Re[3]: Norton Anti Virus 2001 and TheBat

[John Rainer]

Sunday, July 28, 2002, 6:40:11 PM, you wrote:

KLc> Hello Sudip,


SP>> I find that incredulous ! AFAIK, NAV 2001 configures OE and Eudora
SP>> automatically but not others, certainly not TB!. Are you sure, your
SP>> mails were(are) being routed through POPROXY? It's NAV 2002 that scans
SP>> the default POP and SMTP ports, thereby eliminating the need to
SP>> configure a MUA.


KLc>   Yes. All I did, and this is on multiple installs, so I know it's not
KLc>   just a glitch, was tell NAV 2000/2001 that I was using "other" email
KLc>   client. I never had to do anything to TB. And now with 2002 it does
KLc>   it automatically. I am very pleased with 2002's integration.



KLc> Best regards,
 
KLc> KurganMailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]


Sudip is right though - both 2000 and 2001 need manual configuration
of The Bat to scan mail. I cannot see how email scanning will occur if
this is not done. Both versions will still pick up viruses if the
server changes are not made but this will be from the resident
scanner, not from email scanning. The giveaway is the scanning
envelope that appears in the system tray while retrieving mail. If it
is not there in 2001, mail is not being scanned.

>From 2001:

Norton AntiVirus recognizes and automatically configures the following
email clients for protection:

Microsoft Outlook Express 4.0/5.X
Microsoft Outlook 97/98/2000
Netscape Messenger 4.X
Eudora Light 3.0
Eudora Pro 4.0
Pegasus Mail 3.0
Becky! Internet Mail 1.26
AL-Mail32 1.11

2002 operates in a very different way and needs no changes to settings
in The Bat.

John Rainer



Current Ver: 1.61
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/

Re[2]: OT: Win98 or Win XP

[John Rainer]

Monday, July 15, 2002, 5:19:02 AM, you wrote:

JA> Hi Nick,
JA> On Sun, 14 Jul 2002 20:16:33 -0700, you wrote:

>> I understand that MS will not be supporting Win 2K for very much longer, so
>> I'm curious if XP Pro can be just as secure and stable as Win 2K if you know
>> what you are doing.

JA> I thought it was Windows 9x/ME... didn't realise they were dropping support for
JA> 2K as well... An unusual move seeing as they have not really been pushing WinXP
JA> as a server product yet (not that I'd noticed anyway)

The lifecycles and support options are at
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/lifecycleconsumer.asp There are a
number of W2K questions and answers at the foot of the page relating
to business use.

John Rainer



Current Ver: 1.61
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bug Reports: https://www.ritlabs.com/bt/

Re[2]: New 1.60 version ! :-)

[John Rainer]

Friday, March 22, 2002, 9:00:41 PM, you wrote:

R> Hi John

R> On Fri, 22 Mar 2002 20:56:59 +GMT
R>(which was 22/03/2002, 21:56 +0100GMT for me),
R> you wrote:

JR>> Do I have the first bug or is this a feature? I launch The Bat from a
JR>> shortcut on the quicklaunch bar in XP Pro (using 'classic' layout),
JR>> with The Bat set to run maximised. When I do this with 1.6 the whole
JR>> task bar disappears, leaving a gap at the bottom of the screen, and I
JR>> get some really wierd screen corruption when alt-tabbing between apps.
JR>> When launched from a shortcut elsewhere, it seems to be ok.

R> It's a small bug (I have the same problem...)
R> workaround: set your shortcut to 'normal window' and everything works
R> fine...

Hi Roel,

After doing that, it still runs maximised but with no missing task
bar. Is The Bat written in Delphi? We have a program at work that is,
and it also has some strange behaviour when run via the quicklaunch
bar in NT4.

John



Current Ver: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: New 1.60 version ! :-)

[John Rainer]

Friday, March 22, 2002, 7:51:49 PM, you wrote:

EM> Hi ,

EM> The Bat! 1.60 is released and available on the site :
EM> http://www.ritlabs.com/the_bat/download.html


Do I have the first bug or is this a feature? I launch The Bat from a
shortcut on the quicklaunch bar in XP Pro (using 'classic' layout),
with The Bat set to run maximised. When I do this with 1.6 the whole
task bar disappears, leaving a gap at the bottom of the screen, and I
get some really wierd screen corruption when alt-tabbing between apps.
When launched from a shortcut elsewhere, it seems to be ok.

John Rainer



Current Ver: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re[4]: Purchasing Norton Anti Virus 2001

[John Rainer]

Sunday, February 24, 2002, 12:21:22 AM, you wrote:


JD> Does 2002 have the virtual pop server like 2001 does?? No
JD> one ever mentioned that in any of the posts. Please excuse my
JD> ignorance.

JD> Everyone seemed so happy with 2001, I figured
JD> that would be best. :)

JD> Thanks

2002 does not have a configurable virtual pop server and no mail
accounts need any changes to them. Other changes include outbound
email scanning, greater flexibility in specifying file extensions for
autoprotect and background update checks. These are the only
advantages over 2001 as far as I can see and I can live without them
for the sake of autodeleting infected mail.

