enough, those [X]'s give me a warm, fuzzy feeling because I know that another spammer cannot use that potential web bug to verify my e-mail address and I know that some inconsiderate explicative hasn't succeeded in causing me additional costs by getting my router to re-dial to collect their off-page (usually) garbage. -- Geoff Lane Cornwall, UK [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Using The Bat! v1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Pedestrian: A motorist who found a parking space Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: I want to clarify I few things here
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Geoff, Saturday, January 18, 2003, 6:50:49 AM, you wrote: GL On 18 January 2003, 10:12, Robert Silver wrote: Also it makes a product look hoky when graphics com up as square [X] GL ~~~ GL Strange enough, those [X]'s give me a warm, fuzzy feeling because I GL know that another spammer cannot use that potential web bug to verify GL my e-mail address and I know that some inconsiderate explicative GL hasn't succeeded in causing me additional costs by getting my router GL to re-dial to collect their off-page (usually) garbage. The Xs give me a fuzzy feeling too but doesn't necessarily mean X out everything... I should be able to allow viewing HTML in its entirety or be able to choose who can send me HTML formatted mail at least... To me everyone, their mother and pet gold fish can argue all they want but I would love to see more HTML support in the near future. A built in RTF editor so I can at least bold some headings and make italic others I feel need to be emphasized. Everyone might argue that e-mail is supposed to do this and not do that is like saying a car with no heater in the dead of winter on a 24hr trip is not really necessary because the cars only purpose is to get you from a to z (and it is!). But you would probably drop dead of the freeze *if* such a convenience didn't exist... I don't hear much argument about that... Another thing is why when someone says wheres the news reader the bat isn't or shouldn't be a news reader? I suare from the bottom of my heart I hate with a passion dictatorship... If the people want it and theres enough motion why argue? I would love to see news group support with the bat... It can completely remove Mozilla from my system if it did it could probably completely remove outlook from others... I bet my life if an RTF editor was introduced to The Bat! you might say I'll never use it (yeah, right) but you will. You have too... plain text is robotic and you'll use the bold and italic command sooner or later... Its almost guaranteed... I can almost bet my life if a news group reader was introduced you would use it too. Come'on think about that one, argue if you wish too... You're going to turn off the heat on purpose because you know its a convenience and that its not really necessary? I love The Bat! and theres no argument about its current status and my point to this whole thread and *every* community member is if you see something *you don't* like, no matter how much you don't like it leave it be... Polls and surveys work with disagreement but you're trying to persuade an inevitable argument... I can almost bet my life that if HTML, RTF and a news group reader was introduced this bat list would be flooded with new members and the RitLabs team would have more money to develop The Bat! further and faster than before which should be a good thing right? Most people expect HTML and to compose in RTF and a lot of people would really enjoy a news reader... I say the old saying goes well... Carry a gun and not need it, than need it and not have it... I currently support 100% the idea of more enabled HTML, RTF, and news reading capabilities and word is its coming whether you like it or not... My question is once its here will you stop upgrading? - -- Best regards, Victor B. Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v1.62 Christmas Edition Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Request My PGP Public Keys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] iQA/AwUBPilKPF3LB35+TCg0EQKPYQCeNQze0Uy80lq+jbWl3GTKqoZaLJIAoI8y sYNdzU9rwYMt2AGR7FvEBmVN =/LaD -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I want to clarify I few things here
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In 003c01c2beda$2ced91b0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:003c01c2beda$2ced91b0$[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Robert Silver [RS] wrote:'
RS Editing in HTML and sending Emails in HTML is expected in this
RS century.
This is sad. I'd have preferred if the same were being said about
rich text format.
RS Many people like html mail.
If this is so for everyday use and for average mail, then this is so
because they don't realize the problems with HTML mail. I liked it as
well, then decided not to use it when I realized the problems with it,
but was however neutral. Now, I'm just plain against it.
My philosophy now is. If you wish to send rich text, then send it as
an attachment. E-mail needs a format to support rich text and that's
widely supported. However, HTML is just not the answer.
RS This why the smartest setting on Email is both html and text
RS outbound and if you never want to see HTML just set your receive
RS mode to accept only the text part of an html email or bounce the
RS message, however, do not deprive other users from HTML mail which
RS still has its place.
Well, TB! will display a plain text version even if the sender doesn't
send one. I still have problems with it. Not to mention the amazing
increase in mail transmission bandwidth when routinely sending
messages dual formatted.
I currently read my mail using a black background and a light grey
font. It's more soothing to my eyes. Makes me able to read a lot more
mail without getting tired.
There's this particular list that I'm subscribed to where a lot of
HTML mail is posted.
