Re: Blue Lines
On 1/24/07, danger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Mike, Wednesday, January 24, 2007, 12:08:36 PM, you wrote: MG A friend sent me an email that he asked me to edit and return to him. MG When I hit reply, I get his text with a thick blue line to the MG left, and it's nearly impossible to edit what he sent me in any coherent way. If you want to retain your HTML receiving/sending settings, you could always copy paste the content of his email into a text editor, make necessary modifications, then copy paste into an email back to your friend. -- Dave Current version is 3.95.06 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Blue Lines
On 1/24/07, danger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have you considered either having him remove outlook from his computer? I would heartily support any suggestions to remove outhouse from any computer! -- Dave Current version is 3.95.06 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Google Mail
On 12/4/06, Roland Burger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have problems with my new account Google Mail. I don't get mails and I cannot send mails. Does anyone have the right settings for me by private mail? Unfortunately Google Mail don't have the settings for TheBat! I found the settings here ( https://mail.google.com/support/bin/answer.py?answer=13287query=pop3topic=type=fctx=search) sufficient for setting up my gmail account in TB! -- Dave Current version is 3.85.03 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Google Mail
On 12/4/06, Roland Burger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I get further on FETCH-Server not within reach! I also don't find for the pop-server the possibility to set SSL! In TB! it's called TLS. Does this screenshot help? http://www.dave31175.com/gmail.gif -- Dave Current version is 3.85.03 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Google Mail
On 12/4/06, Roland Burger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks Dave! I have now tried to send a message from my Google Mail account to an other account of me and I get: Unknown CA Certificate The server didn't provide a root certificate during the session, and there is no corresponding root certificate in your address book. This connection may not be secure. Please contact your server administrator. I don't use Google for SMTP so I'm sorry I'm unable to help with that issue. -- Dave Current version is 3.85.03 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Why is The Bat's mail being rejected?
On 10/25/06, Joe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Carnak...er...Chris, to further challenge your psychic powers, how do you think BellSouth will respond? Tell me to take a hike? Offer to issue me a new IP, with no guarantee that it'll be any better? Tell me to contact SORBS, et. al? What? :) It's not your IP address that is causing the problem, it is the IP address of their server. I have no experience with BellSouth's tech support, but it seems to me it would certainly be in their best interest to make every effort to get their IP address delisted. -- Dave Current version is 3.85.03 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: messages
On 8/9/06, Ariane Furer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear Sirs, Please stop all the messages. I received to much messages, I dont want it. You subscribed yourself to a mailing list. If you don't want to be on the list, please unsubscribe yourself by going to this link: http://stromgrade.its-toasted.org/mailman/listinfo/tbudl and looking for the text near the bottom of the page that says To unsubscribe from TBUDL... -- Dave Current version is 3.80.06 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: ISP's Blocking TheBat
On 7/12/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've recently had a couple of emails blocked from two different ISP's who claim The Bat is a known spammer. Of course I know this is bull, and I forwarded the info at Ritlabs on the subject to their IT Dept's to no avail. Can I use a filter to change the x-mail header when I send an email to these two people who use these ISP's? I know under Options / Preferences / General, you can uncheck Use X-Mailer Header in Messages to remove it altogether. Perhaps others will know whether you can remove it on a per recipient basis. -- Dave Current version is 3.80.06 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I tried to like The Bat!, really
--On Thursday, July 28, 2005 13:57 +0200 Vili [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: DG 1) On one account, after unsubscribing from the only mailbox that had new DG messages, the account's unread message count didn't change (I guess this DG isn't quite a showstopper, but it certainly is annoying). You did not syncronize the local and server mailbox. This is basic functionality. I shouldn't have to go out of my way and do anything special to tell my mail client to update the unread message count. It should just happen. DG 2) Using server-side filtering, TB! still doesn't know I have new messages DG in folders until I've selected those folders. (Maybe there is a way around DG this, but I shouldn't have to go out of my way to have my mail client check DG for new messages...) ??? If you KNOW, UNDERSTAND, what IMAP is, you should know, that the mailbox's info should be read to get the correct info. So, setup automatic checking of mailboxes. Again, basic functionality. I shouldn't have to tinker around with various options to make my mail client check for new mail. It should just happen. DG I haven't spent any time playing around with IMAP Fine Tune options or DG anything else because I shouldn't have to. Ok. So, you buy a car, and you dont worry about what kind of fuel you use, what kind of tire pressure you have, etc. I buy a car. I check the tire pressure and make sure the gas tank is full (with my mail client I give it IMAP/SMTP server names, usernames, passwords). I can then start the engine and reasonably expect to drive to my destination. If I bought a car and was required to open the hood and modify tubes, levers, and gadgets in the engine before I could drive the car to my destination, I would return to the place where I bought the car and tell them it doesn't work and I want my money back. I DID download Mulberry and tried. Man, that has a lot of settings also. It sure does! However, after I installed Mulberry, I set up my accounts, and then before I looked at *anything else* in the preferences and options, I was informed of my unread messages and was able to read the (correct) messages as I selected them. In fact this has been the case with *every* IMAP-capable client I've tried, except TB. My gripe isn't that TB is incapable of providing basic functionality. My gripe is that it won't provide that functionality until I've fussed around trying to figure out which magical combination of checkboxes need to be selected in order to *force* it to provide basic functionality. Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I tried to like The Bat!, really
--On Thursday, July 28, 2005 10:35 -0500 Mary Bull [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Re-write is in progress, per 9Val on TBBETA. I realize that. I'll check back in a few months to see how things are looking. Maybe someday I'll be able to return to my true love, TB :) (...although I've been saying that for 2 years!) Do run a client that meets your needs, please, for now. But, stay in touch? Of course ;) I'll still be around on TBOT, although presently I have no hope whatsoever of keeping up with the deluge of traffic there! -- Dave Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
how long to unsubscribe?
Yesterday I sent TBBETA TBUDL unsubscribe requests to the address in the headers. I am still receiving list mail. How long does it usually take for unsubscribe requests to be completed? -- Dave Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: how long to unsubscribe?