John Rainer


-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 

Re[2]: Norton Anti Virus 2001 and TB

[John Rainer]

Sunday, February 17, 2002, 12:00:01 AM, you wrote:

GL> Saturday, February 16, 2002, 10:39:04 PM, Yuki Taga wrote:

>> Interesting.  I have never had this happen, so let me see if I
>> understand you correctly.  You are saying that in auto-protect mode,
>> Norton will stop a download if it detects a virus in a message coming
>> it.  Is that right?
GL> ---

GL> It depends on how you configure auto-protect mode. The reason that the
GL> download stops is that NAV detects the virus and prevents TB from
GL> accessing the infected file until it has completed the required
GL> action. If NAV is configured to ask what to do with the infected file,
GL> TB cannot complete processing the message until you have responded to
GL> NAV. Because NAV is holding a message, waiting for your input,
GL> subsequent messages cannot be processed until you respond.

GL> However, if you configure NAV to automatically quarantine or delete
GL> the infection without asking, it can deal with the infection without
GL> waiting for your input, and thus should not prevent TB from completing
GL> the download.

GL> HTH,


It is also important to know the differences between 2001 and 2002, as
the email scanning mechanism is very different. There is no autodelete
function for mail downloads in 2002 and both quarantine and repair on
the mail scanner require user input, so any virus detection stops the
mail download until this is done. After the 20th badtrans, this gets
very tiresome. In 2001, infected mail attachments can be deleted by
the mail scanner without interrupting the download at all, leaving the
mail body intact and a virus information text file in place of the
attachment.

Symantec's advice on this change in 2002 is to turn the mail scanner
off and rely on the resident scanner, as Geoff has indicated for 2001.
This will have exactly the same problem (manual deleting of each
infected attachment) unless you configure the resident scanner to
autodelete which, unlike the mail scanner in 2002, can be done. This
is, however, rather dangerous as it means that infections from other
sources that affect system files could possibly lead to the deletion
of system files before you have a chance to repair them, depending on
what stage Norton picks the virus up. This is one reason why a
separate mail scanner can be a good idea. Set the resident scanner to
autoquarantine and it gets round this problem but still leaves
quarantine filled up with infected files which have to be dealt with
sometime.

I had a lengthy correspondence with Symantec techies about the changes
in 2002 and I got the distinct impression that they were not too keen
on some of these themselves. It seems they were forced on them by
their customer services people, who wanted a mail scanner that didn't
require each account to be configured. They could only give them one
at the expense of losing other functionality.

I went back to 2001 - this works in XP, btw, if you run the symevent
update file before rebooting after installation.

John Rainer


-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 

Re[2]: Anti-virus plugins

[John Rainer]

Wednesday, January 02, 2002, 11:24:09 PM, you wrote:

DAC> On 28 Dec 2001, 10:47:54 AM, John Rainer wrote:

>> The email scanner in 2002 works in a very different way to earlier
>> versions and needs no email client configuration. The only automatic
>> function seems to be autorepair, which pops up a dialog on every
>> infected mail (infuriating) as it can't repair it, plus it picks up
>> the tmp file created by the bat, presumably because the mail is
>> intercepted in a different way from 2000/2001. To make things worse,
>> what's left of any infected mail has most of its headers removed.
>> I've heard that 2001 can be got to work in XP, so I might give it a
>> try - that worked fine in Windows 2000.

DAC> I just received a message with a virus which was detected by NAV 2002.
DAC> While it didn't give me a choice to delete, the easy option was to hit
DAC> the quarantine button, which I did. The virus got quarantined, the
DAC> rest of the mail got collected, and I was able to locate the message
DAC> which had had the infected attachment. (I sent to the sender asking
DAC> that I be removed from the resident Outlook Express address book and
DAC> suggested that the machine be checked for infection. I sent a copy of
DAC> the message to the postmaster of the ISP in question and to abuse@
DAC> that address as well. The message to 'postmaster' bounced because her
DAC> mailbox was over quota!!)

DAC> Anyhow, my point is that NAV 2002 seemed to me to have behaved quite
DAC> adequately.

Fine for you but not for me, especially after using earlier versions.
I'm not denying 2002 works - it does, but the way it works is not as
convenient for me as in 2000 and 2001. If you opt for quarantine
instead of repair, you still have to hit a button to quarantine the
mail otherwise your mail download stops, and after the fifth one, this
gets a bit tedious and after the twentieth infuriating. I was getting
40 badtrans a day when it first came out and others were getting many
more. You then have to look at all the stuff in quarantine and
manually delete it. Having used 2000 and 2001, where there is a
dialog-free delete option as first choice for infected mail, not a
last ditch alternative after going through repair and/or quarantine
dialog, this was a step backward, imho.

