Hello Dennis!
On Saturday, February 26, 2005, 11:01 AM, you wrote:
Are we getting close to consensus here? ...
TB!'s history has been one of penultimate user configuration. As long
as the default is as Nancy Reagan waould say, Just say No, then I
wouldn't see why anyone would object. In
Mary Bull wrote:
Umm, no. I'd prefer if the button stay off with no option to force it
on. That way, if you want to view the HTML/remote Images you have to
click the button for each and every message. Especially since each
message is different and you probably don't want it set to ON. :)
Hello Mary,
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 11:46:42 -0600 GMT (27/02/2005, 00:46 +0700 GMT),
Mary Bull wrote:
MB I would like to be able to protect myself from inadvertently pushing
MB it. :)
Just don't activate the option, and everything will be as it used to
be.
--
Cheers,
Thomas.
I have an
Hello Goncalo,
A reminder of what Goncalo Farias on TBBETA typed on:
26 February 2005 at 15:11:53 GMT +0100
GF Is it too much to have an option to enable full HTML support?
I'm going to make one last comment on this subject. For years most people
on this list have in the past voiced
Hello Goncalo,
A reminder of what Goncalo Farias on TBBETA typed on:
26 February 2005 at 15:17:47 GMT +0100
GF They want an enhanced version with what other clients have best, you
GF seem to want a client tailored to your personal needs and tastes!
Er no, I want The Bat as it is with all
Hello Goncalo,
A reminder of what Goncalo Farias on TBBETA typed on:
26 February 2005 at 15:20:50 GMT +0100
GF Users like you are of big prejudice for business, scaring customers
GF away!
Boo!
--
Tony.
Using The Bat! v3.0.2.10
:gentoo:
www.gentoo.org
smime.p7s
Hello Goncalo,
A reminder of what Goncalo Farias on TBBETA typed on:
26 February 2005 at 15:26:05 GMT +0100
GF Where is the moderator now?
I was going to ask that quite a few messages ago but so far I've managed
to keep my tongue very firmly bit.
--
Tony.
Using The Bat! v3.0.2.10
Hello Thomas,
A reminder of what Thomas Fernandez on TBBETA typed on:
26 February 2005 at 16:36:49 GMT +0100
TF I do not take well to nannying.
Mothering yes but Nannying no :)
On an off topic note, I watched a program about your neck of the woods
Thomas, not sure how close to it you are
Hello Thomas,
A reminder of what Thomas Fernandez on TBBETA typed on:
26 February 2005 at 16:36:43 GMT +0100
TF Same here. I joined this list in 1999, and I couldn't care less about
TF HTML at the time. Times have changed.
Turncoat :)
--
Tony.
Using The Bat! v3.0.2.10
:gentoo:
Hello Cees,
A reminder of what Cees on TBBETA typed on:
26 February 2005 at 21:10:10 GMT +0100
C I'm on YOUR side.
I know, and I thank you. Seems everyone else who used to share my opinion
has abandoned a sinking ship.
The irony of it is, in a few months time we'll all have great html
Hello Goncalo,
A reminder of what Goncalo Farias on TBBETA typed on:
26 February 2005 at 21:25:38 GMT +0100
GF er.. ah, EVOLUTION!
I think you'll find it's oo ah Cantona (:
Seriously though, I don't care either way as long as this list don't get
bombarded with floods of html. I know
Tony Boom wrote:
GF They want an enhanced version with what other clients have best, you
GF seem to want a client tailored to your personal needs and tastes!
Er no, I want The Bat as it is with all the bugs ironed out before any
completely new untested extras are added.
I won't disagree
Hi Tony Boom,
On 26/2/2005 3:12 PM, you wrote:
3 months time, The Bat has the best html engine of any email client
available...
It will likely not have that. Not for a long time .. even if it is
planned.
Still no working flawless IMAP ability but great
comic book features. Hands up all
Hi Tony Boom,
On 26/2/2005 3:03 PM, you wrote:
I'm going to make one last comment on this subject. For years most
people on this list have in the past voiced *very* strong opinions
about keeping The Bat html free... Where are they all now? They've
all jumped ship and are now sitting firmly
Hi Tony Boom,
On 26/2/2005 3:50 PM, you wrote:
Seriously though, I don't care either way as long as this list
don't get bombarded with floods of html. I know html isn't allowed
on here but that's not going to stop people is it.