When I switch to reading the HTML version of a lot of the posts on
that list, I have to read using the senders background colour. Most
are white. Others are light blue. Others are red...yellow. etc. The
font sizes, colours and face also vary from message to message. They
may even vary within the same message. They're often set at a size
that's too small for my display, so I have difficulty reading them. It
doesn't take long before I get frustrated having to readjust my eyes
for each messages style or frustrated because it's literally difficult
to read the tiny text on my screen that may very well be of adequate
size on the senders screen.
I therefore have to switch to reading them in plain text.
Unfortunately, this isn't without problems since the plain text
versions leave out the colouring or the font face change or other HTML
type decorations to indicate what's a quote from what's not.
IOW's, it's chaos there in terms of formatting. However, the
information is good, so I read it in plain text, thanks to TB!, and
tolerate the other problems. Not to mention over-quoting. OE based
HTML messages also encourage embedding of images in posts. It's just
lovely when someone replies to a post containing five or so embedded
images, and proceeds to top-post the reply and quoting the entire
messages, images and all below. All out of ignorance, I'm sure. I
doubt anyone will convince me that this is done with prior
*knowledge*. Plain text would avoid that outright.
So, you may say, one cannot outlaw something because it's abused by
others. My question is, how is the basic user not to 'abuse' it when
it's easily capable of the things that create so many problems for
others? In fact, what it's capable of looks so darned good on their
monitor screens. They genuinely think their reader will always
appreciate this at their end.
Having to endure this list and see what HTML mail can do in the hands
of those who don't know when and how to use it, and aren't aware of the
difficulties it can create for the readers of their messages, I am
forced to now jump on the bandwagon of voices that speak against it on
absolute terms. I used to be neutral in that I just don't use it
personally, but no longer am. I now think it's a bad thing. :(
A browser is designed to render and read HTML. I can configure font
sizes in pages that I view when I read web pages. I can magnify the
page using Opera. I don't have these tools in an e-mail client.
- --
-=] allie_M [=- {List Moderator}
MUA: TB! v1.63 Beta/4 ___ OS: WinXP Pro (SP1)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Comment: My Public Keys - http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html
iD8DBQE+KUxTV8nrYCsHF+IRAiOfAKDPmHoZM5kmUlR1EBkGTJw+d+uiEgCgv18j
IEdJzFSqymhItITMaF+EHnY=
=pCG/
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[3]: I want to clarify I few things here
Saturday, January 18, 2003, 7:37:09 AM, you wrote: VBG and not do that is like saying a car with no heater in the VBG dead of winter on a 24hr trip is not really necessary VBG because the cars only purpose is to get you from a to z VBG (and it is!). Look out, here come the automobile analogy police to arrest you smile VBG But you would probably drop dead of the freeze *if* such a VBG convenience didn't exist... I don't hear much argument VBG about that... Wouldn't bother us much here in South Florida. Even in our current cold spell, down to 60 last night. double smile I think my point is about spending money for a replacement for something that is already built in to the operating system, or comes with it free. What made me spend hard earned money for the bat? Configurability and the ease of avoiding html and it's evils (not it's eye candy). I also bought Eudora before that and used Pegasus for a while (now that is a well priced program). -- Lou --- __@ -- _-\,_ --- (_)/ (_) Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I want to clarify I few things here
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Victor B. Gonzalez [VBG] wrote:'
VBG [..] I would love to see more HTML support in the near future. A
VBG built in RTF editor so I can at least bold some headings and make
VBG italic others I feel need to be emphasized.
I'd certainly support this if it could be supported in a way that
doesn't take away my ability to read you message in the font size and
type I want to, and with the background colour I want to. I'm all for
emboldening, underlining and italicizing, using different font sizes
within the text etc. However, not at the expense of the loss of
control of what font size and face I read with. HTML simply doesn't
offer this across the board.
VBG I love The Bat! and theres no argument about its current status
VBG and my point to this whole thread and *every* community member is
VBG if you see something *you don't* like, no matter how much you
VBG don't like it leave it be...
If I didn't have so much problems with reading HTML mail then I'd
certainly leave it be. I have left the newsreader integration since I
can leave it be if I'm not interested in it. However, I cannot prevent
senders sending me HTML mail all the time.
VBG I can almost bet my life that if HTML, RTF and a news group
VBG reader was introduced this bat list would be flooded with new
VBG members and the RitLabs team would have more money to develop The
VBG Bat! further and faster than before which should be a good thing
VBG right?
I think you're right on this and it's sad that this is so. I really
wish some other format to do what you wish had been popularized.