In 2001, infected attachments can be deleted automatically with no
intervention by me and mail downloads proceed uninterrupted without me
having to be at my desktop to press a button or have other tasks
interrupted. All received mail is still present in my inbox, with
all mail information there, but those with infected attachments have
their attachments replaced by a text file giving details of the virus
that was in the deleted file.

If you're happy with 2002, fine - I just prefer the functionality in
2001 and for any others that do, it does seem to work in XP ok if
certain precautions are taken at installation.

John


-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 

Re[2]: Anti-virus plugins

[John Rainer]

Wednesday, January 02, 2002, 12:19:27 AM, you wrote:

ACM> @ 19:05:47 + [ Tue, 1 Jan 2002], John Rainer [JR] thoughtfully
ACM> wrote the following:
ACM> ...
JR>> Re the stuff on Norton and XP below: (related to Norton AV 2002
JR>> and the loss of the autodelete function for infected mail after
JR>> moving from 2001)

ACM> I'm a PC-Cillin user, and this new system I got came with NAV 2002
ACM> installed.. I've been using it and have so far had one bad experience.
ACM> I disable the mail checker since I use the system monitor. However, it
ACM> would appear that it stakes out the temp folder and will alert you of
ACM> virus or virus-like presence in the temp folder. No problem. However,
ACM> TB! was in the process of downloading an infected message and as soon
ACM> as NAV2002 detected it in the temp folder it alerted me but this
ACM> process somehow prevents TB! from completing the download and deletion
ACM> from the server. As a result of this, TB! kept attempting the download
ACM> until I had to manually delete the offending message from the server.

ACM> This I find annoying. PC-Cillin never did or caused this.

This is more or less what I found - 2001 deleted attachments before
they were actually received by the mail client by redirecting incoming
mail through a local server arrangement. In 2002, what seems to happen
is a forced scan of the mail as it is handled by the client, which not
only picks up infected mail but also tmp files as they are created. It
then says it found two infected files but can only find one of them
(as the tmp file has gone), that they cannot be repaired and that
after deletion of one file there is still infected mail present,
presumably because it can't find the previously infected tmp file.
It does go on, though, to complete the mail download - at least, it
did for me.

None of this can be automated so if you receive a series of badtrans,
it gets very tedious. 2001, on the other hand, works fine, fully
automatic and adding txt attachments to say what virus was in the
deleted attachment. There is a slight drawback from 2002 in that it
doesn't scan outging mail, which I can live without anyway.

John


-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 

Re[3]: Anti-virus plugins

[John Rainer]

Re the stuff on Norton and XP below: (related to Norton AV 2002 and
the loss of the autodelete function for infected mail after moving
from 2001)

I've found that Norton 2001 works fine (so far!) with the Bat in XP if
the instructions found from the google search below are followed.
Norton were very cagy about it working, citing the Microsoft
compatiblity update as untested. in fact, I suspect all the MS update
is is a warning flash on installation about the symevent file in 2001
being incompatible, but installing the updated file during the main
install seems to work ok.

Uninstalling 2002 was a pain, though - the uninstall routine leaves
loads of stuff in the registry which I manually cleared out, and a
number of dll files. Even then, the new install picked up my
registration details from the 2002 install. At least my 90 day oem
2001 copy now has the 365 days of updates of the retail 2002 that was
there before!

My mail downloads are now fully automatic but I've disabled all the
scheduled tasks just in case there is still a problem with Symevent.

John Rainer

Friday, December 28, 2001, 8:22:47 PM, you wrote:

JR> Friday, December 28, 2001, 6:45:55 PM, you wrote:


S>> John, your observations of NAV2002 seem to be exactly the same as my
S>> observations.  I think the autodelete function is not there, at least
S>> I have not seen the option.  Like you, the autorepair does not seem to
S>> work.

S>> I'd be interested to know whether or not you are successful in using
S>> NAV2001 with WinXP.  I did try it, but got the "not compatible"
S>> warnings.  Symantec has some information on using it, but was very
S>> hard to find on their web site, and seemed very sketchy.  I never
S>> could make it work and from what others say, they couldn't either.

JR> Sam,

JR> I found the following info on Google - I don't know if it is reliable
JR> or not! Put "HjWi7.17602$[EMAIL PROTECTED]" complete with
JR> quotes into a Google news search.

JR> There is also a software compatibility update for XP where Norton
JR> Antivirus 2001 is mentioned - I've contacted Symantec about it and am
JR> awaiting a response (cue moaning wind and tumbleweed). See
JR> 
http://servicenews.symantec.com/cgi-bin/displayArticle.cgi?group=symantec.support.winnt.nortonantivirus2002.general&article=25317
JR> - I did not post the original article but did follow it up.

JR> John


-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 

Re[3]: Anti-virus plugins

[John Rainer]

(apologies if this appears twice)

Re the stuff on Norton and XP below: (related to Norton AV 2002 and
the loss of the autodelete function for infected mail after moving
from 2001)

I've found that Norton 2001 works fine (so far!) with the Bat in XP if
the instructions found from the google search below are followed.
Norton were very cagy about it working, citing the Microsoft
compatiblity update as untested. in fact, I suspect all the MS update
is is a warning flash on installation about the symevent file in 2001
being incompatible, but installing the updated file during the main
install seems to work ok.