TB! has been capable of constructing and sending HTML mail since
At 20:12 [GMT+] on Saturday February 26 (actual time - 4:12am on Sunday in
Perth, Western Australia), you wrote:
3 months time, The Bat has the best html engine of any email client
available... Still no working flawless IMAP ability but great comic book
features.
As soon as you say
At 20:03 [GMT+] on Saturday February 26 (actual time - 4:03am on Sunday in
Perth, Western Australia), you wrote:
I'm going to make one last comment on this subject. For years most people
on this list have in the past voiced *very* strong opinions about keeping
The Bat html free... Where
At 19:44 [GMT-0500] on Saturday February 26 (actual time - 8:44am on Sunday in
Perth, Western Australia), you wrote:
GF And, I know this is a pain in the arse, your signature delimiter is
GF non conformant with the list rules. They want it like '-- ' instead of
GF '--'.
Strange that none of
Hi Tony,
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005, at 20:03:11 [GMT +] (which was 1:03 PM where
I live) you wrote:
TB I'm going to make one last comment on this subject. For years most
TB people on this list have in the past voiced *very* strong opinions
TB about keeping The Bat html free... Where are they all
Hello Tony,
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 20:22:58 + GMT (27/02/2005, 03:22 +0700 GMT),
Tony Boom wrote:
TF Same here. I joined this list in 1999, and I couldn't care less about
TF HTML at the time. Times have changed.
TB Turncoat :)
Call me that if you want.
Email was invented to be plain-text
Hello Leif,
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 18:05:26 -0700 GMT (27/02/2005, 08:05 +0700 GMT),
Leif Gregory wrote:
LG Now, TB is a for profit application. That means their time is money
LG (whose isn't). We've had TB users in the past who were visually
LG disabled.
I thinnk most have left, because we don't
Hello Leif,
On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 18:05:26 -0700 GMT(2/26/2005, 7:05 PM -0600 GMT),
per mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Leif Gregory wrote:
Nope. I still don't want HTML support either, I'm just tired of always
arguing about it.
This thread is really about opinions. Everyone has one. :-)
...snip
Hello The,
A reminder of what The Final Cut on TBBETA typed on:
24 February 2005 at 22:38:25 GMT +0100
TFC wow that's sad to see thebat users to closed mind
Nothing to do with closed minds. Most people on here chose TB!
specifically because of it's inability to handle html. You go
Hello Tony Boom
On Friday, February 25, 2005, at 3:29:32 AM
You wrote:
TB Nothing to do with closed minds. Most people on here chose TB!
TB specifically because of it's inability to handle html. You go changing
TB that and everyone will have to find another client.
Well that will make me keep
Hello Paul Van Noord
On Friday, February 25, 2005, at 6:49:57 AM
You wrote:
PVN Hi The,
PVN Some day you will experience circumstances that change your mind.
PVN Until then please continue using Thunderbird and allow TB to be what
PVN it was designed to be...a very powerful _and_ secure email
Hello Ethan,
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
EJM I must confess, however, I'm worried. I am waiting for the latest
EJM release of the new beta to really understand where the changes in
EJM development, reduction in bugs and stability of the product are
EJM going.
EJM I
Paul Van Noord wrote:
TFC 3. peers? show me some and your sources
Eudora, OE, Outlook, etc.
I don't think Thunderbird reaches anywhere near the level of bloat and
unusability of any of these. Outhouse and Outhouse Express especially
are in a class of their own when it comes to bloat and security
Hello Paul,
Friday, February 25, 2005, 10:41:07 AM, you wrote:
PVN Amen! Very well put and expresses my opinion exactly! If formatting is
PVN necessary, create a PDF and send as an attachment.
Even though I have told them manier times, some (of the world's biggest
insurance) companies keep on
Hello The,
A reminder of what The Final Cut on TBBETA typed on:
25 February 2005 at 12:37:15 GMT +0100
TFC You must be kidding to think ppl would have to switch to another
TFC email client if thebat download images from web
Must I? Why not ask them!