However, HTML was popularized out of convenience rather than it really
being appropriate. It's really a pity. So if an inappropriate
alternative format has prevailed to date, we should support its use,
right? :) I don't think so. It's not too late to change.
- --
-=] allie_M [=- {List Moderator}
MUA: TB! v1.63 Beta/4 ___ OS: WinXP Pro (SP1)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Comment: My Public Keys - http://www.ac-martin.com/pgpkeys.html
iD8DBQE+KVQFV8nrYCsHF+IRAm5QAJ9JxRY9sBO0OyqIQI+8w48pBwW/xQCg/BhS
6TN1fuabyB8YqhHfl87JVhY=
=c4Aq
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I want to clarify I few things here
On 18 January 2003, 12:37, Victor B. Gonzalez wrote: The Xs give me a fuzzy feeling too but doesn't necessarily mean X out everything... I should be able to allow viewing HTML in its entirety or be able to choose who can send me HTML formatted mail at least... ~~~ Those [X]'s only appear when the image isn't sent with the message. I don't care if the download is only 2 bytes, the link can be coded to allow the sender to verify your address, which can then become a saleable resource on spam lists. It also allows the sender to verify that you're accessible on-line, and thus a suitable target for a trojan or two. Immunity from such exploits was a major factor in persuading me to part with the cost of business licenses for all users at my site. While I wouldn't abandon TB, I wouldn't upgrade to v2 if it downloaded off-page resources by default. FWIW, you can choose to view HTML in its entirety -- just open the message.htm icon. However, you cannot choose who can send you HTML formatted mail -- if they send it, you must download the whole thing, garbage and all, or delete it from the server after viewing only the header. WRT your likening HTML mail to the heater of a car: The heater on a car (at least, a conventional one that forms part of the cooling system) uses no additional resources. Contrast that with HTML mail, which takes up over the twice my bandwidth and storage than plain text requires. Having said that, I have no objection to TB growing an ability to write HTML mail provided that it does not become the default. Cheers, -- Geoff Lane Cornwall, UK [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Using The Bat! v1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Daddy, what does Formatting Drive C: mean? Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I want to clarify I few things here
Hello Robert, Saturday, January 18, 2003, 6:12:56 AM, you wrote: Editing in HTML and sending Emails in HTML is expected in this century. Knowing the programming language, Delphi, that RitLabs is using, I know for a fact that for them to incorporate an HTML editor, they would almost have to do it from scratch, and that's a lot of work to support most of the features of HTML. There's one component that I know of the can be used in the programming language, but the message has to be exported as HTML before it can be sent. And, if my memory serves me well, that means saving the HTML file to disk and then reloading it to be able to send it. I would like to have rich text support, because in some cases I would be able to change the color of a word or put it bold to attract attention to it. And, Delphi natively does have a component for rich text support. And, I would like to be able to select between the three(text, rich text and HTML) which one I would like to use to compose e-mail messages, since in might mean 2 or 3 editors in their code. Take a look at HotMetal which embeds explorer code. I think something like that can be done and give you the control while using a dll interface from the browser vendor to more quickly render the web page clearly and securely. Again these features should be configurable Actually Delphi does have a component that hooks with the core of Internet Explorer 4 and up. I do prefer the way that HTML is displayed now in The Bat!, but it is quite easy to implement Delphi's web browser component in a way that if you click on a link that an external browser pops up. RitLabs is probably using another HTML viewer component or created their own with the limitation of not showing what is coming from external sources. Here too, I would prefer to be able to choose which viewer I want to use. -- Best regards, Daniel Rail Senior System Engineer ACCRA Group Inc. (www.accra.ca) ACCRA Med Software Inc. (www.accramed.ca) Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[3]: I want to clarify I few things here
Hello Victor, Saturday, January 18, 2003, 12:37:09 PM, you wrote: VBG Everyone might argue that e-mail is supposed to do this VBG and not do that is like saying a car with no heater in the VBG dead of winter on a 24hr trip is not really necessary VBG because the cars only purpose is to get you from a to z VBG (and it is!). VBG But you would probably drop dead of the freeze *if* such a VBG convenience didn't exist... I don't hear much argument VBG about that... risking the automobile analogy police All well and good but when you switch on your car heater you don't want the engine to cut out on you or the car to suddenly take a detour into an unsavoury part of town ??? taking things back on topic Sheesh, enough problem deciding what to write without thinking about what colour to put it in and whether there are some snazzy graphics to go with it ! I think I've said this before but if it wasn't for the security holes in HTML then this argument would never be raised - we'd all be using HTML by choice ( and in reply to Allie we'd also be better at it and not into choosing such garish colour schemes lol ) because that's all we would know. IMHO - HTML mail has it's place but it's not for me so hence my satisfaction with the way TB! does things. -- Best regards, Barry2 Using The Bat! v1.61 on Windows 98 4.10 Build Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: I want to clarify I few things here
