-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
'Lo Allie,
On Sun, 27 Oct 2002 21:38:28 -0500 your time, you authored this:
ACM Since you posted your findings to this list, I thought your p snip
ACM I've always replied with TB! as my ...
Yeah, if you really say so Allie. :-/ What I've posted I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
'Lo Peter,
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 08:35:54 +0100 your time, you authored this:
PP Form my PoV it didn't came out very clearly the 'uncatched' mails
PP contained no viruses but 'only exploits', especially that The Bat! ain't
PP vulnerable to
Hello Simon, Allie, others following this important thread.
It seems to me that Simon and Allie are basing their positions on
two different principles or givens, which are always correct by
definition. That's what produces a stalemate, in absolute terms. In
relative terms, each of us can decide
hey gang,
I finally got my wife to try TB !
Now, all I need is her OL folders. I was able to import her addressbook.
The birthday field was a NO-NO, after the import, when I tried to modify
any entry I got an error message about date code invalid. Re-import with
no BIRTHDAY field and it is fine.
On Monday, October 28, 2002, 10:09 AM, you wrote:
DH Hello Simon, Allie, others following this important thread.
DH It seems to me that Simon and Allie are basing their positions on
DH two different principles or givens, which are always correct by
DH definition. That's what produces a
Replying to your message of Monday, October 28, 2002, 8:17:46 AM:
PC who has the latest, best-easiest method to import Outlook folders???
Good luck,
I have been trying to get a client over to TB! but it hasn't worked yet.
Too many crashes trying to get old messages imported he says.
Let us
Inadvertently, I had two AB entries for the same person. One was
under group A, it had a middle initial, and no nickname/handle. The
other was under group B [same AB], no middle initial, different email
choices, and a handle. I deleted the entry under group B (selecting
no when the incredibly
Hey Paul,
My MUA believes 'The Bat! (v1.62/Beta7) Personal' was used
to write mid:11959072812.20021028101746;pcartwright.com
on Monday, October 28, 2002 at 10:17:46 AM.
PC who has the latest, best-easiest method to import Outlook
PC folders???
Looking for the same thing myself. I know TB has an
Hello Paul,
On Monday, October 28, 2002, 9:30:07 AM, you wrote:
PC and a fourth- if you don't keep ANY anti-virus package up-to-date it is
PC almost worthless. I have used many PCs where the virus definitions are
PC over 1 year old. THEY think they are protected!
PC and lets not forget
Paul-
Monday, October 28, 2002, 7:17:46 AM, you wrote:
PC hey gang,
PC I finally got my wife to try TB !
PC Now, all I need is her OL folders. I was able to import her addressbook.
PC The birthday field was a NO-NO, after the import, when I tried to modify
PC any entry I got an error message
Hi all,
On Monday, October 28, 2002 10:30 your local time, which was 07:30 my
local time, Paul Cartwright [PC] wrote;
DH Hello Simon, Allie, others following this important thread.
DH It seems to me that Simon and Allie are basing their positions on
DH two different principles or givens, which
Hallo Joseph,
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 10:22:13 -0600GMT (28-10-02, 17:22 +0100GMT, where
I live), you wrote:
JN I have closed the AB and reopened it, and still cannot add
JN the handle.
Did you close TB too? Just an idea.
--
Groetjes, Roelof
On Monday, October 28, 2002, Roelof Otten wrote in
mid:14932526056.20021028182741;krakeel.org:
RO Did you close TB too? Just an idea.
Roelof,
No, but in doing so now, I found the problem: operator error. Although
I had clicked no, when TB! asked me whether I want to delete only
the items
On Monday, October 28, 2002, 11:25 AM, you wrote:
PC who has the latest, best-easiest method to import Outlook
PC folders???
TM Looking for the same thing myself. I know TB has an option
TM (Tools\Import Messages\Mailbox Import Wizard...\Microsoft Outlook),
TM but it crashed each time I tried.
On Monday, October 28, 2002, 11:21 AM, you wrote:
DH Hello Paul,
DH On Monday, October 28, 2002, 9:30:07 AM, you wrote:
PC and a fourth- if you don't keep ANY anti-virus package up-to-date it is
PC almost worthless. I have used many PCs where the virus definitions are
PC over 1 year old. THEY
This is not intended to start a discussion of HTML. It is not about
HTML, nor big bandwidth mailings, nor UCE. It is about simple
formatting conventions which go beyond plain text but stop well short
of what many of us dislike about HTML email.
What, either in terms of technical issues or design
Replying to your message of Monday, October 28, 2002, 12:38:35 PM:
JN from allowing bullets, italics, underlines, and bold?
Isn't that better served by Word or such? Send it as an attached file.
That is what I do if I need to send something along them lines.
