Re: [ql-users] QL Forum
Hi. - Original Message - From: "ZN" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 6:24 AM Subject: Re: [ql-users] QL Forum > *** REPLY SEPARATOR *** > > On 06/04/02 at 02:50 Dexter wrote: > > [Developer forum] > > > Anyway, it's already a failed idea, so I'll work on something else. > > Don't pronounce it dead yet... there are a couple of new topics. > > > some advertising material for the Qeyboard :o) > > By all means. You've been very quiet lately (I know, pot, kettle, black, > etc...) > > Nasta > I have black pot and a black kettle, which is to match the QL in the black case. Derek
[ql-users] filter dodger
was Re: [ql-users] "DIANOUX" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Bill Waugh writes: > No need for tantrums lads, I think I started this merely by mentioning that > I had received a virus twice from the same source, would you rather I had > kept quiet and let it spread further. > The bandwidth expended by those like myself who commented on the fact that a > virus was infecting the list is nothing compared to that expended by those > who now choose to complain about it at great length ( Per ). I submitted a reasoned explanation about why I objected to being sniped at (again) for a legitimate complaint and warning to other users. (When I sent my mail had hadnt seen yours.) In the interest of avoiding a posting of a list of some 400 email programs I felt this very small sacrifice in bandwidth to be very well worth it ;) You were under no obligation to read it - which I notice you didnt do anyway. > The good Doctor healed himself, what more can we ask, job done, nuff said, The good doctor was diagnosed by others. Only then could he heal himself! > no replies wanted. If you really were interested in bandwidth conservation you couldnt have done better than to keep out of it yourself: You can hardly expect "no replies" when you put my name to your grumble, can you? Per
Re: [ql-users] "DIANOUX" aftermath, OffT then OnT
- Original Message - From: P Witte <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [ql-users] "DIANOUX" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Finally, those who moan > about Lookout Express should consider how they would feel > about changing their system after using it for many (on the > whole, happy) years. Taking such drastic action is a last > resort! Although I only deploy a virus checker on suspicion > of infection, or after engaging in unsafe practices, I have > only once in five years actually been infected, and that I > discovered without the aid of one. I caught it off the > internet, not via email. > Many thanks, Per, you have expressed my feelings exactly not only in the above quote but in your whole piece. In about two years I have only caught a virus once and that was my own fault! (I caught it from a QL-user on this list!) I spend a lot of time working on international surveys of company computer users and have a pretty good idea of how MS is regarded in most European countries. There are some MS lovers, but most users are constructively critical. MS is usually assessed as the most arrogant computer software or hardware company. Now to bring this provocatively back on topic the unfortunate reality is that you can do a lot of things with MS systems than you cannot do with a QL. Our loyalty is based more on a recognition of what the QL could have been rather than of what it is. In discussing MS I would welcome more humility and less arrogance from the QL community. Geoff Wicks
Re: [ql-users] QL Forum
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Phoebus Dokos wrote: > >Qmail > > Exists... Ask J. Dent for more :-) Well, mine'll probably be called Qemail (pronounced keymail) to match the Qeyboard (pronounced, well, you know ;) > >Qbrowser > > Exists... See QL - Lynx (If you really want to use it though you gotta have a TCP >enabled QL (currently only uQLx does that...)... It's a bit of a stretch thinking of lynx as a web browser in the full sense of the word these days. I am hoping we may be able to produce something that can present graphics, tables, and hopefully handle sound too :o) Dave ql.spodmail.com
Re: [ql-users] QL Forum
On Sat, 6 Apr 2002, Bill Waugh wrote: > Qpaintshop Pro Talk to Pheobus - he's the gfx expert :o) > Qmail Hmmm, I do have to do something there. I've written an email client before. If I do something, it will end up looking like pine. > Qbrowser Even the most basic browser is a huge undertaking. This would have to be a group effort. > Well you did ask That'll teach me :o) Dave ql.spodmail.com
Re: [ql-users] QL Forum
- Original Message - From: "Phoebus Dokos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 9:21 PM Subject: Re: [ql-users] QL Forum > ??? 6/4/2002 3:10:11 ìì, ?/? "Bill Waugh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ??: > >Qpaintshop Pro > > Now why would you want a PaintShop Pro clone on the QL...? Paintshop is one of the worse graphics programs I've ever used (and > trust me I know my way around gfx ;-) Now if you told me Photoshop or Fractal Design Painter yeah! I am with you! Heck the GiMP > is great as well (No GTK in sight though Unless Thierry is constructively spending his time in the sea ;-))) I quite like psp, the browse facility is handy although it probably exist on other graf progs. The point is I would like ANY graphics clone. You lost a poor layuser like I when you got in to GiMP and GTK ( he he its all Greek to me ) (;-) All th best - Bill