Hello Lou, Saturday, January 18, 2003, 12:29:02 PM, you wrote: LY It sounds to me like Outlook was designed for those who want a LY mail/newsgroup/browser program all in one. I think that hits the nail squarely on the head there ! The whole drive in the MicroSoft camp seems to be to incorporate everything you ever would want to do on a PC into one application. We can see the resultant mess that that has created to date lol The question is, do we want to become MicroSoft clones or do we want to have the freedom to do what *we* want when *we* want to do it ?? I know which I'd rather be doing but if folks feel happy as a clone then why stop them, it's a free decision to become a sheep after all !! LY I hate to see baggage added to TB to turn it into an Outlook LY Clone. Outlook is not allowed within 100 yards of any of my LY systems or the systems on the network that I administer. Ditto on both points ... -- Best regards, Barry2 Using The Bat! v1.61 on Windows 98 4.10 Build Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I want to clarify I few things here
Hello Barry2, On Sat, 18 Jan 2003 17:02:17 + GMT (19/01/03, 00:02 +0700 GMT), Barry2 wrote: I think I've said this before but if it wasn't for the security holes in HTML then this argument would never be raised - we'd all be using HTML by choice No. ;-) ( and in reply to Allie we'd also be better at it and not into choosing such garish colour schemes lol ) because that's all we would know. That depends on how long you have been on the internet, and whether you have used only Windows mailers. I was surprised when my business contacts suddenly started use HTML when they really wanted to send email. They didn't enhance anything (colours, fonts), they just didn't know what they were sending, and I read the whole thing in early pine versions with all the HTML tages! ;-) IMHO - HTML mail has it's place Yes. In newsletters. But IMHO not in information exchanges or in discussions. -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. My wife and I were happy for twenty years then we met. Message reply created with The Bat! 1.63 Beta/3 under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I want to clarify I few things here
On Saturday, January 18, 2003 @ 4:37:09 AM [-0700], Victor B. Gonzalez wrote: I bet my life if an RTF editor was introduced to The Bat! you might say I'll never use it (yeah, right) but you will. You have too... plain text is robotic and you'll use the bold and italic command sooner or later... Its almost guaranteed... I'll take that bet...although not for your life. Let's make it a beer or something less fatal. I guarantee I will NEVER use rtf or html mail. That's just me. Make it feature of The Bat!? I have no problem with that. However, I still won't use it. I'm forced to use Outlook for work but use only plain text there as well. Just a personal preference... -- Matt Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I want to clarify I few things here
Hello Robert, Saturday, January 18, 2003, 10:12:56 AM, you wrote: RS Editing in HTML and sending Emails in HTML is expected in this century. Yes RS Text messages have their place too, RS however, do not stamp your feet and send a plain message to friend or RS potential client. Many people like html mail May I suggest then, that there's a product ideally suited to you already out there. It's called Microsoft Outlook. It does all the things you want and also incorporates all that nice html code (including viruses) as well. -- Best regards, Mike Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: I want to clarify I few things here
Hello Lou Yovin, On or about Saturday, January 18, 2003 at 07:29:02GMT -0500 (which was 7:29 AM in the tropics where I live) Lou Yovin intimated: LY It sounds to me like Outlook was designed for those who want LY a mail/newsgroup/browser program all in one. I hate to see LY baggage added to TB to turn it into an Outlook Clone. Outlook LY is not allowed within 100 yards of any of my systems or the LY systems on the network that I administer. My policy exactly, and I put it in writing before I will consult on/administer/service any system! I've been burned too many times by security breaches that were directly attributable to e-mail bourne pathogens. No amount of education can make MS Outhouse safe, as there are too many people with too much time on their hands targeting it for malicious purposes. When you make an application too large and bloated, there are bound to be so many more exploitable weaknesses. -- Warmest tropical wishes, Spike Why is it considered necessary to nail down the lid of a coffin? -- /\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign - Against HTML Mail \ / If it aint a webpage it shouldn't be HTML. XSay NO! to bloatmail - ban HTML mail! / \ Ask Spikey, he hates everything (HTML). -- Flying in the stratosphere with The Bat! V1.61 on Windows 2000 Vers. 5 0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 -- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[3]: I want to clarify I few things here