Uninstalling 2002 was a pain, though - the uninstall routine leaves
loads of stuff in the registry which I manually cleared out, and a
number of dll files. Even then, the new install picked up my
registration details from the 2002 install. At least my 90 day oem
2001 copy now has the 365 days of updates of the retail 2002 that was
there before!

My mail downloads are now fully automatic but I've disabled all the
scheduled tasks just in case there is still a problem with Symevent.

John Rainer

Friday, December 28, 2001, 8:22:47 PM, you wrote:

JR> Friday, December 28, 2001, 6:45:55 PM, you wrote:


S>> John, your observations of NAV2002 seem to be exactly the same as my
S>> observations.  I think the autodelete function is not there, at least
S>> I have not seen the option.  Like you, the autorepair does not seem to
S>> work.

S>> I'd be interested to know whether or not you are successful in using
S>> NAV2001 with WinXP.  I did try it, but got the "not compatible"
S>> warnings.  Symantec has some information on using it, but was very
S>> hard to find on their web site, and seemed very sketchy.  I never
S>> could make it work and from what others say, they couldn't either.

JR> Sam,

JR> I found the following info on Google - I don't know if it is reliable
JR> or not! Put "HjWi7.17602$[EMAIL PROTECTED]" complete with
JR> quotes into a Google news search.

JR> There is also a software compatibility update for XP where Norton
JR> Antivirus 2001 is mentioned - I've contacted Symantec about it and am
JR> awaiting a response (cue moaning wind and tumbleweed). See
JR> 
http://servicenews.symantec.com/cgi-bin/displayArticle.cgi?group=symantec.support.winnt.nortonantivirus2002.general&article=25317
JR> - I did not post the original article but did follow it up.

JR> John


-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 

Re[2]: BAT's word wrapping abilities...

[John Rainer]

Saturday, December 29, 2001, 5:58:24 PM, you wrote:

DH> Hello John!

DH> On 29 Dec 2001 at 17:22:33 you wrote:

>> I can't help wondering if the programmers are indulging the nerd,
>> sorry, expert, users at the expense of the rest of us in this
>> 'feature'.

DH> Is "nerd" or "expert" the operative here? And which do *you* consider
DH> the more insulting?

As someone who considers himself to be a bit of a computer nerd, I
don't find either term insulting, nor was any insult intended - they
tend to be interchangeable descriptions as far as experienced PC users
go!

My attempted, but apparently failed, humorous point was that either
term describes people who tend to get more wrapped up in the details
of something and how it works than how easy it is to actually use by
the rest of the world. If a word processor behaved like this for the
staff at my office, they would be banging on my door demanding my
blood! We actually have a copy of The Bat at work for a specialist
task and no-one else but me will use it.

I'm not knocking the feature itself - as a long term Bat user I know
what it can do, but for me it is just plain irritating in day to day
use - I just there was a switch to make it behave in a more
conventional fashion and keep everyone happy.

John Rainer



-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 

Re[2]: BAT's word wrapping abilities...

[John Rainer]

Saturday, December 29, 2001, 3:53:46 PM, you wrote:

RP> Hello Sebastian,

S>> If I do that though, it just destroys my format. Say I have one
S>> line with a header, then two spaces, then a text, and after 2 more
S>> spaces a footer - I would have to select 3 times and do alt-l -
S>> come on, it's almost 2002, is that all that is possible?

RP> Yes, that's what we get in 2002 with The Bat! Sad but true :-(

RP> The editor in TB is rather disatrous in many respects, but what some
RP> people, including myself, consider as poor design is generally seen as
RP> brillant by the members of this list, particularly those who like to
RP> design pretty little tables and indulge in useless ASCII art. Go
RP> figure...

RP> Cheers,
RP> Rmi Pach

I can't help wondering if the programmers are indulging the nerd,
sorry, expert, users at the expense of the rest of us in this
'feature'. Agent, for example, seems to do this simple task without
the need for weird key combinations every time you paste stuff in or
go back and add to or delete an existing bit of text. It's the one
thing that stops me recommending The Bat to friends who are accustomed
to the ease of use of more run of the mill mail programs.

My suggestion would be a configurable option so that the editor can
behave either way - this would satisfy both camps. The auto-wrap
feature as it stands is just not good enough, imho.

John Rainer



-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 

Re[2]: Anti-virus plugins

[John Rainer]

Friday, December 28, 2001, 6:45:55 PM, you wrote:


S> John, your observations of NAV2002 seem to be exactly the same as my
S> observations.  I think the autodelete function is not there, at least
S> I have not seen the option.  Like you, the autorepair does not seem to
S> work.

S> I'd be interested to know whether or not you are successful in using
S> NAV2001 with WinXP.  I did try it, but got the "not compatible"
S> warnings.  Symantec has some information on using it, but was very
S> hard to find on their web site, and seemed very sketchy.  I never
S> could make it work and from what others say, they couldn't either.