--On Wednesday, July 27, 2005 12:01 +0100 Marck D Pearlstone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you have a rampant spam engine at work protecting you from things it thinks you don't need, you may not have seen the confirm messages. That could be it... I'll check my spamcatcher folder. Thanks! -- Dave Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
I tried to like The Bat!, really
So after months and months of watching TB!'s progress, waiting and hoping IMAP would become usable enough I could return to TB!, I decided yesterday that I would give up, unsub from the lists, and just stick to an old copy of TB! I have lying around for my one POP account (and the only reason I would need that is because TB! saves attachments to their own folder, a capability I haven't come across in other MUAs). But this morning I saw a message from Allie (aka ACM, aka Curtis, etc) on a non-Bat list recommending that people try out IMAP on the latest release version of TB! and that it had come a long ways (of course including a YMMV disclaimer). So I downloaded 3.51.10, fired it up, added two IMAP accounts, and right out of the box, 3 showstoppers: 1) On one account, after unsubscribing from the only mailbox that had new messages, the account's unread message count didn't change (I guess this isn't quite a showstopper, but it certainly is annoying). 2) Using server-side filtering, TB! still doesn't know I have new messages in folders until I've selected those folders. (Maybe there is a way around this, but I shouldn't have to go out of my way to have my mail client check for new messages...) 3) After deleting a few messages from a folder, selecting any message in the message list would display the incorrect message. (Again, perhaps there is a fix for this, but I shouldn't have to trick my mail client into showing me the currently selected message instead of randomly selecting a message to show me...) I haven't spent any time playing around with IMAP Fine Tune options or anything else because I shouldn't have to. A mail client's default settings should be sufficient to provide basic functionality. If I have to take extra time to try to figure out what default settings need to be changed in order to achieve basic functionality, something is just not right. I realize that IMAP issues are apparently supposed to be a high priority in the present beta series. However, I believe it has been two years since IMAP was initially implemented in TB! and it still doesn't have basic functionality out of the box! So, I've waited an extra day in order to give TB! another chance, but I think it's time now to simply give up on TB! and move on. I would still consider TB! to be a top notch POP client, but for IMAP needs, almost any other IMAP-capable MUA could exceed TB's performance. Before I unsub, I just want to thank the TBUDL TBBETA communities for all the help and assistance you have been over the years in answering questions, overcoming problems, and making my TB experience much better and more useful than it otherwise would have been. -- Dave Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Thinking about v3
Melissa Reese said the following on 03/07/2005 01:35: Is the current release version (non-beta) stable and fully functional? Are there any known issues that I should be aware of? As long as you don't need IMAP, you'll probably be OK. -- Dave Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Bat Archives
capocasa said the following on 02/15/2005 12:58: When I go to this address http://www.mail-archive.com/tbudl@thebat.dutaint.com/ to search for a subject the search button doesn't work. Seems to defeat the purpose. Am I missing something? Hmmm, if I type something in the Find box and hit Enter, it works fine. -- Dave Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Bat Archives
capocasa said the following on 02/15/2005 13:32: DG capocasa said the following on 02/15/2005 12:58: When I go to this address http://www.mail-archive.com/tbudl@thebat.dutaint.com/ to search for a subject the search button doesn't work. Seems to defeat the purpose. Am I missing something? DG Hmmm, if I type something in the Find box and hit Enter, it works fine. That's strange. I've tried both browsers, Mozilla and IE and the Find button in the archives is not linked. It's not a button, just a form field. Fill the field and hit the Enter key. -- Dave Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Bat Archives
capocasa said the following on 02/15/2005 13:50: DG capocasa said the following on 02/15/2005 13:32: DG capocasa said the following on 02/15/2005 12:58: When I go to this address That's strange. I've tried both browsers, Mozilla and IE and the Find button in the archives is not linked. DG It's not a button, just a form field. Fill the field and hit the Enter DG key. Thanks Dave, I'm redfaced! No need, it appeared that it should have been linked as a Submit hyperlink as search fields typically have a Submit button or link. -- Dave Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: I have returned
Chris Weaven said the following on 01/20/2005 10:52: If I were to be totally honest here, the only thing I'm really missing from TB! is templates. Working with Thunderbird and IMAP with server side filtering for a few months now has made me realise that I'm not as reliant on TB! as I thought I was. I'm using TBird's filtering, and while there are things I miss about TB!'s more advanced filtering, at least TBird's filtering works smoothly with IMAP, which last I tried TB!, the filtering with IMAP was very quirky and unreliable. So I would agree with missing templates, and also add that I very much miss MicroEd. Once IMAP works well, then I'm sure TB! will be my client of choice, but until then, I'm more than happy with Thunderbird. As Allie puts it so well, 'it works'. Ditto. Although IMAP will have to work as well or better than TBird in every respect before I'll go back. If basic IMAP functionality is inferior, it is not worth paying for even for templates/editor/etc. -- Dave Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Mod: Cut mark
Tony Boom wrote: Which is just one reason why I don't like Thunderbird. It completely quotes the WHOLE message regardless of what is highlighted True. and totally ignores sig delims. Works fine here, v1.0 on WinXP and v0.8 on Mandrake. Just be thankful you don't use IMAP or you'd be cursing The Bat! as vehemently as you're cursing TBird! For IMAP, TBird's 1.0 version is heads and shoulders above TB!'s 3.0 version. And as it is a young client, I'm sure many of the minor quirks will be worked out and major niceties will be added as time goes on. -- Dave Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: POPFile - selective use?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: DO you think I can install POPFile (again) but this time only have it proxying for some accounts and leave others to not be proxied? Wouldn't this be accomplished through your TB! mail account settings? The accounts you want to access through POPFile you would use 127.0.0.1 as your POP server with the appropriate username settings. The accounts you don't want to access through POPFile, you would set up to access the POP server directly. -- Dave Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: POPFile - selective use?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wouldn't this be accomplished through your TB! mail account settings? The accounts you want to access through POPFile you would use 127.0.0.1 as your POP server with the appropriate username settings. The accounts you don't want to access through POPFile, you would set up to access the POP server directly. Yes that's right, I was just checking that it's not going to screw something up if some are doing one thing and others another. I can't think of any reason it would screw anything up (although I've been wrong before...). I seem to recall having done this very thing when I was using POP accounts. -- Dave Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: [thebat] Re: v3.0 b1
Mark Partous wrote: DWG Does The Bat 3 still have the connection center malfunction? Don't have any problem with it. What's malfunctioning for you? I don't know what Deniss's problem with the CC is, but for me, if I abort/delete all tasks in the CC, I am unable to close TB as it says tasks are still active. Clicking Abort on the can't close dialog does no good and I'm forced to kill TB from Task Manager. -- Dave Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Version3 ?!
