Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Jernej, Friday, February 4, 2011, 1:00:51 PM, you wrote: JS Make sure your hard drive isn't dying - slow boot up is often a JS symptom of that (of course, if that VPN software you installed has JS broken drivers, that's not Windows' problem). I don't have any XP JS machines anymore (except in VMWare), but I don't remember seeing any JS that needed more than 2 minutes to boot, even on slow laptops. There are (were) lots of items being started, some of which took 20 seconds, some of them belong to the software that is related to some kind of VPN (VPN itself is started manually) and there was another problem: see my reply to Raymond. Nevertheless: thanks for your reply! -- Best Wishes, Mark using The Bat! 4.2.33.1 Beta 322 days remaining in 2011. Actually it's 687 days) + less than 24 hours. Yours truly residing on earth for 19451 day now. Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Raymund, Friday, February 4, 2011, 11:48:59 PM, you wrote: RT I had that problem on three different PCs now. It always was the DMA RT mode. For some reasons Windows believed the disk wasn't able to do DMA RT and fall back to PIO which is incredibly slow. RT Check your controller if it is using PIO if so fix it :-) (Send me a RT private mail if you need with that.) After reading your mail I googled, downloaded and ran a visual basic script, resetdma.vbs from http://winhlp.com/node/10 Also, I used Soluto to Delay/Pause items being loaded at Startup. I could have paused them with Startup Cop but that tool doesn't tell me how long each items takes to start during logon, nor does it give any advise. I now have a much faster startup and it never hangs any more during that startup. Thank you very much. This was a great help which eliminated a very frustrating problem! -- Best Wishes, Mark using The Bat! 4.2.33.1 Beta 322 days remaining in 2011. Actually it's 687 days) + less than 24 hours. Yours truly residing on earth for 19451 day now. Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
On Thursday, February 3, 2011, 16:32:34, Mark Partous wrote: This PC (XP): 8 minutes to boot. Sometimes it takes 3 boots before it starts up, because it hangs twice (almost at the end of booting). If that happens I have lost half an hour. Problem first occurred after Professional insurance software to connect to several insurance companies' servers had been installed. Make sure your hard drive isn't dying - slow boot up is often a symptom of that (of course, if that VPN software you installed has broken drivers, that's not Windows' problem). I don't have any XP machines anymore (except in VMWare), but I don't remember seeing any that needed more than 2 minutes to boot, even on slow laptops. -- Jernej Simončič http://eternallybored.org/ Nobody notices when things go right. -- Zimmerman's Law of Complaints Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hi Mark, This PC (XP): 8 minutes to boot. Sometimes it takes 3 boots before it starts up, because it hangs twice (almost at the end of booting). I had that problem on three different PCs now. It always was the DMA mode. For some reasons Windows believed the disk wasn't able to do DMA and fall back to PIO which is incredibly slow. Check your controller if it is using PIO if so fix it :-) (Send me a private mail if you need with that.) -- Kind regards Raymund Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
On Wednesday, February 2, 2011, 21:59:04, Jonathan Bayer wrote: Hello Jernej, Wednesday, February 2, 2011, 3:46:51 PM, you wrote: Err, what's the point of Registry then? Something to hide parameters, configuration items, etc from the general user. It is fragile, and the system won't boot if it is broken. Times of Windows 9x and it's fragile registry are long in the past. I haven't seen registry corruption (that wasn't a direct result of hardware failure) on Windows 2000 or newer. If everything that's currently reading and writing the registry would use separate files instead, your computer'd work either much slower (because everybody would be flushing those minuscule changes in small files all the time), or configuration file corruption would be an everyday occurrence. And while this isn't really important for home users, without Registry you also lose the ability to control programs from a central location (which is very important in corporate networks - you don't want the admin to visit every machine, or write a separate script for every program). IMHO, the registry is the worst thing about Windows. I can live with everything else, but the registry is the one thing that breaks windows more often than I can count. Really? In my experience, by far the most often cause of Windows breakage is various spyware, followed by dying hard drives, bad drivers and bad RAM (but these three together don't account for even half of the spyware cases). I don't remember when I last saw registry corruption, and there's a lot of computers I deal with. -- Jernej Simončič http://eternallybored.org/ If a computer cable has one end, then it has another. -- Lyall's Conjecture Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Jernej, Thursday, February 3, 2011, 12:39:12 PM, you wrote: JS Times of Windows 9x and it's fragile registry are long in the past. I JS haven't seen registry corruption (that wasn't a direct result of JS hardware failure) on Windows 2000 or newer. If everything that's JS currently reading and writing the registry would use separate files JS instead, your computer'd work either much slower (because everybody JS would be flushing those minuscule changes in small files all the JS time), or configuration file corruption would be an everyday JS occurrence. Reading / loading the data of all programs that reside on a computer at startup is overkill, particularly those programs of which one knows, even at the time they are being installed, that they will only be used a few times (or even only once) a year. Perhaps there should be two registries, the regular one and one for seldom used programs (a decision the user should take at installation time) which is only loaded when one of those programs is started. -- Best Wishes, Mark using The Bat! 4.2.33.1 Beta 33 days remaining in 2010. Actually it's 34 days) + less than 24 hours. Yours truly residing on earth for 19441 day now. Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