Just my thoughts.
--
Pete
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday, October 28, 2002, Joseph N. wrote...
This is not intended to start a discussion of HTML. It is not about
HTML, nor big bandwidth mailings, nor UCE. It is about simple
formatting conventions which go beyond plain text but stop well short
On Monday, October 28, 2002, Pete Milne wrote in
mid:92276533584.20021028124303;milneweb.com:
JN from allowing bullets, italics, underlines, and bold?
PM Isn't that better served by Word or such? Send it as an attached file.
Pete,
Sometimes an attached file is fine, and the current design
On Monday, October 28, 2002, Jonathan Angliss wrote in
mid:19517308906.20021028134354;certiflexdimension.com:
JA Would you mean like the enchanced-text/rich text mode?
Yes.
--
JN
Current version is 1.61 | Using TBUDL information:
Joseph-
Monday, October 28, 2002, 11:38:35 AM, you wrote:
JN What, either in terms of technical issues or design philosophy, would
JN prevent TB! from allowing bullets, italics, underlines, and bold? In
JN other words, why not go a little bit toward more functionality and
JN more complex
Hello Jonathan,
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 13:43:54 -0600 GMT (29/10/02, 02:43 +0700 GMT),
Jonathan Angliss wrote:
Would you mean like the enchanced-text/rich text mode? I guess there
is nothing stopping RitLabs from creating such a feature,
There are many wishes for this.
There has been
Hi Paul,
on Mon, 28 Oct 2002 12:59:19 -0500GMT (28.10.02, 18:59 +0100GMT here),
you wrote in mid:16168766531.20021028125919;pcartwright.com :
TM What I have heard, is you can export from OL to OE
PC not sure i want to mess with OE, but I may fool with it tomorrow... I'll
PC check the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Monday, October 28, 2002, Thomas Fernandez wrote...
Would you mean like the enchanced-text/rich text mode? I guess
there is nothing stopping RitLabs from creating such a feature,
There are many wishes for this.
I semi agree... the only use
Mark,
On Monday, October 28, 2002, Mark Wieder wrote in
mid:6813457140.20021028121304;ahsoftware.net:
MW There are several centuries worth of literature that prove the point
MW that not only does text mode not need RTF or HTML formatting, but that
MW often simple text can get the point across
On Monday, October 28, 2002, Jonathan Angliss wrote in
mid:6020249812.20021028143255;certiflexdimension.com:
JA I've seen some people specifying fonts that look 'cool' on their
JA computer, but just didn't have the same desired affect on mine.
I agree. That's one reason to restrict any
On Monday, October 28, 2002, 3:28 PM, you wrote:
PM I can confirm that importing messages from OE wasn't any problem at all,
PM although I don't remember the exact procedure... So if you can transfer
PM your Outlook messages to OE, you should be fine. (I have never used
PM Outlook, so I don't
On Monday, October 28, 2002, 3:13 PM, you wrote:
MW Joseph-
MW Monday, October 28, 2002, 11:38:35 AM, you wrote:
JN What, either in terms of technical issues or design philosophy, would
JN prevent TB! from allowing bullets, italics, underlines, and bold? In
JN other words, why not go a little
On Monday, October 28, 2002, Joseph N. wrote:
J Well, although that's not really my experience, I don't think there's
J any harm in seeing a communication that looks the way the sender
J intended.
Aside from the philosophical and practical arguments about who should
have more over the way things
On Monday, October 28, 2002, 4:17 PM, you wrote:
PC On Monday, October 28, 2002, 3:28 PM, you wrote:
PM I can confirm that importing messages from OE wasn't any problem at all,
PM although I don't remember the exact procedure... So if you can transfer
PM your Outlook messages to OE, you
Hello Mark,
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 at 12:13:04[GMT -0800](which was 20:13 where I
live) you wrote:
MW * I can also even *emphasize* certain words, or quote them. If
MW necessary, I can even SHOUT.
Yes but, if Joseph's wishes were acceded to, your *emphasize* would
actually show as bold font. No
Richard-
Monday, October 28, 2002, 2:03:29 PM, you wrote:
RW Yes but, if Joseph's wishes were acceded to, your *emphasize* would
RW actually show as bold font. No colours or anything fancy needed, just
RW the capability to have bold, italic etc as my newsreader Ameol already
RW does.
Ah... so
On Monday, October 28, 2002, Mark Wieder wrote in
mid:18721360364.20021028142447;ahsoftware.net:
MW Ah... so nothing else would be transmitted, but the email client
MW would simply interpret the received text if the proper hints were
MW present... that's something quite different from RTF.
Hello Richard,
Monday, October 28, 2002, 10:03:29 PM, you wrote:
MW * I can also even *emphasize* certain words, or quote them.