Sam,

I found the following info on Google - I don't know if it is reliable
or not! Put "HjWi7.17602$[EMAIL PROTECTED]" complete with
quotes into a Google news search.

There is also a software compatibility update for XP where Norton
Antivirus 2001 is mentioned - I've contacted Symantec about it and am
awaiting a response (cue moaning wind and tumbleweed). See
http://servicenews.symantec.com/cgi-bin/displayArticle.cgi?group=symantec.support.winnt.nortonantivirus2002.general&article=25317
- I did not post the original article but did follow it up.

John



-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 

Re[3]: Anti-virus plugins

[John Rainer]

Friday, December 28, 2001, 1:36:47 PM, you wrote:


DN>   Norton  Antivirus  works  very  well  with The Bat!  Be sure to
DN>   enable the manual mail configuration, and for each mail account
DN>   (assuming  that  it's a POP account), use pop3.norton.antivirus
DN>   instead of the POP mail address.  Use that one in your username
DN>   line:   username/pop.mail   The  SMTP  address  will remain
DN>   unaffected.   The  online help will have more detail, just make
DN>   sure to look under "manual mail configuration."

DN>   I   have   my  NAV  setup  to  automatically  delete  infected
DN>   attachments.   All  I see in the left hand frame is a file icon
DN>   with  some  Norton  Virus  Detected  message.   I  got  another
DN>   "Badtrans"  sent  to  me  yesterday,  and  Norton  and The Bat!
DN>   handled it wonderfully.

Dave,

Which version are you using? - I've gone to 2002 because I'm now using
XP and the autodelete function seems not to be present in 2002 -
worked fine in 2000 and 2001 though.

The email scanner in 2002 works in a very different way to earlier
versions and needs no email client configuration. The only automatic
function seems to be autorepair, which pops up a dialog on every
infected mail (infuriating) as it can't repair it, plus it picks up
the tmp file created by the bat, presumably because the mail is
intercepted in a different way from 2000/2001. To make things worse,
what's left of any infected mail has most of its headers removed. I've
heard that 2001 can be got to work in XP, so I might give it a try -
that worked fine in Windows 2000.

Advice from Symantec on their forums seems to be along the lines of
disabling the email scanner, as it is only a supplementary function,
and relying instead on the resident scanner. Seems to ignore the point
of why some users want to use email scanning but there you go.

John Rainer



-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 

Re[2]: norton antivirus 2001

[John Rainer]

That's odd - 2001 is working fine for me on W2K

John Rainer

Friday, November 16, 2001, 4:44:13 PM, you wrote:

This was my experience also.  Norton AV2002 does seem to protect
the_Bat but not AV2001.
-- 
Have a great day,
Sam
 

> i have installed norton antiviral 2001, activated e-mail protection
> , for various accounts of Outlook Express , it provides proterction
> , but not for thebat 1.53d which i am using pkroy
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ---


-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 

Re[2]: Comment

[John Rainer]

Friday, October 26, 2001, 11:00:20 PM, you wrote:

NA> Hello *Kevin*,

NA> On Friday, October 26 2001 at 01:34 PM PDT, you wrote:

>> So its a Great improvement, GUI is Excellent, and If i could change
>> ANYTHING it would be to have Customizable toolbars!!

NA> No argument there! :o)  Customisable toolbars still is a long awaited
NA> improvement to the GUI, but we've had to take a back seat to HTML and a
NA> Calculator. ;o(

Seconded - plus the ability to lock the damn things - I always seem
to have the knack of inadvertently dragging them off position.

John Rainer


-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 

Re[2]: Help! I can no longer open eml messages saved to my hard drive

[John Rainer]

Saturday, October 20, 2001, 1:06:38 AM, Peter Meyns wrote:

PM> I'm not sure what msimn is, but it is obviously not OE.

Actually, msimn.exe _is_ the OE executable. :)

John Rainer


-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 

Re[2]: Mailsweeper blocking 'unrecognised headers' in mail redirected via The Bat

[John Rainer]

Thursday, October 18, 2001, 7:11:06 PM, you wrote:

SH> On  Thu,  18 Oct 2001 at 18:52:41 GMT +0100 (10/19/2001 12:52 AM where
SH> you think I live) "John Rainer"=[JR] typed the following :

JR>> We  can't  use forwarding as the Reply-to address gets screwed and
JR>> senders don't always include their email address in the body text.

SH> TB 1.54 (still beta) have change the standard header while redirecting
SH> a message. Would you mind to try latest beta, perhaps the "new header"
SH> will accepted by MIMEsweeper.

Unfortunately, the latest beta suffers from the same problem. I have
got round it by forwarding (forwarded messages see to get passed ok)
the mail with %replyto="%Ofromaddr". This means the staff get a
working reply-to address in the mail that ends up in the network.
However, the mails they receive still appear in their message list
onscreen to come from one address, despite being originally sent by
any one of 400 organisations. I tried adding %from="%Ofromaddr" which
worked on some mails but some were not sent on by the smtp server
accessed by the standalone, so I gave up. At least it works and the
original sender address is quoted in the body text.