On Thursday, February 3, 2011, 14:32:33, Mark Partous wrote: Reading / loading the data of all programs that reside on a computer at startup is overkill, particularly those programs of which one knows, even at the time they are being installed, that they will only be used a few times (or even only once) a year. Who says all data is loaded? Registry is a database, records are loaded when they are needed, and then paged out when not needed anymore. The data format is just optimised for quick updates, and the data is journaled so that unexpected shutdowns leave the contents in consistent state. -- Jernej Simončič http://eternallybored.org/ Nothing can be done in one trip. -- Cook's Second Law of Travel Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello MFPA, On Wed, 2 Feb 2011 19:36:00 + GMT (03/Feb/11, 2:36 AM +0700 GMT), MFPA wrote: Are we ready for a bug report yet? Or at least a wish-list item for user-friendliness? ;-) M A wish list item makes sense to me. I have one about search strings at M https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=8391 but this needs its own, M IMHO. I have just supported this wish-list item. I am waiting for seconders that search conditions (rather than search strings) should be deletable. -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.2.36.4 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Mark On Thursday, February 3, 2011, 1:32:33 PM, you wrote: Reading / loading the data of all programs that reside on a computer at startup is overkill, particularly those programs of which one knows, even at the time they are being installed, that they will only be used a few times (or even only once) a year. Windows may be daft but it's not that daft :-) The registry is only read when data is needed from it, admittedly quite a lot at boot time, but after that only when a program needs it. I have to say I long for the days of ini files, and MSFT guidelines for some years now have been for programs to keep their specific data in their own (probably xml) files. Not in the Program Files directory since the days of Vista though! -- Best regards, Jeff Gaines www.avoncastle.net Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Jeff, Thursday, February 3, 2011, 3:58:08 PM, you wrote: JG Windows may be daft but it's not that daft :-) JG The registry is only read when data is needed from it, admittedly quite a lot at boot time, but after that only when a program needs it. JG I have to say I long for the days of ini files, and MSFT guidelines for some years now have been for programs to JG keep their specific data in their own (probably xml) files. Not in the Program Files directory since the days of Vista though! This PC (XP): 8 minutes to boot. Sometimes it takes 3 boots before it starts up, because it hangs twice (almost at the end of booting). If that happens I have lost half an hour. Problem first occurred after Professional insurance software to connect to several insurance companies' servers had been installed. Luckily the problem doesn't occur every day... The two pc's running Windows 7 certainly start a lot faster. But so does an older PC running the most recent Ubuntu... :-) -- Best Wishes, Mark using The Bat! 4.2.33.1 Beta Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Jernej, You may work in a corporate environment, but half the world is not corporate. I include small businesses in that. Configuration files are not written to that often, so your comment about flushing misuscule changes is irrelevent. I'd rather have a single conf file corrupted rather than the entire registry corrupted. However, I don't get your idea that conf or ini file corruption would be an everyday occurrance. If the registry doesn't get corrupted that often, why would individual files get corrupted any more frequently? One _major_ advantage to separate conf/ini files is that it can be much easier to migrate a software package from one system to another. And why is it difficult to control programs from a central location with separate files? If all the conf files are stored in a single directory (such as /etc on Unix/Linux), I don't see any difference. You can consider the individual files as a database, with each table stored in a separate file, if you like. Regarding breakage, I do agree that these days, the majority of incidents are caused by spyware. But because of the registry, the spyware is more likely to cause other damage in the registry. