Re: How to set font ?

2004-10-01 Thread Spam

  

 Spam, [S] wrote:

 Bitstream Vera Sans is a free font included in many Linux
 distributions.

 Just tried it and it's not looking too good in Windows here.

 Bitstream Vera Sans Mono looks a lot better. At least the version of
 it that I had already obtained elsewhere (I can't remember where).

  Ah yes, it may depend on which editor you use. MicroED or variable
  width such as the HTML one. Try setting Windows to use the Bitstream
  Vera Sans for menu's (I usually increase size from 8 to 10 for
  Vera). It does look goon on my machine. =)

-- 



Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html


Re: How to set font ?

2004-09-30 Thread Spam
 I use HTML/PlainText mail format

 this is a setting for viewing mails

 and by default, font is set to Courier New size 9 by TB3.
 All my mail have to be written in ARial 10.

 did you try verdana? it's also very nice

   I like Bitstream Vera Sans. It is not a fixed width font, but it is
   very nice and has anti-aliasing enabled - giving very smooth text.

   Bitstream Vera Sans is a free font included in many Linux
   distributions.
  
-- 



Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html


Re: How to set font ?

2004-09-30 Thread Spam

  

 Hello Spam,

 On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:33:09 +0200GMT Spam wrote:

 did you try verdana? it's also very nice

I like Bitstream Vera Sans. It is not a fixed width font, but it is
very nice and has anti-aliasing enabled - giving very smooth text.

Bitstream Vera Sans is a free font included in many Linux
distributions.
  
 look here: http://tinyurl.com/4yheo

 there is also a fixed width version of Vera Sans that can easily be
 installed in the windows font dir.

  Thank you. I was looking for those before :)
´

-- 



Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html


Unicode support?

2004-09-30 Thread Spam

  Will The Bat! support Unicode support? For example the very common
  UTF-8 codepage? Application that communicate with Unicode do not
  need to know any other code pages (such as ISO-8859-1, big5,
  shift-jis, etc). Unicode support allmost all current languages in
  the world, including Arabic, Japanese and Chinese with its Kanji
  characters.

  Many email applications such as Outlook, Evolution, Thunderbird and
  a lot of webmails support UTF-8.


-- 



Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html


Re: Unicode support?

2004-09-30 Thread Spam

  

 Hello Spam,

 On Thursday, September 30, 2004, at 16:51 Lithuanian Time, you wrote:

S Will The Bat! support Unicode support?

 I am very pesimistic regarding unicode support. It was promised for years,
 but promises just left promises.

  Why so? About all OS'es support Unicode. Windows has since NT 4.0. I
  use it virtually everywhere. Is it notepad or the Linux console or
  in my Instant Messaging programs and on all my websites. It work
  perfectly fine and I can mix Japanese, Latin and other languages
  without the need to specify additional code pages/conversion tables.
  As long as programs support Unicode there is no need for users to
  ever bother with code pages again.

  I do not agree with you at all that Unicode is just a empty promise.


-- 



Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html


Re: Unicode support?

2004-09-30 Thread Spam

  

 Hello Spam,

 You got a name?

 On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 18:37:40 +0200 GMT (30/09/2004, 23:37 +0700 GMT),
 Spam wrote:

S   I do not agree with you at all that Unicode is just a empty promise.

 IMHO Unicode is the future. What Edvinas meant is that *Unicode in TB*
 has been promised for a long time and still isn't there.

  Ah. I understand. Sorry for my mistake.
´

-- 



Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html


Re: Mail filtering on IMAP folders?

2004-09-29 Thread Spam

 Spam, [S] wrote:

 I posted a message earlier about mail filtering on IMAP folders. I
 am using The Bat! 3 and it seem as the mail filters only activate if
 I click on the Inbox folder. The mail is still received as normally
 and I get a new mail icon in the system tray. The problem is the
 filters which do not activate unless I click on the Inbox folder.
 When I do I can see messages moved to Trash and other folders.

 There's nothing you can do about this. This is how TB!'s IMAP
 filtering behaves at the moment. You could check to see if your ISP
 offers a webmail access to your account and if so, check if you can
 filter from there. In this way you could do some of the filtering at
 the server level. Otherwise, TB!'s IMAP is very frustrating when it
 comes to auto-filtering.

  Seriously, this would seem to be a severe flaw in The Bat! The whole
  idea with filtering is its automation instead of have to do things
  manually.

  Is this going to change anytime soon? It's not like The Bat! doesn't
  receive messages. It does, and it tells me I have new messages too.

-- 



Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html


Mail filtering on IMAP folders?

2004-09-28 Thread Spam

  Hello everyone,

  I posted a message earlier about mail filtering on IMAP folders. I
  am using The Bat! 3 and it seem as the mail filters only activate if
  I click on the Inbox folder. The mail is still received as normally
  and I get a new mail icon in the system tray. The problem is the
  filters which do not activate unless I click on the Inbox folder.
  When I do I can see messages moved to Trash and other folders.

  What can be the problem and how do I get around this?

  Thank you for any suggestion.

-- 

  ~S




Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html


Re: Fed up with BayesIt

2004-09-28 Thread Spam

  

 I started training BayesIt 0.5.9 a few months ago with thousands of
 spam and non-spam messages.  Despite this, it's catching only about
 10%. I continue to mark the missed stuff as junk, but either BayesIt
 just can't do the job or the spammers are outwitting it.  Either way,
 I'm not prepared to invest any more time in it.

 Can you guys suggest a better alternative?

  Yes, use SpamAssassin. Not sure if it could be used though The bat!
  though. I am using it in conjunction with my email server to mark
  messages as SPAM. It works very effectively (would be better if The
  Bat!'s email filters would work good with IMAP folders).

  ~S

´

-- 



Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html