Re: [ql-users] QL Forum
??? 6/4/2002 3:10:11 ìì, ?/? "Bill Waugh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ??: >Qpaintshop Pro Now why would you want a PaintShop Pro clone on the QL...? Paintshop is one of the worse graphics programs I've ever used (and trust me I know my way around gfx ;-) Now if you told me Photoshop or Fractal Design Painter yeah! I am with you! Heck the GiMP is great as well (No GTK in sight though Unless Thierry is constructively spending his time in the sea ;-))) >Qmail Exists... Ask J. Dent for more :-) >Qbrowser Exists... See QL - Lynx (If you really want to use it though you gotta have a TCP enabled QL (currently only uQLx does that...)... Maybe Marcel is planning on implementing the TCP_ device on the upcoming v.4 of QPC? (hehe just checking) > >Well you did ask > >All the best - Bill > > > > -- Phoebus R. Dokos - Quantum Leap Software Web and Graphic Design - Custom Program Solutions Tech Support - Software Localization Web: http://www.dokos-gr.net ICQ#:34196116 / SMS:+30973267887 SMS:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [ql-users] "DIANOUX" <_jean-louis.dianoux@wanadoo.fr>
??? 6/4/2002 8:27:46 ðì, ?/? "Dilwyn Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ??: > >>Last time we got into this thread I heard the sound of toys being >thrown >>out of prams and children sulking in their rooms. Careful boys! >>-- >>Roy Wood > >Ha, and Dave Parks wants us to use his forum!!! > >If we aim to discuss (PC) viruses on here yet again (and AFAIK the >only QL on-topicness of this is that the virus came from a QLer in the >first place) then I'll start tossing toys out of my pram as well. QL >Chat for this one now PLEASE. > I'll refrain from answering until we can "enhance" QPOP with all kinds of goodies (Attachments) and a sHermes EEPROM erasing virus first ;-) hehe Ummm on second thought we should write a QubIDE partition eraser (Wait it does that on its own!) Damn! you can't even write a decent virus for the QL nowadays :-) (Now THAT IS ON TOPIC) -- Phoebus R. Dokos - Quantum Leap Software Web and Graphic Design - Custom Program Solutions Tech Support - Software Localization Web: http://www.dokos-gr.net ICQ#:34196116 / SMS:+30973267887 SMS:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [ql-users] QL Forum
- Original Message - From: "Dexter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "QL Users" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 2:47 AM Subject: [ql-users] QL Forum > > Hi all, > > Well, I'm scratching my head... > > I really want to do something constructive for the QL community. I'm > working on the soon-to-be-released Qeyboard. I've done some work on a QL > ethernet interface, which is now incorporated into Qubide 2 as etheride... > > And I set up a forum that nobody uses... :o) > > I have a web server sat here 99.9% idle, and it's up for whatever people > have actual use for. It looks like the QL forum is not a hit. So, what is > needed? Tell me, and I'll do my best. :o) Qpaintshop Pro Qmail Qbrowser Well you did ask All the best - Bill
Re: [ql-users] "DIANOUX" <_jean-louis.dianoux@wanadoo.fr>
- Original Message - From: "Dilwyn Jones" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, April 06, 2002 2:27 PM Subject: Re: [ql-users] "DIANOUX" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >Last time we got into this thread I heard the sound of toys being > thrown > >out of prams and children sulking in their rooms. Careful boys! > >-- > >Roy Wood > > Ha, and Dave Parks wants us to use his forum!!! > > If we aim to discuss (PC) viruses on here yet again (and AFAIK the > only QL on-topicness of this is that the virus came from a QLer in the > first place) then I'll start tossing toys out of my pram as well. QL > Chat for this one now PLEASE. No need for tantrums lads, I think I started this merely by mentioning that I had received a virus twice from the same source, would you rather I had kept quiet and let it spread further. The bandwidth expended by those like myself who commented on the fact that a virus was infecting the list is nothing compared to that expended by those who now choose to complain about it at great length ( Per ). The good Doctor healed himself, what more can we ask, job done, nuff said, no replies wanted. All the best - Bill
Re: [ql-users] "DIANOUX" <_jean-louis.dianoux@wanadoo.fr>
> Yes, Ive tried Netscape, M$IE Mail, Lotus Notes and > Pandora, and couldnt get away fast enough from any of them. > I archive all my correspondence: A good many thousand mails > are locked into a proprietary archiving system; the only way > out is deeper into M$'s clutches. Believe me, I tried > getting out after the first hundreds of mails or so but gave > up after days of BS&T. Most of that stuff is now lost or > inaccessible for easy reference. Finally, those who moan > about Lookout Express should consider how they would feel > about changing their system after using it for many (on the > whole, happy) years. Taking such drastic action is a last > resort! I also thought that it would be difficult to get back dozens (not thousands in may case) mails. But importing them into Netscape worked surprisingly well when I did it. Arnould