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fanatic about Linux vs. Windows. I use Windows every day, even though my main job currently is a Linux administrator. Windows is, at present, the best OS for a desktop, although several Linux distributions are catching up. Linux, on the other hand, is IMHO better at servers than Windows. I do recommend Windows when it is necessary and appropriate, and recommend Linux the same way JBB I will agree that it is much better than the days of 9x, but it Thursday, February 3, 2011, 6:39:12 AM, you wrote: On Wednesday, February 2, 2011, 21:59:04, Jonathan Bayer wrote: Hello Jernej, Wednesday, February 2, 2011, 3:46:51 PM, you wrote: Err, what's the point of Registry then? Something to hide parameters, configuration items, etc from the general user. It is fragile, and the system won't boot if it is broken. Times of Windows 9x and it's fragile registry are long in the past. I haven't seen registry corruption (that wasn't a direct result of hardware failure) on Windows 2000 or newer. If everything that's currently reading and writing the registry would use separate files instead, your computer'd work either much slower (because everybody would be flushing those minuscule changes in small files all the time), or configuration file corruption would be an everyday occurrence. And while this isn't really important for home users, without Registry you also lose the ability to control programs from a central location (which is very important in corporate networks - you don't want the admin to visit every machine, or write a separate script for every program). IMHO, the registry is the worst thing about Windows. I can live with everything else, but the registry is the one thing that breaks windows more often than I can count. Really? In my experience, by far the most often cause of Windows breakage is various spyware, followed by dying hard drives, bad drivers and bad RAM (but these three together don't account for even half of the spyware cases). I don't remember when I last saw registry corruption, and there's a lot of computers I deal with. -- Best regards, Jonathanmailto:jba...@bayerfamily.net Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Jernej, Thursday, February 3, 2011, 3:49:36 PM, you wrote: JS Who says all data is loaded? It is being read, isn't it? Are there people who read all pages of a law-book when they only need the text of some sections of the law? -- Best Wishes, Mark using The Bat! 4.2.33.1 Beta Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Mod: Top posting (was: Search conditions in Message Finder)
Hallo Jonathan, On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 10:35:38 -0500GMT (3-2-2011, 16:35, where I live), you wrote: JBB indows when it is necessary and appropriate, and recommend Linux the JBB same way JBB JBB JBB I will agree that it is much better than the days of 9x, but it JBB Thursday, February 3, 2011, 6:39:12 AM, you wrote: On Wednesday, February 2, 2011, 21:59:04, Jonathan Bayer wrote: moderator Note: This moderator's interjection is a note to all readers and not just to the person being replied to, even if their post may have instigated this reply. Please don't feel singled out Jonathan. ' This posting violated the list rules regarding top posting. Top posting, i.e., typing all your reply text at the top of your message and following it with all quoted text below, is not encouraged and we actually request that you not do so on this list because a) It makes it difficult to glean context from what you typed at the top of the message and b) It encourages excessive quoting. We would much prefer if you quote just that much of the message to which you're replying, so we know what it is you're referring to, and then below the quotation, type your response. If you're responding to more than one part of the original, then quote each part separately and follow each part with your response. Now, I know that you may not personally prefer this format and that you may disagree with some of the reasoning here. We very much respect this. However, this is the format that most of the active members here prefer and all members are expected, and are being asked to use the format that will make most of the active membership here comfortable reading. You'll likely get a more responsive group when you post using a style that is comfortable for them to read and understand. To find out why these MOD messages are posted to the list instead of private mail, please read the welcome message you received when you subscribed. Thank you. /moderator -- Groetjes, Roelof Have you said THANKS to your Moderator today? pgpDD9pr1xYZl.pgp Description: PGP signature Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Mark, On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 16:38:31 +0100 GMT (03/Feb/11, 22:38 PM +0700 GMT), Mark Partous wrote: MP Are there people who read all pages of a law-book when they only MP need the text of some sections of the law? I read all of the pages of a contract even if I only need some sections. That's because the contracts are between 69 and 102 pages long (so far), and I enjoy sending an email to ask their lawyers what - for example - sentence 3 in paragraph 2 of page 59 really means. But then, this has nothing to do with how Windows behaves about the Registry. I just thought I'd bring this up as we seem to have an off-topic week. Happy New Year of the Rabbit to all! :-) -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.2.36.4 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder (modified per list rules)
