Hello Samson,
Monday, May 3, 2004, 8:20:06 PM, Samson wrote:
>> BTW, can't you set Agent to wrap lines at 72 characters or so?
>> It is
>> not easy to read your messages.
S> is it ok now? and this shows thebat's line wrapping needs to be
S> improved :)
Not necessarily. It could be the window s
viernes, 30 abr 2004 at 07:32, it seems you wrote:
> my account setting is to keep attachment in message body (not a
> separate file). however i found the
> file size displayed in the mail sidebar never matches the actual size when the file
> is saved to
> disk. for example, i now have a file whi
A member of the Spanish TBUDL have reported TB! takes always the EML
files even if you haven't associated TB! with EML files in the TB!
Preferences.
--
/\/
/ \ / \ /
/\/ e t \/ i c i o u s
Moderator of Spanish TB
Hello NetVicious,
> A member of the Spanish TBUDL have reported TB! takes always the EML
> files even if you haven't associated TB! with EML files in the TB!
> Preferences.
That may be because EML file type is still associated with TB (i.e. no
other program has associated EML with it). Open Windo
>You can do that with VFs, why not use one instead of search tool?
That's exactly my point of the word "decent". since this feature is already nicely
implemented in
VF, I would natually hope the same functionality (or even more powerful) to be done in
"search
dialog". Otherwise it is very inconv
>GS> What is wrong with "[EMAIL PROTECTED]&class" for "Search for" and select
>"subject" and "sender"
>GS> for scope?
>
>Because I don't know it was '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' I only know his name was
>'John Doe' and the subject contained 'class'.
The other point is that if i type "john & class" in text
>It should be the clustering waste space.
Thanks but I don't really think that is the reason. I understand the difference
between "actual file
size" and "disk space occupied". in my example, the size I observed from windows file
property is
79,974, which is not even a even KB, and I'm sure it is
martes, 4 may 2004 at 00:21, it seems you wrote:
> Thanks but I don't really think that is the reason. I understand
> the difference between "actual file
> size" and "disk space occupied". in my example, the size I
> observed from windows file property is
> 79,974, which is not even a even KB, and
> Are you using IMAP or POP3. Pop3 it's being used here.
both. the problem was first found on my pop3 account. then i just (2 min ago) tried to
save an
attachment from my imap account to windows desktop. it shows 89,567 bytes in thebat
window but after
saved, windows shows 89,625 bytes.
however
Hello Samson,
> or leave a "live" VF as "use for everyday search" and keep modifying its
> properties every
> time i need. Both are not the "right" thing to do.
I agree with you the Search Tool can be improved but, since we have VFs
now I assume it is not of high priority. I use a "live" VF for m
Hello MAU,
Monday, May 3, 2004, 1:37:33 PM, MAU wrote:
>> The VFs pretty much replace the Bookmark feature with VA.
M> Not completely though. I still wish wish I could flag (assign to colour
M> group) a message as "For Reply" .AND. "Important" .AND. "For Reference",
M> if you now what I mean.
N
> I agree with you the Search Tool can be improved but, since we have VFs
> now I assume it is not of high priority. I use a "live" VF for most of
> my searches now.
alright, i agree it is a temporary solution so far. at least better
than none :)
>
> BTW, can't you set Agent to wrap lines at 72
Hello Greg,
> The VFs pretty much replace the Bookmark feature with VA.
Not completely though. I still wish wish I could flag (assign to colour
group) a message as "For Reply" .AND. "Important" .AND. "For Reference",
if you now what I mean.
--
Best regards,
Miguel A. Urech (El Escorial - Spain
Hello Januk,
> I meant a feature for the *receiver* in case they disagree with the
> sender's opinion of where a message should be threaded. I have no
> idea how such a feature should work, or even if it could work in
> practice, but in very abstract theory, it would be nice.
While I wait for su
Hello Januk,
On Monday, May 3, 2004 at 10:02:11 AM you [JA] wrote (at least in
part):
IAW>> Maybe TB! needs to have a function where when someone replies to a
IAW>> thread but then changes the subject, on saving or trying to send, the
IAW>> program starts this as a new message rather than a reply
Hello Thomas,
Chemists convened on Monday, May 3, 2004 at 20:21 GMT +0700 to watch
Thomas Fernandez synthesize:
> We're a philosophical bunch when there are no betas to dissect. ;-)
^^
I think you can omit
Hello Zeflash,
On Mon, 3 May 2004 14:38:33 +0200 GMT (03/05/2004, 19:38 +0700 GMT),
Zeflash wrote:
Z> OK. I didn't know my mail would trigger such a general debate about
Z> the position of TheBat in the mail industry :)
We're a philosophical bunch when there are no betas to dissect. ;-)
Z> I'll
17 matches
Mail list logo