Re: [ql-users] "DIANOUX" <_jean-louis.dianoux@wanadoo.fr>
>Last time we got into this thread I heard the sound of toys being thrown >out of prams and children sulking in their rooms. Careful boys! >-- >Roy Wood Ha, and Dave Parks wants us to use his forum!!! If we aim to discuss (PC) viruses on here yet again (and AFAIK the only QL on-topicness of this is that the virus came from a QLer in the first place) then I'll start tossing toys out of my pram as well. QL Chat for this one now PLEASE. -- Dilwyn Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.soft.net.uk/dj/index.html
Re: [ql-users] "DIANOUX" <_jean-louis.dianoux@wanadoo.fr>
> >On Wed, Apr 03, 2002 at 11:25:46PM +0100, P Witte wrote: > >> Hiall, > >> > >> This is the third virus Ive had from [EMAIL PROTECTED] within > >> the last couple of months. So far I have escaped, but sooner or later > >> someones going to take a hit. > > > >to be more precise, someone using the unfortunate email program. > > > >Should I post a list of alternative email programs? There is > >probably at least 400 really usable email programs around, many > >of them free, a good fraction of this even work on several platforms. > >None of them can promise perfect security but the impact with *every* > >other mailer has been not even a fraction of the problem you encounter > >with Outlook every time its miserable design fails. > > > >Btw don't think this is a problem that will go away with improved > >anti-virus SW or the 1EXP46-th build of Outlook, a real solution > >would require Microsoft to cut back on unneeded dangerous features > >and that probably won't happen until the doomsday. > Demon's Turnpike has been 100% OK since I started using it 5 years ago. > There are no security flaws in it - well none the hackers know about. I dont want to get into any more religious wars, so Id like to take the opportunity to put some logic into this "discussion". I have valid reasons for doing what I do. Here are a few: When I started out with the internet I decided it was time to go for at least one interface that was common to most of the rest of computing humanity. A few quirky computer systems are enough of a handicap. I dont want to become a complete nerd unnecessarily. Hence Windoze, and the only "free", working email program at the time outside the workplace. I asked for advice - on this list too IIRC - and none of these clever hindsights were forthcoming at the time. Yes, Ive tried Netscape, M$IE Mail, Lotus Notes and Pandora, and couldnt get away fast enough from any of them. I archive all my correspondence: A good many thousand mails are locked into a proprietary archiving system; the only way out is deeper into M$'s clutches. Believe me, I tried getting out after the first hundreds of mails or so but gave up after days of BS&T. Most of that stuff is now lost or inaccessible for easy reference. Finally, those who moan about Lookout Express should consider how they would feel about changing their system after using it for many (on the whole, happy) years. Taking such drastic action is a last resort! Although I only deploy a virus checker on suspicion of infection, or after engaging in unsafe practices, I have only once in five years actually been infected, and that I discovered without the aid of one. I caught it off the internet, not via email. If there are any timorous newbies on this list Im sure they must be grateful for all sage advice and may even rejoice in a list of 400 email programs, but dont issue that sort of thing at me, if you please. Thank you. Im not saying that I cant change, or that I dont need advice, including basic advice, it is just that this particular issue keeps being regurgitated, and the incessant sniping from some quarters is slowly fraying my cool. Yes, doors have even been banged and multiple exclamation marks have been bandied about when people have raised their legitimate concerns - denied by others sitting on their own smug solutions, some of which I dare say, would not bare too close scrutiny wrt insight, suitability or performance, but have rather to do with opportunity, taste and habit - exactly as in my own case. I believe everyone is entitled to make their own choices provided they behave reasonably and responsibly, and ensure they do not cause unnecessary distress to others. Someone was obviously not paying attention, which is why I allowed myself to grumble recently. Not, mind you, by presuming to lecture him on his choice of mail client, but by suggesting he be temporarily disconnected from this list until he had taken appropriate remedial action. Now I too have lectured at length. I hope at least some of you found the humorous in it. However, I also hope you detected the steely core of my resolve not to be pushed around. In matters of race, gender, religion, sexual orientation and choice of email client I expect to be respected as an equal and not subjected to "re-education" campaigns and other forms of harassment. Per