Hello Jernej, Thursday, February 3, 2011, 6:39:12 AM, you wrote: On Wednesday, February 2, 2011, 21:59:04, Jonathan Bayer wrote: Hello Jernej, Wednesday, February 2, 2011, 3:46:51 PM, you wrote: Err, what's the point of Registry then? Something to hide parameters, configuration items, etc from the general user. It is fragile, and the system won't boot if it is broken. Times of Windows 9x and it's fragile registry are long in the past. I haven't seen registry corruption (that wasn't a direct result of hardware failure) on Windows 2000 or newer. If everything that's currently reading and writing the registry would use separate files instead, your computer'd work either much slower (because everybody would be flushing those minuscule changes in small files all the time), or configuration file corruption would be an everyday occurrence. Configuration files are not written to that often, so your comment about flushing misuscule changes is irrelevent. I'd rather have a single conf file corrupted rather than the entire registry corrupted. However, I don't get your idea that conf or ini file corruption would be an everyday occurrance. If the registry doesn't get corrupted that often, why would individual files get corrupted any more frequently? And while this isn't really important for home users, without Registry you also lose the ability to control programs from a central location (which is very important in corporate networks - you don't want the admin to visit every machine, or write a separate script for every program). You may work in a corporate environment, but half the world is not corporate. I include small businesses in that. One _major_ advantage to separate conf/ini files is that it can be much easier to migrate a software package from one system to another. And why is it difficult to control programs from a central location with separate files? If all the conf files are stored in a single directory (such as /etc on Unix/Linux), I don't see any difference. You can consider the individual files as a database, with each table stored in a separate file, if you like. IMHO, the registry is the worst thing about Windows. I can live with everything else, but the registry is the one thing that breaks windows more often than I can count. Really? In my experience, by far the most often cause of Windows breakage is various spyware, followed by dying hard drives, bad drivers and bad RAM (but these three together don't account for even half of the spyware cases). I don't remember when I last saw registry corruption, and there's a lot of computers I deal with. Regarding breakage, I do agree that these days, the majority of incidents are caused by spyware. But because of the registry, the spyware is more likely to cause other damage in the registry. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fanatic about Linux vs. Windows. I use Windows every day, even though my main job currently is a Linux administrator. Windows is, IMHO at present, the best OS for a desktop, although several Linux distributions are catching up. Linux, on the other hand, is IMHO better at servers than Windows. I do recommend Windows when it is necessary and appropriate, and recommend Linux the same way JBB -- Best regards, Jonathanmailto:jba...@bayerfamily.net Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
On Thursday, February 3, 2011, 15:58:08, Jeff Gaines wrote: Not in the Program Files directory since the days of Vista though! Actually, Program Files never was the right place for configuration (or any other kind of volatile data) - even Windows NT 4 (released in 1996) did not let non-admin users write there. The only thing that Vista changed is that all programs by default run as if a limited user was running them, precisely to force programmers to start writing their software properly (UAC was never meant to be a security feature). -- Jernej Simončič http://eternallybored.org/ A bird in the hand is safer than one overhead. -- Newton's Little-known Seventh Law Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
On Thursday, February 3, 2011, 16:35:38, Jonathan Bayer wrote: You may work in a corporate environment, but half the world is not corporate. I include small businesses in that. What's small business for you? We mostly deal with small businesses (3-30 computers, most under 10). Configuration files are not written to that often, so your comment about flushing misuscule changes is irrelevent. I'd rather have a single conf file corrupted rather than the entire registry corrupted. Get Process Monitor and let it capture events for 10 seconds, then filter everything but Reg* events. You'll see that there are 50-100 registry operations done every second on average. However, I don't get your idea that conf or ini file corruption would be an everyday occurrance. If the registry doesn't get corrupted that often, why would individual files get corrupted any more frequently? Simple: Registry is a database, with a journal. If a write gets interrupted, Windows will almost always be able to restore it to a consistent state. Most programs that use custom config files just edit that file in place, and if that gets interrupted, it will often leave you with empty file, or a file that has half of the contents missing. One _major_ advantage to separate conf/ini files is that it can be much easier to migrate a software package from one system to another. And a major disadvantage is that if the program lets you run multiple copies of itself, it'll need to have some kind of config file locking implemented. And why is it difficult to control programs from a central location with separate files? If all the conf files are stored in a single directory (such as /etc on Unix/Linux), I don't see any difference. You can consider the individual files as a database, with each table stored in a separate file, if you like. Consider this very simple scenario: you have a terminal server. Both internal users and external users work on it. You want to let internal users have unlimited internet access, but want to allow external users only access specific