Your new to this list so you don't
Paul Van Noord wrote:
Also, its editor is primitive compared to MicroEd.
I'll agree wholeheartedly with that. MicroEd is far and away the think I
miss most about TB! However, simply being able to receive my mail is
considerably more important than the editor.
DG I do like TBird's *optional*
Paul Van Noord wrote:
On 2/25/2005 The Final Cut wrote:
TFC 3. peers? show me some and your sources
Eudora, OE, Outlook, etc.
Eudora MAYBE. Remotely. OE and Outlook no way!
--
Dave Calvarese
PGP Key Available at http://home.comcast.net/~dhcalva/DavidCalvarese-dh.asc
signature.asc
Hello Tony,
I could have replied to other messages, so there's no reason to feel singled
out! :-)
Friday, February 25, 2005, 3:10:46 PM, you wrote:
TB Your new to this list so you don't know the past 4 years history of this
subject.
Well, I must admit, I'm only here for some 2 years and 2
Hello Mark!
On Friday, February 25, 2005, 9:30 AM, you wrote:
Mark And at the end of another day of nice driving in their beloved
Mark old car, all went to sleep in their bed.
Mark Not without opening the doors of their car of course! :-)
LOL But! As was pointed out in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
if
Hello Paul,
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PVN As long as software developers and camera makers insist on
PVN defaulting to total bloat this problem will exist.
Software yes but camera makers? I don't think so. When I take a picture
I waht the highest qualitiy possible
Hello Paul,
Friday, February 25, 2005, 4:48:41 PM, you wrote:
PVN I'm curious.
You'll have to stay in that state until after the WE.
I (probably) won't be able to reply to you and/or others for the next three
days.
I'm off to play a pig! The one that plays it safe and builds his house
with
Paul Van Noord wrote:
On 2/25/2005 Richard Wakeford wrote:
A 1600x1200 picture reduced to 320x240 for viewing in a newsletter
will look worse than the same picture taken at 640x480. Why waste the
resources for an inferior product?
Then go buy a sub 1 MP camera. I prefer to take better
Hello Paul,
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 you wrote in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
PVN A 1600x1200 picture reduced to 320x240 for viewing in a newsletter
PVN will look worse than the same picture taken at 640x480. Why waste the
PVN resources for an inferior product?
Because I keep the pictures (in this case
Hello Tony,
On Fri, 25 Feb 2005 08:29:32 + GMT (25/02/2005, 15:29 +0700 GMT),
Tony Boom wrote:
TB Nothing to do with closed minds. Most people on here chose TB!
TB specifically because of it's inability to handle html. You go changing
TB that and everyone will have to find another client.
Paul Van Noord wrote:
I'm curious. What do you say to the people who have a dead 2 year-old
who strangled himself by pressing the up button on the window with his
knee because his dad forgot to set the window lock?
First I'd ask why the 2 year old wasn't secured in a child seat while
the car was
Dave Gorman wrote:
Paul Van Noord wrote:
We're simply talking about building software that will allow the end
user options as to how best the software can suit his/her needs. We're
talking about letting the end user have the control, instead of the
software manufacturer taking on a
Quoting Dave Gorman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
---snipped--
Granted, there are many end users who will not know the
ramifications of
their choices. Buy why should my computing experience be
diminished or
made more inconvenient for no reason other than to
Paul Van Noord wrote:
2/25/2005 2:25 PM
Hi David,
Conversely, POCO is missing much of TB's functionality and has had
perpetual stability issues.
I can't recall ever having a stability problem with Poco. Yes, Poco
might be missing a lot of the advanced features... But it at least has
all
Hello David,
A reminder of what David Calvarese on TBBETA typed on:
25 February 2005 at 19:39:29 GMT +0100
DC Someone on this list called Pocomail a 'child's toy', but it's a child's
DC toy that has basic functionality that TB! is currently lacking
And the reason TB is lacking it is
Hello Dennis,
A reminder of what Dennis Hays on TBBETA typed on:
25 February 2005 at 19:44:31 GMT +0100
DH I don't think most of us looked at
DH this product because of its fine HTML viewer.