MAU wrote: I think I will stick with 2.12 and look for another client :( If you don't want to upgrade for whatever reason, I suggest you stay with 2.12 (bugs included). You are not going to find anything better out there at the moment. Maybe prettier, but not better. I second the motion, IF one is only using POP3. As an IMAP user, I'm just too frustrated with all the exception errors, spontaneous closing, doubling of messages, and flaky filtering/syncing to be able to recommend TB to any IMAP users. Of course there are some IMAP users whose experience is not as negative as mine, but as for myself, I'm already putting Thunderbird to the test. I'll sorely miss MicroEd and Templates, but everything else seems to very pleasantly be running smooth as silk in Thunderbird. -- Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: [thebat] Re: v3.0 b1
Alexander S. Kunz wrote: For me, proper formatting of text-only messages, including the ability to re-flow quotes, is very important, and neither Outlook nor Opera's M2 or AK-Mail or Thunderbird (haven't tried others) has any function like that of TB's ALT-L keyboard shortcut - I'm using it all the time. MicroEd and Templates are what I am already missing most about TB by moving to Thunderbird, but I've come to a point where those features are not sufficient for me to put up with TB's poor IMAP performance. -- Dave Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: [thebat] Re: v3.0 b1
Lynn wrote: M3 The best suggestion that I have heard is stay with M3 2.12. It works well enough for me (but I don't need M3 IMAP ... which was promised for 2 ... wasn't it? :-/ ) And has it improved with v3? I've tried at least 3 other IMAP clients which are supposed to be excellent, but if that's the case, I figure IMAP has a high vacuum rating ... I would hope TB could do better :-( I've decided I'm not even going to spend my money or time to find out if IMAP is any better on V3. I purchased the V2 upgrade a year ago for the promised fully-functioning IMAP support. Initially IMAP was quite unusable and I had to resort to other clients. Eventually I returned to TB when IMAP became somewhat usable. However, one year later with version 2.12, IMAP performance is unsatisfactory. Several times a day I get a parade of exception errors and have to kill TB from the task manager. Several times a day TB closes of it's own accord. When I reopen after either of these events, there are two copies of every message in every folder. I have to close and reopen TB to rectify that. There are numerous other annoyances and performance problems with IMAP. I had stuck it out thinking that surely the bugs would be worked out and v2 would prove eventually to be a stable IMAP client. However it never did. I've paid Ritlabs once for a functional IMAP client and never received it. I'm not going to pay again just on the hope that maybe someday it will be a good IMAP client. I'll stay subscribed to the lists and will keep watching TB. Maybe after some time I'll give v3 a try and see if has become an acceptable IMAP client, but for the time being I'm evaluating alternatives. -- Dave Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: (no subject)
Hello Mike, Thursday, July 29, 2004, 10:02:41 AM, you wrote: I can't seem to get IMAP emails to be deleted off the IMAP server. Is there an account feature I have missed that lets me do this?? Try: Folder / Purge+Compress -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: mail dispatcher fails
Hello Roelof, Thursday, July 29, 2004, 2:25:01 PM, you wrote: AM In the main window CTRL+Enter generates a reply message. AM In the editor CTRL+Enter sends the message. And that's a real bother, for if you keep it pressed too long or with a slight tremble your unedited reply gets sent. That's why I have Confirm Immediate Sending checked in the Account Properties! I was bitten too many times by the accidental sending bug! -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Word wrap problems
Hello Peter, Tuesday, July 27, 2004, 3:02:59 PM, you wrote: Would I be correct in assuming that MicroEd has huge potential for goofing up due to the great number of options avaulable? I'm not certain what you mean by potential for goofing up, but the really nice thing about MicroEd is that your content will be sent wrapped exactly as you see it. You know before sending how the wrapping will be received by your recipient. -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Word wrap problems
Hello Peter, Tuesday, July 27, 2004, 4:22:08 PM, you wrote: Would I be correct in assuming that MicroEd has huge potential for goofing up due to the great number of options avaulable? I'm not certain what you mean by potential for goofing up, Sorry, that may be a Kiwi (New Zealand) slang saying. To goof up usually means to mess something up. In other words, due to the great number of options available for MicroEd there is a greater possibility of someone like me messing things up by fiddling. That's what I meant to say. Sorry for the slang. Your communication was fine, it was my communication that was unclear. I understood the concept of goofing up. I just wasn't sure how you thought you were going to goof things up by using MicroEd. Your clarification has gotten through my thick skull :) Granted, there are a lot of options, and it is not necessarily clear what each of them means or does. However, since what you see in the editor before you send is what will actually be sent, you have the opportunity to correct anything that has been goofed up. Also, you can experiment with different options toggled off or on to see the effect they have. And the broad range of knowledge and experience on this list can provide clarification as to what any of the options do and how to use them. Hope that helps! -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Fwd: the Bat! future evolution
Hello Claude, Monday, July 19, 2004, 10:56:55 AM, you wrote: If I told you that, it is to know if you would like to see The Bat turns into a kind of PIM or not and if Ritlabs have such plans in their projects for the 3.0 or 4.0 version of the software ? I hope not -- if I wanted Outlook, I would just use Outlook! -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.12.00 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.12.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: What is the Watched by button in the properties of folders ?
Hello WilWilWil, Thursday, June 24, 2004, 12:36:28 PM, you wrote: When I have a look at the properties of my folders, there is a button named Watched by at the bottom left of the window. When I click on it, I can see a tree with all my folders, with a check box nearest. What is it for ? It shows what virtual folders are watching that folder for messages matching the filtering criteria of the virtual folder. ...At least that's my understanding of it. -- :Dave_Gorman: Using The Bat! v2.12 Beta/1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.11.02 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: questions/suggestions for the bat...
Hello Allie, Sunday, June 20, 2004, 6:20:57 AM, you wrote: Holding the Alt key while selecting any item in the message list will list only those messages containing that particular item. Wow! How nifty is that?! I've been using TB for years and I didn't know about that little tidbit! -- :Dave_Gorman: Using The Bat! v2.12 Beta/1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.11.02 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Import from Outlook fails
Hello Graham, Thursday, June 17, 2004, 9:58:32 AM, you wrote: You should have no problem importing the address book direct from Outlook Just beware of a potential problem with the date format if you import any dates/birthdays from the Outlook AB. -- :Dave_Gorman: Using The Bat! v2.12 Beta/1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.11.02 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Rogues Smilies (WAS: Re: Import from Outlook fails)
Hello Leif, Thursday, June 17, 2004, 10:11:20 AM, you wrote: You know.. this rouges smileys thing has actually worked out better than I anticipated. I really, really like being able to put a face to a name immediately while reading a message. Yeah, it's pretty slick isn't it? Although it is quite disconcerting when I'm scanning messages my own face pops out at me! -- :Dave_Gorman: Using The Bat! v2.12 Beta/1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.11.02 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Rogues Smilies (WAS: Re: Import from Outlook fails)
Hello Leif, Thursday, June 17, 2004, 12:09:22 PM, you wrote: Should I include logic in my code that would omit your own smiley from the Rogues.MSL when you click the box to create a new .ZIP file? It seems unanimous, and I agree with everyone else that it just wouldn't be worth the trouble. I have to look in the mirror every morning anyway, so if that doesn't kill me, seeing my face in an email probably won't either... ;) -- :Dave_Gorman: Using The Bat! v2.12 Beta/1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.11.02 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Rogues Smilies (WAS: Re: Import from Outlook fails)
Hello Leif, Thursday, June 17, 2004, 2:19:41 PM, you wrote: No biggie to me.. It's really a piece of cake.. Within my while loop: If current login name != DB login name add line to Rogues.MSL I guess that's not so tough! It's up to you, really. I'm not too concerned either way. It doesn't seem a simple if/then is too likely to wreak havoc on the process. -- :Dave_Gorman: Using The Bat! v2.12 Beta/1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.11.02 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Sending from IMAP account.
Hello Allie, Friday, June 4, 2004, 6:37:31 PM, you wrote: CW Anyone any ideas why this is happening, as it's VERY frustrating! CW Would it have anything to do with both my outbox and sent items CW being server side? It may very well do. Would you try sending mail with your outbox local? I can send without trouble only when the outbox is local here. I have the same problem with either a local or server-side outbox. Chris, typically if I select the message in the outbox and wait for a bit, it appears in the preview screen. I can then double-click it to open it, add a blank space (just something to change it), then send again. Usually it will go on the second attempt, but sometimes requires a third. This probably happens to 35% of my outgoing messages. It has gotten quite tiresome. -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.11.02 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: v2.11, IMAP auto-filtering
Hello Christopher, Wednesday, June 2, 2004, 12:04:14 PM, you wrote: I am disappointed. My filters still don't work. Nothing seems to happen automatically. Interestingly, automatic refiltering was working reasonably well for me on Beta 6 (aside from the fact that folders into which messages were filtered did not indicate there were new messages until the folder was selected), however it seems in 2.11 there is no auto-filtering. Was it intentionally removed for the release version? -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.11 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.11.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: OT: AV
Hello Marc, Monday, May 31, 2004, 9:31:54 PM, you wrote: AVG carries my vote. Though I use the Professional version on this machine, I have 2 other machines that use the FreeWare version. I never had much luck with the free version. It was quite good at letting me know of virus-infected files, but did nothing to remove, neutralize, or quarantine them. I had to remove every infected file manually. I've been using Panda Titanium 2004 and have had very good luck with it. I think it was recommended by someone on one of the Bat lists at some time. -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.10.03 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: IMAP: Deleted messages
Hello Jonathan, Wednesday, May 5, 2004, 4:42:39 PM, you wrote: JA What's wrong with Browse deleted messages under the Folder JA menu? How about, it doesn't work? Works fine here... guess it might depend on your delete settings. After a re-filter of 32 messages, Browse deleted messages showed only 1 message. Mulberry showed all 32 messages with strike-through. Webmail showed all 32 messages with strike-through. The deleted messages are apparently in the IMAP folder flagged as deleted. Browse deleted messages just doesn't show them. -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.10 RC/1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.10.03 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search on imap account!?