pages on your intranet. This is very simple to do with group policies in Windows, which control Registry. Don't get me wrong, I'm not a fanatic about Linux vs. Windows. I use Windows every day, even though my main job currently is a Linux administrator. Windows is, at present, the best OS for a desktop, although several Linux distributions are catching up. Linux, on the other hand, is IMHO better at servers than Windows. I do recommend Windows when it is necessary and appropriate, and recommend Linux the same way I administer both, and while Linux certainly is sufficient for some tasks, there's a lot it's lacking when it comes to desktop use (specifically when you need to remotely administer groups of machines for desktop users). -- Jernej Simončič http://eternallybored.org/ If it works, don't fix it. -- First Rule of Rural Mechanics Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Thomas, Thursday, February 3, 2011, 5:09:10 PM, you wrote: TF Happy New Year of the Rabbit to all! :-) According to a news-item I was lead to believe that many Chinese have bought / will buy a rabbit now. Was there any particular reason why they did not do that with last year's animal? :-) -- Best Wishes, Mark using The Bat! 4.2.33.1 Beta 332 days remaining in 2011. Actually it's 697 days) + less than 24 hours. Yours truly residing on earth for 19441 day now. Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Mark On Thursday, February 3, 2011, 7:19:24 PM, you wrote: According to a news-item I was lead to believe that many Chinese have bought / will buy a rabbit now. Was there any particular reason why they did not do that with last year's animal? :-) You can't fatten a tiger for Easter :-) -- Best regards, Jeff Gaines www.avoncastle.net Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Jeff, On Thu, 3 Feb 2011 21:10:05 + GMT (04/Feb/11, 4:10 AM +0700 GMT), Jeff Gaines wrote: According to a news-item I was lead to believe that many Chinese have bought / will buy a rabbit now. Was there any particular reason why they did not do that with last year's animal? :-) JG You can't fatten a tiger for Easter :-) You can - but you will be his meal! ;-) -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.2.36.4 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
On Thursday, February 3, 2011, 3:10:05 PM, Jeff Gaines wrote: You can't fatten a tiger for Easter :-) why not? my house cats always get fat -- Dwight A. Corrin 316.303.9385 phone ahead to fax dcorrin at fastmail.fm photo galleries at http://dcorrin.smugmug.com photo blog at http://dcorrin.aminus3.com http://photos.vfxy.com/photoblogs/5882 Using IMAP with The Bat! 5.0.0.134 BETA on Windows Vista version 6,0 (Service Pack 2) Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello all, Wednesday, February 2, 2011, Dwight Corrin wrote: What is really the problem is that you can search for A and B and C, or you can search for A or B or C but there is no way to search for A and B and C or D there are 3 modes for searching in Message Finder, swtich from this Simple to Advanced one and set what You like :-) -- Bye Marek Mikus Czech support of The Bat! http://www.thebat.cz Using the best The Bat! 5.0.0.135 BETA under Windows 7 6.1 Build 7600 with MyMacros,XMP,AnotherMacros, AntispamSniper v 3.2.6.4 Notebook Thinkpad, Core2 Duo 2.40 GHz, 4 GB RAM Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello MFPA, On Wed, 2 Feb 2011 02:48:32 + GMT (02/Feb/11, 9:48 AM +0700 GMT), MFPA wrote: I can add more by clicking on the New Condition button below that. However, I cannot reduce the number of conditions to only three or two. M For 4.0.38 this can be achieved by editing the registry value at M HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\RIT\The Bat!\Finder\Scopes As a user I object to having to hack the registry. This should be possible from within the user interface of the software. Are we ready for a bug report yet? Or at least a wish-list item for user-friendliness? ;-) -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.2.36.4 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hi On Wednesday 2 February 2011 at 3:07:28 PM, in mid:610392231.20110202220...@thomas-bkk.my-fqdn.de, Thomas Fernandez wrote: As a user I object to having to hack the registry. This should be possible from within the user interface of the software. I agree it should be in the user interface but also believe such settings should be stored in the software's own settings files rather than clogging up the registry. Are we ready for a bug report yet? Or at least a wish-list item for user-friendliness? ;-) A wish list item makes sense to me. I have one about search strings at https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/view.php?id=8391 but this needs its own, IMHO. -- Best regards MFPAmailto:expires2...@ymail.com Don't be silly, it's all make believe anyway Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