Thanks

John Rainer


-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 

Re[2]: Mailsweeper blocking 'unrecognised headers' in mail redirected via The Bat

[John Rainer]

Thursday, October 18, 2001, 7:11:06 PM, you wrote:

SH> On  Thu,  18 Oct 2001 at 18:52:41 GMT +0100 (10/19/2001 12:52 AM where
SH> you think I live) "John Rainer"=[JR] typed the following :

JR>> A recent upgrade to Mailsweeper, which I think is part of, or
JR>> associated with, Mimesweeper has led to these mails being blocked due
JR>> to 'unrecognised headers' in the re-directed mail.

SH> What is the "unrecognized header", any specific info ?

I'll find out for sure, although I think that was the message it gave,
without identifying the header concerned

SH> TB 1.54 (still beta) have change the standard header while redirecting
SH> a message. Would you mind to try latest beta, perhaps the "new header"
SH> will accepted by MIMEsweeper.

Thanks - I'll give the beta a try.

John


-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 

Mailsweeper blocking 'unrecognised headers' in mail redirected via The Bat

[John Rainer]

My employers use The Bat on a standalone PC to automatically redirect
mail from a external mail server, containing mail on professional
topics, to a custom email address within the company. This arrangement
dealt with problems accessing the mail's pop server directly from the
network via a client PC - using Exchange, this bypassed Mimesweeper
and was stopped. The organisation responsible for the mail refuses to
allow mail forwarding to my or any other member company.

A recent upgrade to Mailsweeper, which I think is part of, or
associated with, Mimesweeper has led to these mails being blocked due
to 'unrecognised headers' in the re-directed mail. It gets quarantined
and has to be manually released. Our I.T. section say that Mailsweeper
cannot be configured to allow whatever headers are causing this
problem to be ignored. It is apparently possible to set up mail from a
particular source to be ignored by Mailsweeper but this means
everything goes through unchecked.

Mail composed within The Bat goes through, mail forwarded via Outlook
Express goes through but anything redirected by The Bat doesn't. Anyone
any idea why these re-directed mails are being blocked and how to get
around the problem? We can't use forwarding as the Reply-to address
gets screwed and senders don't always include their email address in
the body text.

Thanks

John Rainer


-- 

Archives   : http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
Moderators : mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
TBTech List: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Latest Vers: 1.53d
FAQ: http://faq.thebat.dutaint.com 

Re[2]: The Bat! Lite?

[John Rainer]

C> But as a selling point to get people to buy TB!, after a 30 day fully
C> functional evaluation period, the "Lite" version would become default
C> until a valid license is purchased.

C> I applaud Stefan and Max for producing and continually updating an
C> excellant product and believe they well deserved to be paid! By
C> causing the evaluation version to migrate to a Lite version the
C> customer will not loose their email, but they won't have access to the
C> enhancements eitheruntil a valid key is purchaced.

C> Cheers,
C>  Cricket

I think there might be a slight danger that the lite version will
satisfy too many persons' needs and take income away from the main
version(s). Take myself, for instance - I only became a Bat user
because I was fed up with Outlook Express pulling back html material
when online and insisting on dialling in when viewing html offline.
The dial-in demand could be disabled but at the expense of affecting
other functions and I wasn't happy with the security aspect of html
handling either.

I didn't want a client with embedded advertising/spyware but needed
good handling of multiple accounts and reasonably powerful filters.
The Bat fitted the bill fine but the networking features, pgp, macros
and templates are all redundant for me. In fact, I disable the mail
ticker, find the editor a pain and also wipe most of the account
default template settings. I'm not saying this is the way it should be
- just that I'm sure there is a section of the market where people's
needs are quite basic but they do not want to use OE or other html
clients.

One of the program's biggest plusses for me is the message dispatcher
- I had no idea it was there for a couple of months until I found it's
use being discussed on the mail list. As a feature, it is just
described in the Help file as 'Manage your mail on the pop server' -
what underselling for new users! An old hand or systems administrator
might recognise the implications of this description straight away but
a lot of people won't. It's an absolute godsend for deleting large
mails, unsolicited or otherwise, without having to download them or
apply a universal size block on a account that stops everything. Yes,
I could telnet into my account but that's obscure for most people and
this feature makes it so much easier. I know people who on being sent
an unsolicited 5mb attachment will just moan about their phone bill
and sit there while it downloads!

My thoughts would be to stick to the current arrangement but to bear
in mind the Bat customer base are a pretty varied lot and easy to use
configuration of features is probably, IMHO, a better option than
producing a lite version.