Hello Davidhoff, Monday, May 3, 2004, 9:48:14 AM, you wrote: it's possible to search a message in a Imap account?? If I try to search something, on the search interface I press START but afer a second it say that nothing was found. Probably it don't search at all! It does search. It just doesn't display immediately, and doesn't updated the No messages Found status consistently. The only way to tell when it is done searching is to watch that account's activity in the Connection Centre. You will see it opening the various folders involved in the search. When it is done, it will just say On-line. Yet another IMAP quirk that I really hope gets some attention... -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.10 RC/1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.10.03 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: IMAP rules ..
Hello Clive, Saturday, May 1, 2004, 4:02:23 PM, you wrote: Tell you what. Go to Ritlab's website and try and find references to TB and IMAP. While you're there , try and find the forum, too. As I recall there were large numbers of postings scathing about TB's abilities in that area. It seems that IMAP is not a priority. I really wish we could get some honest indication from Stefan about this. I don't think he monitors TBUDL, but I know he participates on TBBETA and there has been plenty of IMAP discussion there. If this is as good as it's going to get for IMAP, I would begin seriously considering other options. In general, nothing else I've tried comes close to TB! for most features, but IMAP has become essential, and perhaps I'll need to compromise in other areas to get acceptable IMAP support. If, indeed, there will be further IMAP development, I'm happy to stick it out knowing that things will be better eventually. I would just like an honest answer. -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.10.03 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: IMAP rules ..
Hello Marek, Saturday, May 1, 2004, 5:00:17 PM, you wrote: new filtering system is under development and Stef is preparing it for new beta serie. Virtual folders were developed by other Ritlabs programmer, filtering system was not delayed by implementing them. That's good to hear. Thanks for the info! Any word on IMAP improvements in general? -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.10.03 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: IMAP rules ..
Hello Jody, Friday, April 30, 2004, 8:17:53 PM, you wrote: do incoming rules work automatically when using IMAP and TheBat? No. It has been promised, but the timeline is anyone's guess. At this point it seems the virtual folders are a higher priority. -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.10.03 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: IMAP rules ..
Hello Jody, Saturday, May 1, 2004, 11:13:22 AM, you wrote: do incoming rules work automatically when using IMAP and TheBat? DG No. It has been promised, but the timeline is anyone's guess. At this DG point it seems the virtual folders are a higher priority. Sad ... because I for one would disagree with that choice. I as well... It is my understanding, though, that the entire filtering system is being rewritten from the ground up. So perhaps implementing VF's was something they could accomplish more quickly. But I, and several others on this list, are quite frustrated with the snail's pace with which RITLabs is approaching IMAP improvements. -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.10.03 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Managing IMAP folders
Hello Clive, Thursday, April 29, 2004, 1:36:10 AM, you wrote: It's a late alpha - but stable - can be downloaded here: http://www.broobles.com/imapsize/ Thanks for the tip! I've bookmarked it and will check it out when I have time. -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.10.01 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Other spam catching systems
Hello Marten, Monday, April 26, 2004, 4:03:14 PM, you wrote: I want something to sit between The Bat and the various POP servers that will identify as best it can, any Spam and let it through to me marked as such so I can filter it and check it once in a while for mis-categorized spam. After a short training period, I've had very good results with POPFile (http://popfile.sourceforge.net/). -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.10 RC/1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.10.01 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Relating to IMAP...
Hello Martin, Friday, April 23, 2004, 3:08:25 AM, you wrote: Open Account Properties and go to Mail management. There's an option to close the connection when the account is inactive. Of course, if the account is inactive, it's not going to be syncing unless I select it (which would be like having a POP account without periodic checking...). So one has to decide which is the lesser of two evils: Having to manually activate IMAP accounts? or having the Connection Center continuously open? For me it's the latter. Now if the Connection Center could be configured on an account-by-account basis, that would be the ideal. But maybe that would be easier said than done from a programming standpoint... -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.10.01 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Relating to IMAP...
Hello Allie, Friday, April 23, 2004, 7:47:41 AM, you wrote: DG So one has to decide which is the lesser of two evils: Having to DG manually activate IMAP accounts? or having the Connection Center DG continuously open? For me it's the latter. There's a third evil. :) You can have the CC always hidden and use the log panel to see what's happening with the account. Even considering the third evil, I will stick with my original choice of evils :) In some instances the log panel will not be enough and you need to fireup the CC. This is enough reason for me. I do quite a bit of searching, and with IMAP, the only way to know it's done searching is the CC messages. As you said, the CC is too cumbersome to bring up on demand, esp if it's often needed. The CC is annoying especially since it comes up in the foreground when sending messages. This is my biggest argument in favor of the perpetual CC. I'm still having frequent sending problems (described below), and watching the CC pop up when sending is the confirmation I need that the message was actually sent -- it's a more immediate and certain confirmation than watching the Outbox contents. My sending problem is that quite often when I send a message, it just sits in the Outbox (whether using a local or server-side Outbox, it makes no difference). If I try to do a Send queued mail it says there is nothing to send. The only way to get it to send (as someone on the list recommended) is to open the message from the outbox, make a small change (add a space, for instance) and send again. This works, although sometimes even that requires 3-4 instances of reopening/changing/resending. This appears to be an IMAP-specific problem as it does not occur with my POP accounts. I've figured it's just one more TB! IMAP glitch that I'll have to live with until they decide to prioritize IMAP functionality (or until I finally snap and decide to use a different client). -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.10.01 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Relating to IMAP...
Hello Allie, Friday, April 23, 2004, 10:07:02 AM, you wrote: This is terrible. I think that problem would break my patience. sigh If I sent as much mail as you I would have abandoned TB! (at least temporarily) long ago!! -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.10 RC/1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.10.01 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: questions before switching over from Outlook
Hello sgp, Monday, April 19, 2004, 2:21:31 AM, you wrote: but I have have some concerns, the main one being that IMAP is buggy. Depending on your usage and needs, IMAP can vary from completely unusable to quite acceptable. In spite of Ritlabs apparent focus on the icing instead of the cake, I'm confident that IMAP issues will eventually be worked out, it's just a question of when?. 1. What is the best way to quote html messages so that html is actually preserved? 2. Are other users using external html editors? which ones? how? I've never had any need or interest in sending HTML email, so I can't offer any suggestions. 3. Is there a way to collect incoming mail from several POP3 accounts into one single POP3 inbox folder? Mind that I want to be able to use sorting office _incoming_ mail filters on this folder, so a common folder won't do because it doesn't support incoming mail filters. What I'd like to be able to do is to redirect all POP3 accounts into one inbox so I don't have to redefine the same set of filters for each account, just one set for the combined inbox. If your only reason for a single POP3 inbox is for filtering purposes, I believe the new filtering system that is being worked on will allow a filter to be applied to multiple accounts. 4. Is the MailTicker supported for IMAP accounts? It doesn't work here. I don't usually use the ticker (it annoys the heck out of me), but I just turned it on and it seems to be working. I wonder if it's a synchronization issue? -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.10 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.10.01 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Time for a Newsgroup?