On Wednesday, February 2, 2011, 20:36:00, MFPA wrote: but also believe such settings should be stored in the software's own settings files rather than clogging up the registry. Err, what's the point of Registry then? -- Jernej Simončič http://eternallybored.org/ The public is always wrong. -- Stock Market Axiom Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Jernej, Wednesday, February 2, 2011, 9:46:51 PM, you wrote: JS Err, what's the point of Registry then? There isn't any! :-) -- Best Wishes, Mark using The Bat! 4.2.33.1 Beta 32 days remaining in 2010. Actually it's 33 days) + less than 24 hours. Yours truly residing on earth for 19440 days now. Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Jernej, Wednesday, February 2, 2011, 3:46:51 PM, you wrote: On Wednesday, February 2, 2011, 20:36:00, MFPA wrote: but also believe such settings should be stored in the software's own settings files rather than clogging up the registry. Err, what's the point of Registry then? Something to hide parameters, configuration items, etc from the general user. It is fragile, and the system won't boot if it is broken. IMHO, the registry is the worst thing about Windows. I can live with everything else, but the registry is the one thing that breaks windows more often than I can count. JBB -- Best regards, Jonathanmailto:jba...@bayerfamily.net Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Thomas, On Tuesday, February 01, 2011 you wrote: TF Hello Jack, TF On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 09:24:32 -0600 GMT (31/Jan/11, 22:24 PM +0700 GMT), TF Jack S. LaRosa wrote: RT Well, there is a button on the right hand side of the edit field of RT the condition. It is labeled '-'. TF Yes, but: The next time I open Search, the deleted items is shown TF again. TF Any confirmations? JSL Not here. I deleted three of the four original search JSL conditions some time ago using the '-' and they have never JSL returned. TF Maybe it's a version thing, I am using 4.2.36.4. We don't have a TF changelog clarifying this, do we? Honestly, I wouldn't know. Sorry. -- Jack LaRosa Using The Bat! ver: 4.2.42. Running Windows XP Pro ver 5 build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hi On Tuesday 1 February 2011 at 2:20:26 AM, in mid:9610432292.20110201092...@thomas-bkk.my-fqdn.de, Thomas Fernandez wrote: Hello MFPA, On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 19:57:33 + GMT (01/Feb/11, 2:57 AM +0700 GMT), MFPA wrote: I have ever only set up two, and only these two conditions will be displayed. M I didn't set up anything, just did some message M searches and then later found they had been retained M in a history without my permission and (in my M TB!version) there is no option to delete them. I think we are talking about different things. I am talking about search conditions (and header contains or text contains etc) while you are talking about search strings, methinks. We are both referring to the same thing: in the box marked text contains (or subject contains or whatever) I enter a string to search for. I later find that string has been stored without my permission in a history so that it appears either in a drop-down list at the end of the subject contains etc. boxes or in a different list under the menu item Edit | Use previous conditions. -- Best regards MFPAmailto:expires2...@ymail.com Those who do not read are no better off than those who cannot. Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello MFPA, On Wed, 2 Feb 2011 00:18:18 + GMT (02/Feb/11, 7:18 AM +0700 GMT), MFPA wrote: I think we are talking about different things. I am talking about search conditions (and header contains or text contains etc) while you are talking about search strings, methinks. M We are both referring to the same thing: in the box marked text M contains (or subject contains or whatever) I enter a string to M search for. I later find that string has been stored without my M permission in a history so that it appears either in a drop-down M list at the end of the subject contains etc. boxes or in a different M list under the menu item Edit | Use previous conditions. In fact, no we are talking about different things. You have just described search string. I have four search conditions. These are: Header contains Sender contains Subject contains Text contains I can add more by clicking on the New Condition button below that. However, I cannot reduce the number of conditions to only three or two. -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.2.36.4 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hi On Wednesday 2 February 2011 at 1:51:06 AM, in mid:1759241832.20110202085...@thomas-bkk.my-fqdn.de, Thomas Fernandez wrote: Hello MFPA, On Wed, 2 Feb 2011 00:18:18 + GMT (02/Feb/11, 7:18 AM +0700 GMT), MFPA wrote: I think we are talking about different things. I am talking about search conditions (and header contains or text contains etc) while you are talking about search strings, methinks. M We are both referring to the same thing: in the box M marked text contains (or subject contains or M whatever) I enter a string to search for. I later M find that string has been stored without my M permission in a history so that it appears either M in a drop-down list at the end of the subject M contains etc. boxes or in a different list under the M menu item Edit | Use previous conditions. In fact, no we are talking about different things. You have just described search string. OK, I misunderstood what you meant. I have four search conditions. These are: Header contains Sender contains Subject contains Text contains I guess the interface is slightly different between our versions. In 4.0.38 each of those search condition lines has two drop-down boxes to choose between header, text, memo, subject, etc. and to choose contains, starts with, etc. I can add more by clicking on the New Condition button below that. However, I cannot reduce the number of conditions to only three or two. For 4.0.38 this can be achieved by editing the registry value at HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\RIT\The Bat!\Finder\Scopes -- Best regards MFPAmailto:expires2...@ymail.com Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at statistics! Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