Hello Victor B. Gonzalez, On or about Saturday, January 18, 2003 at 07:37:09GMT -0500 (which was 7:37 AM in the tropics where I live) Victor B. Gonzalez blithered: VBG Most people expect HTML and to compose in RTF and a lot of VBG people would really enjoy a news reader... And most of those same people are the lawful prey of the virus and web-bug authors. I choose not to be! VBG I say the old saying goes well... Carry a gun and not VBG need it, than need it and not have it... I currently VBG support 100% the idea of more enabled HTML, RTF, and news VBG reading capabilities and word is its coming whether you VBG like it or not... I carry a gun, and have only needed it three times in 30 years, and used it (ie fired it) only once, in self defense. Total times I have exposed it for its intended purpose - under three minutes in 30 years. It is, therefore OPTIONAL. Again, I choose NOT to be a 'helpless victim.' VBG My question is once its here will you stop upgrading? In a word, if these unnecessary 'features' are not made optional - YES! And I'm not alone in this. -- Warmest tropical wishes, Spike A Kennedy's most common sexual position: Defendant. -- /\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign - Against HTML Mail \ / If it aint a webpage it shouldn't be HTML. XSay NO! to bloatmail - ban HTML mail! / \ Ask Spikey, he hates everything (HTML). -- Flying in the stratosphere with The Bat! V1.61 on Windows 2000 Vers. 5 0 Build 2195 Service Pack 3 -- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I want to clarify I few things here
Hello Spike, On Sat, 18 Jan 2003, at 20:49:06 GMT -0500 (1/18/2003, 7:49 PM -0500 GMT here), you wrote in [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: In a word, if these unnecessary 'features' are not made optional - YES! And I'm not alone in this. Optional is the key. Personally I would think it a good strategy on Ritlabs part to continue high end functionality with options to make TB more attractive to larger market. This way the long term viability of the product is more assured. As a user I like that as long as certain features are optional such as HTML, news reader. Now I've read quite a lot of posts on HTML mail. I can totally understand the headache created when receiving HTML mail. So how about an option to strip HTML from email on receipt to receive only text email? If products exist out there already, why not incorporate that functionality into an email client? Other things I think would be a Kill a sub-thread. How many times have I received email on this list that goes off on a tangent that I'm not interested? Quite a few times. I don't think this functionality should only apply to a news reader. How about manual re-threading. How many times have I received an email where the sender was actually starting a new topic in a reply message? Quite a few times. I don't think this functionality should only apply to a news reader. Just my 2 cents worth. -- Best regards, Greg Strong TB! v1.63 Beta/4 on Windows XP Service Pack 1 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: I want to clarify I few things here
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Greg, In a word, if these unnecessary 'features' are not made optional - YES! And I'm not alone in this. RitLabs will never kill their already good share of the market by removing options from the user... That would be a business flaw that could damage productivity and user loyalty... Everyone against HTML support have a few things in common but what I do not see in common is any of the positive HTML can achieve even in an email... To me text is good for one thing and I call it information straight... The reader starts at the top and works his way to the bottom meanwhile I know that with good HTML design you can actually stimulate a readers attention and responsiveness... One thing that kills me is this, is there anyone here whose against HTML mail and is also against doing business by email? I mean in other words if an HTML formatted email reaches your inbox does a filter or any other mean delete it before you see it? My point is The Bat may be great against showing web images inline but it can never stop an email composed elsewhere from reaching you in HTML... You can probably stop it using other means but overall in the end you still deal with it regardless of how much you might cry, wine, pant and pout about it. I believe in the freedom of choice. Any user any where in the world can send me any type of mail they wish as long as the message itself gets across... I have no qualms with it. I have respect for the Internet where technology will move ahead without asking you, prompting you or warning you and HTML no matter what the pessimist might think about it, has made its way into the email market without warning you. You can cry, wine, pant and pout but you're in no way going to stop the movement... I am currently preparing to run a business of my own and I only see the ability to create, manage and edit HTML inline as a plus. I have no arguments about future support for anything that does not damage what it is I respect today. Choice I am sure will come and it is the choice I will respect more than no choice but to edit in text and text alone. That's my opinion and 2 cents about HTML... About security, web bugs, spam viruses, etc... I fear it in the least... RTF editing and news group support I definitely encourage. Give me freedom of choice or give me death and if I die by the hands of death those hands most likely belong to a text only activist... Have a great day everyone and even if HTML is never supported inline The Bat! is still a very awesome client :) - -- Best regards, Victor B. Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v1.62 Christmas Edition Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Comment: Request My PGP Public Keys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] iQA/AwUBPipZPl3LB35+TCg0EQJZzgCgpGtmjPXkSVLKcm3pzm7tqlAhivQAnR9r ngdV1b5oO2ayybATc+PETTXQ =/hTe -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