Hello Greg, Monday, March 1, 2004, 7:35:39 PM, you wrote: What I don't want to see is a change of focus in development. DG Granted, I've been skimming most of the posts in this thread after the DG first several dozen, so maybe I missed something. No, I don't think you missed much. I merely made the statement because if TB is used as a news reader with MyGate or other such software, then users may start demanding features which are more news reader specific, therefore changing the focus of development away from priorities more specific to an email program such as IMAP. I understand where you are coming from now. That certainly makes sense. I too would hate to see the focus of TB development move away from MUA priorities. DG And I'll second the motion for further IMAP development :) Even though I have IMAP accounts at MRB and FastMail I only access from one location. So it really doesn't hit me like someone who does have multiple access to an email account. I had never used IMAP prior to TB v2. I have three primary email accounts -- work, home (personal), and lists. I had accessed all 3 both from my home computer and my work computer (and periodically my laptop when I travelled) using POP and Leave messages on server. After TB v2 came out I tried IMAP and was instantly hooked to the point of not being able to go back to POP. I was so hooked that I even used Becky for a while because TB's initial IMAP support was too buggy for use, but I couldn't go back to POPping my multiple accounts! -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.04.7 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.04.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
AV sending email
Hi TBUDLers, With only one of my accounts I am getting the following AV after sending a message (it is actually after the connection center shows the SMTP transaction reach 100% and then disconnect): Access violation at address 0076FCB0 in module 'Thebat.exe'. Read of address 0002. This is very consistent, always the same message. The account is an IMAP account. The error occurs whether using the server's outbox or a local outbox. The email is actually sent, but doesn't necessarily leave the outbox or appear in the sent folder. After clicking OK on the AV, everything else proceeds as normal. Any ideas? -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.04.7 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.04.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Time for a Newsgroup?
Hello Greg, Monday, March 1, 2004, 5:30:20 PM, you wrote: In my mind why would someone want to read about an email program from a news reader? I think Allie has covered answers to this. However, in my mind the question is not so much why would they want to as it is why not let them? What I don't want to see is a change of focus in development. Granted, I've been skimming most of the posts in this thread after the first several dozen, so maybe I missed something. But I thought the discussion was simply mirroring TBUDL to a newsgroup so those who prefer newsgroup browsing to mailing lists would have the opportunity to do so. I didn't think we were talking about a change in the development of TB. Granted I originally wanted news reader capability and I don't really use IMAP, I'd still like the development of IMAP continue because in my eyes it is more important. As for mirroring the ML's to a newsgroup, I wouldn't use it myself, but as long as appropriate anti-spam measures are in place (email address obfuscation, etc), I'm all for it. I didn't think the discussion was about newsreading capabilities in TB. If it comes to that, I would prefer it be done by way of a plugin so it is completely optional and not just adding clutter. And I'll second the motion for further IMAP development :) -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.04.7 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.04.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
sending mail from IMAP account
Hi TBUDLers, I'm using the server's outbox. Approximately 1 out of every 10-15 emails will not be sent. The following is from the account log: 2/27/2004, 07:22:53: SEND - sending mail messages - 1 messages in queue !2/27/2004, 07:22:53: SEND - Could not export message 2/27/2004, 07:22:53: SEND - connection finished - 0 messages sent I can try resending several times and it will not send. My only choice is to copy the email's contents to the clipboard, delete the email from my outbox, and create a new email. Is this a server problem? or a TB! problem? or both? -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.04.7 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.04.07 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: sending mail from IMAP account
I'm using the server's outbox. Approximately 1 out of every 10-15 emails will not be sent. The following is from the account log: 2/27/2004, 07:22:53: SEND - sending mail messages - 1 messages in queue !2/27/2004, 07:22:53: SEND - Could not export message 2/27/2004, 07:22:53: SEND - connection finished - 0 messages sent I can try resending several times and it will not send. My only choice is to copy the email's contents to the clipboard, delete the email from my outbox, and create a new email. Is this a server problem? or a TB! problem? or both? To follow up, the problem is getting worse. Today it is happening with ~75% of sent emails. I have switched to a local outbox but that has not helped. -- Dave Current version is 2.04.07 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: sending mail from IMAP account
Hello Gerard, Friday, February 27, 2004, 2:05:03 PM, you wrote: Try this. Open the mail and change a little thing, like add a space or change a word. Then press send again. This works for me almost all the time. Thanks, I will give that a try next time this problem happens. However, now I'm having an even more annoying problem. On every send I get an Access Violation and the message stays in the outbox. However, it seems the message actually did get sent. -- Dave Current version is 2.04.07 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: IMAP filtering problem
Hello John, Thursday, February 26, 2004, 7:42:39 AM, you wrote: The message was from Michael to Randy, Susannah, and me -- but it was sorted into my Randy folder. I'm assuming then that it was supposed to go into your Michael folder? Can you paste your Michael Randy filters into a reply to this email? Maybe that could shed some light on the problem. -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.04.4 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.04.07 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
IMAP message counts
Hi TBUDLers, I believe this has been brought up before, but the IMAP message counts are just weird. For instance, my Inbox message count is listed as 19 6. 6 is the actual number of messages in the inbox. I don't know where the 19 is coming from -- maybe the number of messages that used to be there? At any rate, why doesn't it just say 6? Eventually it turns into just 6, but I don't know why I should have to wait for an accurate message count? -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.04.7 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.04.07 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: TLS (was: Configure X-Header field)
Hello Terry, Wednesday, February 25, 2004, 9:57:03 AM, you wrote: Have you tried using TLS? Some ISPs only block port 25 but don't block TLS on port 465. Can you elaborate? I'm running my own mail server, but need to have it send through my ISP's SMTP server rather than directly. Would what you are suggesting be a possible workaround for me? -- Dave Current version is 2.04.04 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: TLS (was: Configure X-Header field)
Hello Allie, Wednesday, February 25, 2004, 1:29:30 PM, you wrote: DG Can you elaborate? I'm running my own mail server, but need to DG have it send through my ISP's SMTP server rather than directly. Which mail server are you running? MDaemon Usually, you can configure the server to send mail via a smarthost. That is what I am doing presently. DG Would what you are suggesting be a possible workaround for me? This is one workaround, yes. I was just wondering if TLS would be a way I could use MDaemon to deliver directly instead of using the smarthost setting to deliver through my ISP. Usually my ISP does OK, but sometimes there are delays in delivery that I would rather avoid if possible. -- Dave Current version is 2.04.04 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: TLS (was: Configure X-Header field)
Hello Allie, Wednesday, February 25, 2004, 1:50:10 PM, you wrote: With direct delivery, MDaemon would have to interact with a lot of different servers, some of which support TLS and others that don't. Makes sense. MDaemon seems to use StartTLS for deliveries if the receiving server supports it. For example, I setup a smarthost for mail deliveries and entered the name and password. When I check the logs, I see that mail is delivered to the smarthost using StartTLS even thought I didn't specifically configure MDaemon to use it. I'll have to check my logs when I get home. Perhaps mine is doing that as well. If you can reliably do direct deliveries then go ahead. I seem to remember MDaemon's smarthost settings having an option to use smarthost if direct delivery was not possible. I may do some experimenting when I have the time. Thanks for your input, Allie! -- Dave Current version is 2.04.04 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