On Tuesday, February 1, 2011, 7:51:06 PM, Thomas Fernandez wrote: In fact, no we are talking about different things. You have just described search string. I have four search conditions. These are: Header contains Sender contains Subject contains Text contains I can add more by clicking on the New Condition button below that. However, I cannot reduce the number of conditions to only three or two. I have header text text sender because whatever you used last time you used all four, or more stick. What is really the problem is that you can search for A and B and C, or you can search for A or B or C but there is no way to search for A and B and C or D -- Dwight A. Corrin 316.303.9385 phone ahead to fax dcorrin at fastmail.fm photo galleries at http://dcorrin.smugmug.com photo blog at http://dcorrin.aminus3.com http://photos.vfxy.com/photoblogs/5882 Using IMAP with The Bat! 5.0.0.134 BETA on Windows Vista version 6,0 (Service Pack 2) Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Raymund, On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 12:56:21 +0100 GMT (30/Jan/11, 18:56 PM +0700 GMT), Raymund Tump wrote: In the Message Finder, there is a New Condition button to increase the number of search conditions. Is there a way to reduce the number other than editing the registry? RT Well, there is a button on the right hand side of the edit field of RT the condition. It is labeled '-'. Yes, but: The next time I open Search, the deleted items is shown again. Any confirmations? -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.2.36.4 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
On Monday, January 31, 2011, 14:19:18, Thomas Fernandez wrote: Yes, but: The next time I open Search, the deleted items is shown again. The Search window will always display at least 4 conditions when opened. -- Jernej Simončič http://eternallybored.org/ Build a system that any fool can use and only a fool will use it. -- Fifth Rule on Fools Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Jernej, On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 15:04:39 +0100 GMT (31/Jan/11, 21:04 PM +0700 GMT), Jernej Simončič wrote: Yes, but: The next time I open Search, the deleted items is shown again. JS The Search window will always display at least 4 conditions when JS opened. Not true: On one of my other computers (using the same TB! version on all), I have ever only set up two, and only these two conditions will be displayed. -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.2.36.4 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Test for On--- On Monday, January 31, 2011, at 8:04:39 AM, Jernej Simončič wrote: The Search window will always display at least 4 conditions when opened. I get only one condition when I open the message finder from the toolbar. -- Jim Kyle Using The Bat! v4.2.36.4 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 on VMWare Server 2 under Xubuntu 10.04.1 with AntiSpamSniper Version 3.2.4.5 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Thomas, On Monday, January 31, 2011 you wrote: TF Hello Raymund, TF On Sun, 30 Jan 2011 12:56:21 +0100 GMT (30/Jan/11, 18:56 PM +0700 GMT), TF Raymund Tump wrote: In the Message Finder, there is a New Condition button to increase the number of search conditions. Is there a way to reduce the number other than editing the registry? RT Well, there is a button on the right hand side of the edit field of RT the condition. It is labeled '-'. TF Yes, but: The next time I open Search, the deleted items is shown TF again. TF Any confirmations? Not here. I deleted three of the four original search conditions some time ago using the '-' and they have never returned. -- Jack LaRosa Using The Bat! ver: 4.2.42. Running Windows XP Pro ver 5 build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hi On Monday 31 January 2011 at 2:10:41 PM, in mid:31761118.20110131211...@thomas-bkk.my-fqdn.de, Thomas Fernandez wrote: I have ever only set up two, and only these two conditions will be displayed. I didn't set up anything, just did some message searches and then later found they had been retained in a history without my permission and (in my TB!version) there is no option to delete them. -- Best regards MFPAmailto:expires2...@ymail.com If you are afraid to speak against tyranny, then you are already a slave. Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello MFPA, On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 19:57:33 + GMT (01/Feb/11, 2:57 AM +0700 GMT), MFPA wrote: I have ever only set up two, and only these two conditions will be displayed. M I didn't set up anything, just did some message searches and then M later found they had been retained in a history without my M permission and (in my TB!version) there is no option to delete M them. I think we are talking about different things. I am talking about search conditions (and header contains or text contains etc) while you are talking about search strings, methinks. -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.2.36.4 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello Jack, On Mon, 31 Jan 2011 09:24:32 -0600 GMT (31/Jan/11, 22:24 PM +0700 GMT), Jack S. LaRosa wrote: RT Well, there is a button on the right hand side of the edit field of RT the condition. It is labeled '-'. TF Yes, but: The next time I open Search, the deleted items is shown TF again. TF Any confirmations? JSL Not here. I deleted three of the four original search JSL conditions some time ago using the '-' and they have never JSL returned. Maybe it's a version thing, I am using 4.2.36.4. We don't have a changelog clarifying this, do we? -- Cheers, Thomas. http://thomas.fernandez.hat-gar-keine-homepage.de/ Message reply created with The Bat! 4.2.36.4 under Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Service Pack 3 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Search conditions in Message Finder