John Rainer

-- 
__
Archives   : <http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com>
Moderators : <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
TBTech List: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: 1.52 Message centre/Connection Centre problems

[John Rainer]

JL> Hello John,

JL> Monday, May 07, 2001, 10:36:13 AM, you wrote:

>> I was quite happy with the old progress bar and now it has been
>> replaced by something hideously ugly

JL> In my opinion the CC is a significant improvement to TB. I found the
JL> old progress bar to be next to useless. If you resize the entire CC so
JL> that you can see all columns in the upper window and scroll down to
JL> the log in the lower window, you've got a superb option for control of
JL> your doings when sending and receiving mails - IMO!

The progress bar gave me nearly all the information I wanted - its
only problem was that mail retrieval for multiple accounts layered
progress bars on top of each other so that you couldn't see what was
going on for each account. The connection centre addresses this issue
but now it gives far more information than I need and is just too
intrusive. I'd prefer a single small progress bar and an option to
check accounts successively rather than simultaneously but that's just
IMO! :)

John

-- 
__
Archives   : 
Moderators : 
TBTech List: 
Unsubscribe: 

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

1.52 Message centre/Connection Centre problems

[John Rainer]

In v1.52, the download progress bar has been replaced, according to
the text file of changes, by the Message centre. As I can't find a
Message centre, I assume this is the Connection centre.

A couple of things:

1. I was quite happy with the old progress bar and now it has been
replaced by something hideously ugly.

2. On checking multiple accounts in previous versions, it would
sometimes fail to retrieve mail from an account. I would cancel
retrieval after oking the warning message, select the account and
retrieve mail ok. With 1.52 the same thing happens but if I now try to
cancel the download, the retrieval can't be cancelled, no matter what
option (Delete task or Abort) I try in the Connection centre. I can
still navigate around the program but I can't get rid of the retrieval
task. If I try to close the whole program down, it hangs completely
and I have to ctl-alt-del to get rid of it.

I'm using The Bat on W2K, and am using Norton AV, which has been
working largely ok with this program for at least 12 months.

Thanks

John Rainer

-- 
__
Archives   : <http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com>
Moderators : <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
TBTech List: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Beginner's List

[John Rainer]

ACM> On Tue, 16 Jan 2001 07:56:08 +, John graced us with these
ACM> comments:

JR>> I have to disagree - I am a long term subscriber to this list but
JR>> am just a simple home user looking for the occasional tip to make
JR>> my life easier. I do find them here but I have to wade through a
JR>> huge amount of stuff which is often almost bizarrely obscure or
JR>> gone into in a depth way beyond that which I need. I've often had
JR>> to search through the archive to understand the answer, let alone
JR>> the questions!

ACM> Aaah! It's to users like yourself, that splitting the list is
ACM> dedicated. :=)
ACM>  A. Curtis Martin  [List Moderator TBUDL/TBBETA]

Courteous and detailed reply snipped.

Thankyou for your response. I agree that the more overtly aggressive
posts have largely gone but a forum that is always full of advanced
topics is in itself a barrier to asking the more simple questions. I
think the proposal to have two lists is a good one.

For the benefit of any straw poll, I do not see any problems in having
two groups. I'll probably subscribe to both, read the beginner's one
in detail and skim the tech one, as someone has already suggested.

Many thanks

John Rainer

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Beginner's List

[John Rainer]

DH> You already have the beta list. IMPOV, "the more in-depth type of
DH> discussions" have NOT been "overwhelming TBUDL". If I had more time,
DH> I'd get deeper into myself and don't want to have to join another
DH> list in order to get "in depth" info. No one is forced to read all
DH> of any post. Some readers may skip the most basic items (unless they
DH> care to help), while others may engage in or color code / flag for later
DH> reference, any items that get into enough detail to make them
DH> interesting. I say, leave it as is.

I have to disagree - I am a long term subscriber to this list but am
just a simple home user looking for the occasional tip to make my life
easier. I do find them here but I have to wade through a huge amount
of stuff which is often almost bizarrely obscure or gone into in a
depth way beyond that which I need. I've often had to search through
the archive to understand the answer, let alone the questions!

There are also a few regular posters who occasionally seem to adopt a
'this is my club' attitude to the group. This seems to lead to the
slapping down of simple newbie questions as being of the 'seen it,
done it, got the t-shirt, now go away and leave this group for the big
boys' category. This makes posting of queries about basic functions
quite intimidating. I can imagine just how newbies (a derogative term
in itself, to set aside 'them' from 'us') feel when they see the list
articles for the first time.

DH> Most of the beginners issues could probably be taken care via the
DH> FAQ or the new help file (which I haven't seen), but TBUDL's capable
DH> of handling any issue relating to finished releases.

The problem with (any) Help file is that in searching it, you need to
know the basics in the first place. Here's something from the current
one in looking up message filters:

"It is possible to use Regular Expressions as signal strings in the
message filters. In a filter definition in the Sorting Office
dialogue, select the “Options” tab and tick the “Regular expressions”
checkbox. Note that ALL signal strings of the filter will be treated
as regular expressions so make sure that they all are compliant with
the syntax of Regular Expressions."