crashing immediately after opening
I had been using 2.04.7 without any major problems until today. I installed a trial copy of Netlimiter (http://www.netlimiter.com/). Suddenly TB would crash immediately after opening. So I uninstalled Netlimiter. Still crashing. I did a system restore back to yesterday evening when everything was fine. TB still crashing. I restored my TB program directory and registry key from yesterday's backup (using Allie's backup batch file). Still crashing. I uninstalled TB completely, leaving the mail directory. I reinstalled 2.04.7. I started adding back in my accounts one by one. It worked fine for my 3 POP accounts. As soon as I added my first IMAP account, it crashed again. I'm at my wits end and don't know what else to try. Any ideas? (I really thought I was through with Becky!...) -- Dave Current version is 2.04.04 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Could not store message
Hello Marten, Tuesday, February 24, 2004, 1:06:30 PM, you wrote: Where do I access 'Dispatcher' - I cannot find a link, button, menu option to it anywhere. Shift-Ctrl-F2 or Account / Dispatch Mail on Server -- Dave Current version is 2.04.04 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Crash on Search in 2.04.4
Hello Mark, Monday, February 23, 2004, 4:22:15 PM, you wrote: OK, might have gained some possible insight into why the crach on search is happening to some folks. There may be a problem with the install routine on 2.04.4. That may or may not be a factor, but for me the crash on search started when I upgraded the executable to RC3 (I don't remember which beta I upgraded from -- I think RC1). -- Dave Current version is 2.04.04 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: One account for home and work
Hello Alexander, Saturday, February 21, 2004, 3:10:27 AM, you wrote: So I'm looking for solution, how to synchronize one account (message base) for that two PCs, to have equal message bases, so when replying at home, don't reply at work etc... Leave messages on server for X number of days works OK for the receiving part, but the sending/replying is still a nuisance. All I can think to do is BCC yourself on all sends, but of course that is a far from perfect solution. I tried this with POP for quite some time and was always frustrated. IMAP has been a godsend. -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.04 RC/3 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.04.04 | quot;Using TBUDLquot; information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: A simple suggestion for MicroEd
Hello zParticle, Friday, February 13, 2004, 6:07:51 PM, you wrote: MicroEd could rule. But it needs soft wrapping. Isn't this what Auto-format does? -- Dave Using The Bat! v2.04 RC/3 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 1 Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: A greater appreciation for TB!
Hi dAniel hAhler, On Fri, 6 Feb 2004 20:27:45 +0100 dAniel hAhler wrote: D I would like to ditch the account trees for multiple accounts. W I wouldn't. D Any Idea if something along this line is being worked on? W I sincerely hope not - unless it's optional and not the default. dh What would that mean? I don't get it, even not by reading Darrin's dh original post. W Just that I would prefer to retain the account tree :-) Instead of what, exactly? :) Instead of Outlook's approach of no distinction between accounts in the folder tree. Compare how TB has each account as the root level in the folder tree and how Outlook does not have the accounts in the folder tree -- in Outlook all folders are common folders. -- Dave Current version is 2.02.3 CE | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Reply would not quote
Hi Mary, On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 13:09:16 -0500 Mary Bull wrote: Last night when I clicked Reply to answer a private message, the body of the message was not quoted. There was only a blank field for the body of the message, plus my sig. Is this happening for all replies? or just replies to this address? Maybe a faulty address book template? -- Dave Current version is 2.00.6 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Reply would not quote
Hi Mary, On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 15:18:11 -0500 Mary Bull wrote: D Maybe a faulty address book template? Exactly. You are brilliant. Thanks a bunch! All fixed now. :) That's certainly a stretch! Just a lucky guess... But I'm glad it's working OK now :) -- Dave Current version is 2.00.6 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Auto Address New Messages
Hello John, Wednesday, October 8, 2003, 4:53:32 PM, you wrote: I am wanting to have the messages already addressed when I click on new message while I am in a certain folder. For instance, In my TBUDL folder, if I click new message can the To: area be auto-filled with [EMAIL PROTECTED] This can be done with a folder template -- but before you decide to do this, look in the archives for Marck's folder template lecture. It seems to me I remember seeing it just a few days ago. -- Dave Current version is 2.00.6 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Text quoting
Hello John, Tuesday, September 30, 2003, 2:21:52 PM, you wrote: All you had to do is select and highlight whatever text you want to quote in the original message... and then hit the reply key. and a reply composition window would open with the selected text already quoted. Select text, hit F4. -- Dave Current version is 2.00.6 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
IMAP
Hi TBUDLers, I've not paid much attention to IMAP threads previously as I didn't have an IMAP capable account set up. But now I have an IMAP account and have been attempting to use it. Now obviously I'm an IMAP newbie and perhaps am not entirely understanding how IMAP is supposed to work, but some things just don't seem right. * 2 folders that were deleted days ago (and are no longer on the server) continue to appear in my account folder list. If I try to delete them, I am told they no longer exist. The only way to be rid of them was to delete the account altogether and readd it. This seems a cumbersome and impractical thing to have to do any time folders are deleted. Surely this isn't the way it's supposed to work? * I sometimes get access violation errors dealing with folders, particularly sub-folders. Is this a yet-to-be-addressed bug? * I seem to be unable to import messages into an IMAP folder. I would like to import locally stored messages from my POP account. I do Tools / Import / TBB and select the appropriate TBB. It says they are imported, but they apparently only display locally and have no persistance. After TB is closed and reopened, the imported messages are not there. Shouldn't imported messages write back to the server as part of synchronization? Or is this just the nature of the beast? Is there any way to do what I'm intending (aside from a redirect and losing date/time info)? -- Dave Using TB! 2.00.6 on Windows XP Pro Current version is 2.00 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Empty Folder
Hello Richard, Sunday, September 14, 2003, 5:25:04 AM, you wrote: DG I've noticed the Empty Folder function is considerably and DG annoyingly slower in v2 than in the 1.63 beta series. Although DG the progress indicator is nice. Mine is considerably quicker with v.2 than before. I don't see any progress indicator, however; maybe it's because it empties the folder (with several hundred messages) in a fraction of a second? I've figured out a pattern. If I empty a large folder of regular sized, no attachment emails, it occurs more rapidly than before. If I empty a folder of emails that all have attachments, it is much slower than before. It seems that, for some reason, message size has become an issue in emptying the folder whereas it wasn't previously. Another thing I've noticed. If I empty several hundred large attachment emails from the Inbox, it takes several minutes. When I empty the same messages from the Trash, it is instantaneous. -- Dave Current version is 2.00 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Where did the subject go in these messages?
Hi TBUDLers, I've been noticing a strange thing recently. It probably started sometime within the last couple of betas and is now happening on v2 as well. All emails from Allie Martin and a couple of others (Stuart Hemming and Chema Berian, perhaps others as well) appear in my message list with no subject, and the body of the message includes part of the kludges even though I have not ctrl-shft-k'd. See an example: http://dave.cyzap.com/tb.gif Why is this happening? -- Dave Using TB! 2.00 on Windows XP Pro Current version is 2.00 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Empty Folder
Hi TBUDLers, I've noticed the Empty Folder function is considerably and annoyingly slower in v2 than in the 1.63 beta series. Although the progress indicator is nice. Can anyone confirm? -- Dave Using TB! 2.00 on Windows XP Pro Current version is 2.00 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Inline images (I know, I know...)