When I first started using The Bat it didn't even have a html viewer at
all. Plain text was all it
Hello David,
A reminder of what David Calvarese on TBBETA typed on:
25 February 2005 at 20:39:45 GMT +0100
DC Poco might be missing a lot of the advanced features... But it at least
DC has all the basics
So has a pencil and paper.
What fascinates me is all these newcomers come on here
Tony Boom wrote:
And the reason TB is lacking it is because it's taken us years of
campaigning to keep it that way.
I don't see why your so adamant to get full html support. You keep
comparing TB to all these other email clients, if they're that good and do
what you want then use one
Tony Boom wrote:
If TB! doesn't do what they want it to do and Poco or Thunderbird does then
use that and join the relevant list and you can send html all day long
without anyone moaning!
Never said I wanted to send HTML email, I'm quite happy with text. I
just want to be able to read it
Tony Boom wrote:
What fascinates me is all these newcomers come on here singing the praises
of all these other crap email clients but they still want to use The Bat,
why?
If TB! doesn't do what they want it to do and Poco or Thunderbird does then
use that and join the relevant list and you can
On Friday, February 25, 2005, 2:06:18 PM, David Calvarese wrote:
I just want to be able to read it right when I choose to. I get a
few newsletters that are not available as text only and that TB!
just horribly mangled.
I also get lots of HTML newsletters, but never seen one mangled, let
Hello David,
A reminder of what David Calvarese on TBBETA typed on:
25 February 2005 at 21:00:28 GMT +0100
DC Because most of the other clients are crappy otherwise.
Then stop trying to turn The Bat into an otherwise crappy client.
DC :) And at the moment, I AM using Thunderbird and not
DC Because TB! has at least 1 problem with GnuPG that I can't get around.
No, it doesn't, you may have a problem but you can get around it.
It won't let you select multiple keys to encrypt to with GnuPG. There
are ways around it, setting up groups in the gpg.conf file, or using a
3rd party
Hello David,
A reminder of what David Calvarese on TBBETA typed on:
25 February 2005 at 21:07:09 GMT +0100
DC Never said I wanted to send HTML email, I'm quite happy with text.
OK, my apologies.
DC I just want to be able to read it right when I choose to. I get a few
DC newsletters that
Hello David,
A reminder of what David Calvarese on TBBETA typed on:
25 February 2005 at 21:30:23 GMT +0100
DC but I shouldn't have to.
Why? If you need a tool to do a job then why shouldn't you use it if it
does what you want it to do?
I have a vacuum cleaner that cleans the carpet but
Tony Boom wrote:
Sorry David and that other chap with the illegal copy of TB! but for the
sake of a few mouse clicks to get exactly what you want I don't see the
point in ruining a perfectly good email program.
Oh, I don't mind the double click all that much, it'd be annoying if I
had a lot
Tony Boom wrote:
DC but I shouldn't have to.
Why? If you need a tool to do a job then why shouldn't you use it if it
does what you want it to do?
I have a vacuum cleaner that cleans the carpet but I still have to push it
up and down... But I shouldn't have to should I?
They make
Hello David,
A reminder of what David Calvarese on TBBETA typed on:
25 February 2005 at 21:54:55 GMT +0100
DC They make Vacum cleaners that are self-propelled that you don't have to
DC push. They also advertise themselves as 'Self Propelled'. Same with
DC lawn mowers.
Plug their self in,
Tony Boom wrote:
Hello David,
Plug their self in, recharge themselves, cut the grass, hoover the carpet
and then empty their selves as well do they? Wow! need to get me one of
those :)
Funny you should mention that, there are both Vacums and lawn mowers
that do that...
DC If TB! would get
On Friday, February 25, 2005, 19:42, Dennis Hays wrote:
What we all have in common, on this list, are the reasons we
originally came to TB! And, from a marketing point of view, these have
to be respected. I don't think most of us looked at this product
because of its fine HTML viewer.