Hi In the Message Finder, there is a New Condition button to increase the number of search conditions. Is there a way to reduce the number other than editing the registry? Under Edit | Use previous conditions there is a list of previous search conditions. How do I delete the items from this list and tell TB! not to store them any more? -- Best regards MFPAmailto:expires2...@ymail.com I would like to help you out. Which way did you come in? Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello all, Sunday, January 30, 2011, MFPA wrote: In the Message Finder, there is a New Condition button to increase the number of search conditions. Is there a way to reduce the number other than editing the registry? yes, since v4.2.12 Under Edit | Use previous conditions there is a list of previous search conditions. How do I delete the items from this list and tell TB! not to store them any more? this is not configurable -- Bye Marek Mikus Czech support of The Bat! http://www.thebat.cz Using the best The Bat! 5.0.0.134 BETA under Windows 7 6.1 Build 7600 with MyMacros,XMP,AnotherMacros, AntispamSniper v 3.2.6.3 Notebook Thinkpad, Core2 Duo 2.40 GHz, 4 GB RAM Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hi MFPA, In the Message Finder, there is a New Condition button to increase the number of search conditions. Is there a way to reduce the number other than editing the registry? Well, there is a button on the right hand side of the edit field of the condition. It is labeled '-'. How do I delete the items from this list and tell TB! not to store them any more? I don't think that is possible. At least I didn't find any option to do so... But the privacy Menu would be the best place to put one :-) -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen Raymund Tump Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hi On Sunday 30 January 2011 at 12:01:19 PM, in mid:872978583.20110130130...@ipex.cz, Marek Mikus wrote: Hello all, Sunday, January 30, 2011, MFPA wrote: Is there a way to reduce the number other than editing the registry? yes, since v4.2.12 That's good to hear; I look forward to not having to do this in Regedit when I can afford to upgrade. Under Edit | Use previous conditions there is a list of previous search conditions. How do I delete the items from this list and tell TB! not to store them any more? this is not configurable That's a shame; no software should store such things without permission. Any idea where the previous search entries are stored, so that I can look to delete them directly? -- Best regards MFPAmailto:expires2...@ymail.com None are so fond of secrets as those who do not mean to keep them Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hi On Sunday 30 January 2011 at 11:56:21 AM, in mid:1581657338.20110130125...@gmx.de, Raymund Tump wrote: Well, there is a button on the right hand side of the edit field of the condition. It is labeled '-'. That must be the enhancement Marek says was introduced in v4.2.12. I'll see that when I am able to upgrade. How do I delete the items from this list and tell TB! not to store them any more? I don't think that is possible. At least I didn't find any option to do so... In the absence of this option, I don't suppose you have any idea where TB! stores these search strings? I have searched without success for the text string and the hex string, in files and in the registry. But the privacy Menu would be the best place to put one :-) It sounds logical but that menu is about digital signatures and message encryption. I think the optimum place for this option is with the list of previous searches, so that there is no need to poke around and look for it. Extra entries at the bottom for Clear this list and Do not store search strings would do the job quite nicely. -- Best regards MFPAmailto:expires2...@ymail.com Don't anthropomorphize computers - they hate it Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hello all, Sunday, January 30, 2011, MFPA wrote: In the absence of this option, I don't suppose you have any idea where TB! stores these search strings? I have searched without success for the text string and the hex string, in files and in the registry. all history entries including Message Finder are stored in Account.his file -- Bye Marek Mikus Czech support of The Bat! http://www.thebat.cz Using the best The Bat! 5.0.0.134 BETA under Windows 7 6.1 Build 7600 with MyMacros,XMP,AnotherMacros, AntispamSniper v 3.2.6.3 Notebook Thinkpad, Core2 Duo 2.40 GHz, 4 GB RAM Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Search conditions in Message Finder
Hi On Sunday 30 January 2011 at 9:16:37 PM, in mid:1678430462.20110130221...@ipex.cz, Marek Mikus wrote: all history entries including Message Finder are stored in Account.his file Thank you - search strings are present in plain text in account.his. Windows's search function is very poor at looking for text contained in a file rather than in it's title. Having looked through some of my account.his files, plus renaming one and seeing a replacement created on closing TB! I would say they look safe to edit or delete. Any reason why it might be a bad idea to delete account.his files on a regular basis? -- Best regards MFPAmailto:expires2...@ymail.com Wise men learn many things from their enemies. Using The Bat! v4.0.38 on Windows XP 5.1 Build 2600 Current version is 4.2.42 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