Hello Steve, Wednesday, June 25, 2003, 9:23:27 AM, you wrote: However, today I received an email (promotional, sort of SPAM) with an inline image showing actually as part of the email (as well as an attachment, as is the norm). If the image is sent with the email, TB! will show it. If the image is not attached to the email but is only a link to an external location, TB! will not show it. -- Dave Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Automated response(?)
Hello Mike, Friday, June 13, 2003, 11:17:52 AM, you wrote: The practice of publishing my entire message header here, and in the HTML archives is very much insulting and unappreciated. I am trying to help you, and in return, you both insult me and expose me to even more spam? It is my understanding that email addresses, even in message bodies, are now concealed in the TBUDL web archives. Can anyone confirm? -- Dave Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: A Useful spam filter
Hello Mike, Friday, June 13, 2003, 11:49:12 AM, you wrote: To this author, e-mail is text; HTML belongs on the web; HTML in e-mail is spam. Read my lips: Not a thing draconian about that logic. Anyway, that's my (limited) experience. As you say, your experience is limited. While in general I agree with your sentiments about HTML email, I do make exceptions for HTML newsletters, untrained family/friends, and the like. In my not-so-limited email experience I would agree that rejecting *all* HTML seems draconian. But if it works for you, so be it. However, I can't agree with the sweeping statement that HTML in e-mail is spam. As the HTML newsletters I subscribe to are in fact solicited and not commercial, they do not fit the standard definition of spam as non-solicited commercial email. Nor are my uninformed/untrained family/friends sending me unsolicited commercial email when they send me HTML emails. However, if we want to play word games, I guess we could refer to anything we feel like as spam. -- Dave Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Email addresses in the Archive (was Re: Automated response(?))
Hello Mike, Friday, June 13, 2003, 12:16:49 PM, you wrote: DG It is my understanding that email addresses, even in message DG bodies, are now concealed in the TBUDL web archives. Can anyone DG confirm? Confirmed. :-))) And my e-mail address has just been compromised as I discuss spam eradication methods with the TB! list? Lovely. Just lovely. That's what I get. Before you blow a gasket, take a look: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg57120.html. This message in the archive included email addresses in the body. Why don't you have a look and see if you can tell me what they were? -- Dave Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: A Useful spam filter
Hello Mike, Friday, June 13, 2003, 12:32:49 PM, you wrote: Nor are my uninformed/untrained family/friends sending me unsolicited commercial email when they send me HTML emails. Uninformed/untrained family/friends are, or should be, trainable by a respected and experienced user. You don't have the patience to teach a well-intentioned Bayesian filtering program what spam is, and I don't have the time to teach all of my friends that HTML email will send the earth spinning out of its orbit. However, if we want to play word games, I guess we could refer to anything we feel like as spam. Word games? Oh really? I was present at the creation of e-mail and HTML was against the rules then, just as it is now. As far as I know, the standard accepted definition of spam is unsolicited commercial email. To say that *all* HTML email is spam when I can provide specific examples of HTML email that is neither unsolicited nor commercial, is to change the definition of spam to include whatever *you* feel like including, thereby deviating from the standard definition of spam, and thereby playing word games. Pulze! No more of this HTML = good stuff with my name on it, eh? I have stated that while in general I do not like HTML email, but am willing to make specific exceptions. I have stated that for that reason, for my purposes I would consider a rejection of *all* HTML email as draconian. I have stated that classifying all HTML email as spam does not fit the standard definition of spam. Nowhere have I stated HTML = good. -- Dave Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Automated response(?)
Hello Csaba, Friday, June 13, 2003, 1:30:22 PM, you wrote: HMTL mail is here and will stay whatever you declare and even if you were there at the creation of e-mail. Life changes and evolves. E-mail is changing into html. I am glad you can't do anything about it. The fact that it is happening does not make it good or acceptable. Nor does it mean that I have to grant my unlimited stamp of approval to it. I don't use it usually. But sometimes if I need it I use it to enhance my mails. I make few exceptions for HTML email. It's too bad that Outhouse and Outhouse Express have convinced the uninformed masses that HTML email is a good thing and that emails with hideous colors and fonts are good things. However it's even more appalling when someone who should know better uses HTML email. Try to be a little bit more open-minded. People might get to like you. Was this really necessary? I realize that I'm often less civil than I should be, but personal comments like this have no place in this discussion. -- Dave Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: A Useful spam filter
Hello Mike, Friday, June 13, 2003, 1:40:52 PM, you wrote: Sorry Dave. I view dictionaries, as the late lexicographer David P. Guralnick said Dictionaries are historical documents, recording where a language was at the time it went to print (or words to that effect. The great Ambrose Bierce had yet another definition of the dictionary as A malevolent literary device which makes a language hard and in-elastic. What I am leading up to, is that I reject your definition of spam. Spam is a personal thing and we are dealing in semantics here. You don't want all HTML to be viewed as Spam. I do. Point taken. I've often said that words are no more than what we make them. But on the other hand, doesn't communication require commonly accepted definitions of what words mean? How can I communicate with someone if every word I use has a different meaning to me than it does to the other person? I guess that's a question for another discussion altogether! You said above You don't want all HTML to be viewed as Spam. I do. In my word games sentence, I said I guess we could refer to anything we feel like as 'spam'. We're saying the same thing, aren't we? I could say that my cat is a dog because my definition of dogs includes cats, but I probably wouldn't find very many people to agree with me. -- Dave Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: DEAD HORSE (was Automated response(?))
Hello Marck, Friday, June 13, 2003, 1:44:54 PM, you wrote: DEAD means DEAD. Sorry, Marck, I sent my last reply before I got as far as your proclamation. No disrespect intended. -- Dave Current version is 1.62r | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Ignore thread
Wednesday, April 2, 2003, 11:48:33 AM, Mark wrote: I have used many different pieces of software but PowerPro is one of the few that I don't seem to understand at all. I still have it installed, but I do not have the slightest idea what I could use it for. :-) Wow! I realize I'm deep into offtopic land with this message, but I don't know if you're on TBOT. Are you on the PowerPro mailing list? A lot of the traffic is far above and beyond what I've even dreamt of doing with PP. But you could probably get some really good ideas of PP's use by just mailing the PP list and asking for some examples of how people use PP. I have tons of keyboard/mouse macros and custom menus. I would have a tough time giving up PP if I ever had to, and I've barely scratched the surface of it's capabilities. Mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] to subscribe, if you're interested. Or join TBOT [EMAIL PROTECTED] and ask other TB users how they use PP. I know I've seen several TB users that also use PP. -- Dave Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/7 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: SOT: mail servers
Wednesday, March 26, 2003, 1:22:26 PM, Paul wrote: On Wednesday, March 26, 2003, 1:39 PM, you wrote: JN Mercury does not include XP among its supported O/Ss. I have XP home and I'm using Mercury32 just fine! I'll second the motion -- I'm using Merc32 on XPPro with no problems. -- Dave Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/7 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: recomend another mailer ?
