Hi Peter, @16-Nov-2003, 03:54 +0100 (16-Nov 02:54 UK time) Peter Ouwehand [PO] in mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] said to Marck:
MDP>> 2) You would have to have had your brain removed to write such MDP>> a template that calls upon a file in the attachments folder in MDP>> the first place - and then *told* someone about it! PO> Seems you'r not aware how an 'average' Windows user is willing PO> to share information. I have been writing commercial (for resale, not for single use) software for 26 years. Yes, I am completely aware of how naive end users can be, but WADR no "average windows user" is going to: 1) Run TB and... 2) Write their own macro based templates... 3) that include lumps of macro code... 4) read from files... 5) that live in an attachments folder. This scenario is so many times removed from reality, that it's the computing equivalent of operating a children's playground at the top of a 1000ft cliff with no fence and a slide that ends at the edge of the chasm. PO> 'long time' TB users seem to be aware of things that most M$ PO> users are not, don't simply assume everyone is aware. I will assume with great ease that anyone aware enough to rewrite the TB default templates with their own variants that call up macros based in files somewhere is not a naive user. An unaware user is not going to be writing templates full of macros that come from files. Only extremely advanced users write macros that are read from files anyway, and then only under very special circumstances. I consider myself pretty advanced and I've never done it. Never needed to do it. QTs are much more convenient. IMHO this is where common sense kicks in over paranoia, statistics, possibilities and permutations. -- Cheers -- .\\arck D Pearlstone -- List moderator TB! v2.01.26 on Windows XP 5.1.2600 Service Pack 1 '
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
________________________________________________ Current version is 2.01.3 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