When
Hello David,
A reminder of what David Calvarese on TBBETA typed on:
25 February 2005 at 22:16:21 GMT +0100
DC Funny you should mention that, there are both Vacums and lawn mowers
DC that do that...
They can reach that high can they, have you seen the size of my wheelie
bin?
What about
Hi Dave Gorman,
On 25/2/2005 9:14 AM, you wrote:
I see your point. But on the other hand, these same neophyts could open
the same email in their browser with the same results. Plus, TBird's
display of HTML emails *without* remote images is still far superior and
more readable than TB!'s
Hi Mary Bull,
On 25/2/2005 10:44 AM, you wrote:
LOL But! As was pointed out in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] if the capability is
there, someone outside can force you to roll down the window. All
the same, an apt analogy, Mark.
I wonder who that would be. Mary, I'm happily using Thunderbird here
Hi Tony Boom,
On 25/2/2005 3:37 PM, you wrote:
Have you ever thought to double click the html attachment to see what
happens? Oh look, the browser opens and there's your html newsletter
complete with all those pretty pictures... Don't tell me your too lazy to
double click a mouse button?
Oh
Hello Tony,
On Friday, February 25, 2005 you wrote:
Nothing to do with closed minds. Most people on here chose TB!
specifically because of it's inability to handle html.
Having read this sentence, I don't know: should I laugh or should I
cry? Believe me, I, and many others, didn't
Hi Tony,
On 25/2/2005 3:25 PM, you wrote:
In that case join a thunderbird list and don't come on here saying
Thunderbird can do this and Thunderbird can do that. If html is
THE ONLY thing The Bat can't do compared to all the others then
bugger off and tell the Thunderbird list that.
I'm
Hello Krzysztof Trybowski
On Friday, February 25, 2005, at 7:53:27 PM
You wrote:
KT Having read this sentence, I don't know: should I laugh or should I
KT cry? Believe me, I, and many others, didn't choose TB because of its
KT inability to display HTML (which was, BTW, on a TO-DO list
Hello AC Martin
On Friday, February 25, 2005, at 7:58:29 PM
You wrote:
AM I'm using ThunderBird primarily. However, I'd much *prefer* using TB!
AM for a lot of reasons. While using ThunderBird, I've encountered
AM interesting features and approaches. Why not suggest them, especially
AM if I'm
Hello Allie!
On Friday, February 25, 2005, 6:42 PM, you wrote:
LOL But! As was pointed out in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] if the capability is
there, someone outside can force you to roll down the window. All
the same, an apt analogy, Mark.
I wonder who that would be. Mary, ...
Well, I was
Hi Paul Van Noord,
On 25/2/2005 8:18 PM, you wrote:
Speak for yourself. Those I work with are using Opera and have some
instruction in responsible internet usage. It in their ignorance that
most problems occur. In a majority of cases the images in the HTML
messages I receive are superfluous
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
- -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi The,
on Thu, 24 Feb 2005 15:50:18 -0500GMT, you wrote:
TFC I hope I'm asking to the right list, but I'd like to know
TFC if some of you are agree with this wishlist
TFC
Hello Peter Meyns
On 24 février 2005 at 22:18:20GMT +0100 (which was 16:18 where I live)
Peter Meyns [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
PM I don't. Use a browser if you need content that wasn't sent along with
PM the message. The Bat! is an email client, not a browser. And I don't
PM want her to be.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Cees
On 24 février 2005 at 22:34:18GMT +0100 (which was 16:34 where I live)
Cees [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
C AMEN to that!
C If you want THAT kinda crap... use that bitch that's called Outlook Express!
C Let's keep TheBat! the decent
Hello The,
On Thursday, February 24, 2005 you wrote:
This is a great idea to compete with thunderbird and any email
clients that actually download images from website
If I put thunderbird as exemple, you can choose to download
images from address you have in personnal address book or in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello Krzysztof Trybowski
On 24 février 2005 at 23:29:14GMT +0100 (which was 17:29 where I live)
Krzysztof Trybowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
KT I absolutely agree. This will perhaps happen one day. The only pain
KT is, if it will be done in
101 - 173 of 173 matches
Mail list logo