Tuesday, March 11, 2003, 3:23:12 PM, John wrote: (If this goes through, then this list filters and rejects any mail that comes from foxmail) Really? (That is, Really? not in the sense of questioning you or disagreeing with you, but Really? in the sense of astonishment and surprise!) I've seen HTML emails from Outhouse on this list. It seems strange Foxmail would be filtered... it is always so unpredictable. I'm not going to argue with you or try to dissuade you from leaving TB!, after all we all have our own preferences in what we like in software. I'm just curious what you find unpredictable. Sorry I can't help with a recommendation. I came to TB! from Outhouse and Outhouse Express and I've never looked back. I've never felt the need to shop any further. (Oh, except I played around with Eudora a little before finding TB! but never got along with it.) -- Dave Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/7 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: Getting feedback from Ritlabs
Friday, March 7, 2003, 2:33:41 PM, John wrote: That's the sort of reply I keep getting but nothing from RitLabs;( Actually Allie's quote of Stefan *is* from Ritlabs. As much as I like the bat I'm afraid they are going to lose a customer over this. I suppose one could use Outhouse Express which hasn't seen any meaningful development for years ;) Not the lack of PGP8 but the lack of information/feedback. Is there anyone from Ritlabs on this list? I could be wrong, but I don't believe TB! developers participate on TBUDL. At least one of the developers is an active participant on the TBBETA list. He is the one Allie quoted in his response to you. I'd be happy with a Barring major setbacks it's x months/weeks away At least then I would have something to base my decisions on. Do you get this specific of development feedback from every other software vendor whose product you use? -- Dave Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/7 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
Timeout, please??
I leave TB! running overnight on my work computer with periodic mail checking. Frequently, for reasons unknown, the mail receiving process will just stall. However, rather than timing out, the stalled process will just sit there staring blankly into space until I manually abort it. Why oh why doesn't it ever time out?! Is there anything I can do about this? or is it just the nature of the beast? BTW, I'm posting this on TBBETA as I am using a beta version, but I've experienced this problem with every version of TB! I've used, both release and beta versions. -- Dave Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/7 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: Timeout, please??
Wednesday, March 5, 2003, 9:30:56 AM, Dave wrote: BTW, I'm posting this on TBBETA as I am using a beta version, but I've experienced this problem with every version of TB! I've used, both release and beta versions. OK, well I thought I was posting on TBBETA! ...Errant AB clicking...where is that coffee anyway? -- Dave Using The Bat! v1.63 Beta/7 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
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: Bat v2?
Wednesday, January 15, 2003, 11:04:01 AM, Ben wrote: Is there a specific reason the bat behaves like this as appose to other email clients? TB!'s editor sees everything *not* separated by an empty line as belonging to one paragraph. I always leave auto-format off and reflow text with alt-L as necessary. -- 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: Should I stay or should I go...?
Tuesday, January 14, 2003, 9:57:45 AM, Miguel wrote: - I cannot save searches and thus make explorer short cuts to them But the Message Finder saves the last 9 searches you have done with all conditions (not just the search strings). You can re-use any of them by opening the Message Finder and going to Edit-Use previous conditions. Wow! 2 years of TBing for me, and I had no idea this existed! Thanks Miguel!! -- 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: Moving to New Messages
Tuesday, December 10, 2002, 4:22:57 PM, Anthony wrote: When using Ctrl-] to move to the next new message in a different folder, it always goes to the second new message instead of the first message. Is this a bug? The behavior I observe is that when using Ctrl-], when it changes folders, it goes to the first new message after the most recently focused message in that folder. -- Dave Using The Bat! v1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 1.61 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Multiple Bat users on one PC?
Friday, October 25, 2002, 12:38:06 PM, Hans wrote: I think it would be useful to have multiple Windows users, each having their own TB! setup. When I try this it seems to work when all Windows user are of type Computer administrator but my kids have a Limited account and when I try to start TB! from such an account I get the error message Failed to create working directory C:\Program Files\The Bat!\MAIL\. Any suggestion how to fix this without promoting the kids to Computer administrator? This is how I have my SO myself set up on XP, however, we are both Administrator accounts. It sounds to me like a permissions issue to the MAIL folder. Are you using NTFS? Maybe try altering the permissions for that folder so the kids' XP user accounts have full control rights on that folder. -- Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v1.62/Beta1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 1.61 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Multiple Bat users on one PC?
Friday, October 25, 2002, 3:13:31 PM, Paul wrote: I just ran into another issue about the users, etc. I created a GROUP ( networking-groups. set a password, restarted TB and logged into that group. my addressbook was no more. empty. Of course I had a backup, and it was probably still there under the admin login, but this sure seems like an awful lot of trouble and problems to make 2 users happy. so how do you have TB setup for 2 users on XP??? I actually haven't done any TB setup for the 2 users. I have 3 user accounts on XP: Administrator (default administrator acct), d (myself), and k (my SO). All three users have administrative privileges in Windows. I installed TB as Administrator in order that TB would appear in the Start Menu for All Users. When XP is logged in as d or as k, each XP user has their own individual TB mail store, accounts, address book. As TB stores that info in HKEY_CURRENT_USER, no other user setup was necessary in TB, it's merely using the separate Windows users accounts for separate TB user accounts. I think most of the discussion in this thread has been about having multiple TB users all using the same Windows user. I know nothing about setting that up as my SO I have always used separate Windows logins. When Hans talked about permissions errors for separate TB users operating under separate Windows logins, I assume the problem is because the non-administrative Windows logins do not have sufficient permissions to write to the mail store. That is why I suggested granting those non-admin Windows users full control permission for the mail store folder. That way the users could continue to have limited rights, but have sufficient permissions on the mail store folder to write to it. -- Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v1.62/Beta1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 1.61 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Multiple Bat users on one PC?
Friday, October 25, 2002, 4:51:48 PM, Paul wrote: I don't have an admin user for XP, MY login is that. actually ALL logins have that capability, but it is weird, because everytime my SO tries something new, TPF (tiny firewall) complains, but it only complains in MY login- I installed TPF from my login. XP Home or Pro? You must be using the welcome screen and fast user switching? I had the same problem with TPF using fast user switching. It sends pop-up alerts to the user who logged in first, not necessarily the active user. -- Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v1.62/Beta1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 1.61 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Next unread across accounts
Tuesday, August 27, 2002, 6:13:31 PM, Allie wrote: DG Neither Ctrl-Alt-Right Arrow nor Ctrl-] moves to next unread DG *across accounts* for me. This cannot be done in TB!. Any plans for it? -- Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v1.62/Beta1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 1.61 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Next unread across accounts
Tuesday, August 27, 2002, 4:36:22 PM, Britt wrote: JS skip to next unread msg - also across accounts. I have heard - and use - Ctrl + Alt + Right arrow. Neither Ctrl-Alt-Right Arrow nor Ctrl-] moves to next unread *across accounts* for me. -- Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v1.62/Beta1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 1.61 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: browser association (2nd posting)
Thursday, August 8, 2002, 11:55:39 AM, Ochrid wrote: Whenever I click on an URL in a message, The Bat! openes Internet Explorer, despite the fact that Mozilla is my default browser. Can I change that somewhere? Did you miss Thomas F's reply to your first posting? To the best of my knowledge TB! uses the Windows default browser setting when opening URL's. Do URL's open in Mozilla from other applications on your PC? I don't know why TB! would use anything other than the Windows default. It has worked consistently for me regardless what the default browser is. -- Dave [EMAIL PROTECTED] Using The Bat! v1.62/Beta1 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 1.61 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