MW If necessary, I can even SHOUT.
RW Yes but, if Joseph's wishes were acceded to, your *emphasize*
RW would actually show as bold font. No colours or anything fancy
Joseph-
Monday, October 28, 2002, 12:55:14 PM, you wrote:
JN There might be some decisions that need to be made, but that doesn't
JN turn it into a slipper slope, nor does it have anything to do with
JN HTML. Appearance is not the biggest problem with HTML, and I agree
JN that HTML is not the
On Monday, October 28, 2002, Mark Wieder wrote in
mid:17023324829.20021028145731;ahsoftware.net:
MW Actually, I think it's exactly this thinking that led M$
MW eventually to the executable attachments in Lookout. Folks
MW brainstormed about more and more features they'd like to see in
MW email
Hello Joseph,
What I did mean is what, I believe, is generally referred to as
enriched text, and you paraphrased it well in the excerpt above.
Wether it is called RTF or enriched text I would not use it. But I'm
with you. Why not include the option? Specially when TB already
includes a Rich
Monday, October 28, 2002, 12:55:14 PM, you wrote:
JN There might be some decisions that need to be made, but that doesn't
JN turn it into a slipper slope, nor does it have anything to do with
JN HTML. Appearance is not the biggest problem with HTML, and I agree
JN that HTML is not the way to
On Mon, 28-Oct-2002 17:54 [GMT-0500]
myob [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello Richard,
Monday, October 28, 2002, 10:03:29 PM, you wrote:
* I can also even *emphasize* certain words, or quote them.
If necessary, I can even SHOUT.
Yes but, if Joseph's wishes were acceded to, your *emphasize*
Monday, 10/28/2002, 5:37 PM
Hi Mark,
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002, at 12:13:04 [GMT -0800] (which was 12:13 PM where I live)
you wrote about: 'RTF'
MW There are several centuries worth of literature that prove the point
MW that not only does text mode not need RTF or HTML formatting, but that
MW often
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In mid:11530922880.20021028164613;qwest.net,
Joseph N. [JN] wrote:'
JN I don't know if you misunderstood my intent or if I misstated
JN the subject. I really should not have mentioned RTF, which is a
JN MS format. What I did mean is what, I believe,
On Monday, October 28, 2002, Allie C Martin wrote in
mid:122307102960.20021028211108;landscreek.net:
JN I don't know if you misunderstood my intent or if I misstated
JN the subject. I really should not have mentioned RTF, which is a
JN MS format. What I did mean is what, I believe, is
On Monday, October 28, 2002, Alec Burgess wrote in
mid:019f01c27eea$cc1b1850$3a5232d1;bur2Kdns:
As does *Outlook Express* with /OE-QuoteFix/ ;-)
I thought _theBat_ did this too (I'm not using it yet). From this
conversation I gather it does *NOT* ?
Alec,
Correct, TB! cannot compose with
Joseph-
Monday, October 28, 2002, 3:14:37 PM, you wrote:
JN (I know I really oughta let this slide) Do you really think, I
JN mean, inside your head do you really really think, that providing for
JN a limited set of universally used typographical conventions is the
JN same thing as providing
Hi Paul!
In message mid:11959072812.20021028101746;pcartwright.com
on Monday, October 28, 2002, 9:17:46 AM, you wrote:
PC who has the latest, best-easiest method to import Outlook folders???
I just email them to myself; that way I get all the headers, aside
from the Received: headers, which
Joseph-
Monday, October 28, 2002, 2:46:13 PM, you wrote:
JNOn Monday, October 28, 2002, Mark Wieder wrote in
JN mid:18721360364.20021028142447;ahsoftware.net:
MW Ah... so nothing else would be transmitted, but the email client
MW would simply interpret the received text if the proper hints
Mark,
On Monday, October 28, 2002, Mark Wieder wrote in
mid:16338069661.20021028190316;ahsoftware.net:
MW You may want just bold and underlining. Someone else may want
MW tables. Yet another may want to embed a spreadsheet (I have a
MW client who steadfastly refuses to move from Outlook
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
In mid:1659073.20021028203148;qwest.net,
Joseph N. [JN] wrote:'
JN I wonder if the reason is commercial or technical. That is, has
JN HTML become so popular because it offers the sellers of the
JN world more billboard space, or is it that there
Hello Paul,
On Mon, 28 Oct 2002 16:17:40 -0500 GMT (29/10/02, 04:17 +0700 GMT),
Paul Cartwright wrote:
I can confirm that importing messages from OL IS a problem. The mail
import wizard crashes after every folder is imported. SO, my sequence
for importing mail from OL
is:
start wizard,
49 matches
Mail list logo