Of course, silly me. No doubt it is bread and butter to many
of you but this kind of thing is rather difficult when you're doing it
just once to set the program up rather than administering a system
where it is a routine day in, day out task. I just set up all my
filters from guesswork until they worked ok. There's an awful lot more
which no doubt makes the Bat extremely powerful but I hope it
accommodates more than just power users. I'm all for another
list!

John Rainer



-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: TB! Temp Files?

[John Rainer]

ACM> I've never had reason to be deleting these files or have never had a
ACM> build up of these files in my temp folder. This failure of TB! related
ACM> temp files being deleted is a very uncommon problem.

Not that I'm particularly bothered, but this happens regularly to me - I
assume as a result of using a mail virus scanner.

John Rainer



-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: The Bat! - bug report

[John Rainer]

TF> Hallo Mike,

TF> On Fri, 17 Nov 2000 16:59:47 -0500 GMT (18/11/2000, 05:59 +0800 GMT),
TF> Mike Yetto wrote:

MY>>   The bug description:
MY>> If a message is received while reading a prior message the one
MY>> being read is cleared.

MY>>   Steps to reproduce the bug:
MY>> Open a message with message list visible, view only unread and
MY>> thread by reference.  While reading the message wait for another to
MY>> arrive and you will be reading a blank screen.

TF> I do not confirm this. Message come in all the time, and I never see a
TF> blank screen where I was reading a message before.

I have had this for a while, and not sure that it is exclusive to the
Halloween edition - in addition, my threading is set to None.

If I'm viewing a message in the preview pane, and another message
drops into its folder at the same time, the header list shuffles down
one and the preview pane for the message I'm reading blanks out until
the header is selected again. Not that it is deselected when the new
message arrives, but it needs clicking a second time to view the
message again.

Very annoying, but I just have to wait until all the mail delivery is
finished before reading it. If it can be changed, that would be
welcomed!

John Rainer



-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: New user, lotsa questions

[John Rainer]

MDP> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
MDP> Hash: SHA1

MDP> Hi John,

MDP> On 17 September 2000 at 08:32:16 GMT +0100 (which was 08:32 where I
MDP> live) John Rainer wrote and made these points on the subject
MDP> of "New user, lotsa questions":

JR>> - all I want text to do is to fully word wrap at a fixed number of
JR>> characters and to insert a blank line when I hit Return, but the
JR>> autoformat and word wrap options still seem to do baffling things!
JR>> Messages that are heavily edited seem to require both endless
JR>> selection and alt-L keystrokes just to properly wrap.

MDP> That  is  because you have auto-format turned off. Ctrl-Shift-F is the
MDP> auto-format  toggle key and I use it often. Most of the time I have it
MDP> on and edited text is re-flowed as I type.

Thanks for the info, Marck, but I've tried the autoformat options and
it still irritates. Pasting large amounts of text near the end of a
line, in particular, always leaves a line outstanding and the cursor
sometimes hops down to a new line instead of staying at the end of the
pasted text, for reasons I haven't yet worked out. For instance, if I
copy what I have written so far, with autoformat and wordwrap on, and
paste it close to the end of a line, part of the copied text on one
line goes way beyond the word wrap limit, even if I go on to a new
para, so it's back to alt-l to bring it back in again. However, if I
add a character to text within the offending para, it re-aligns
automatically. Aaargh! I just want it to wrap like most other Windows
program (drums heels on floor and screams). It also used to do other
quirky things, like indenting new lines on hitting Return, which I
think was template based and involved trawling through all the
accounts I had set up to get rid of it. If there is a way to alter the
default template settings, I wish I knew it before I had set up six
accounts :(

Cheers

John

Apart from that, Mrs Lincoln, did you enjoy the play?



-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[3]: New user, lotsa questions

[John Rainer]

MRH> A.,

MRH> Regarding your message dated: 17 September 2000...

ACM>> I personally do like the free caret interface myself. Also, for me,
ACM>> TB!'s editor took some time to get accustomed to. It was a period of
ACM>> adjustment and giving and taking. The end result has been that the
ACM>> shortcomings for me do not exceed the good points. If TB! were to
ACM>> support an external editor, I would still use this one.

MRH> I would agree with this myself.  I took a while to learn the
MRH> differences between the Windows standard editor functionality and
MRH> TB!'s functionality but the free caret interface is something I find I
MRH> take advantage of regularly simply because it allows me to easily lay
MRH> out my text in a clearer and more 'creative' way.

I have to chip in here. I've been using The Bat for most of the year
and the editor is the one thing about the program that I find
annoying. For my needs, I don't need advanced formatting - all I want
text to do is to fully word wrap at a fixed number of characters and
to insert a blank line when I hit Return, but the autoformat and word
wrap options still seem to do baffling things! Messages that are
heavily edited seem to require both endless selection and alt-L
keystrokes just to properly wrap.

I think it is a wonderful program and no doubt there are power users
who find the editor both powerful and useful but I did not buy it for
its editing functions and for me it is a major irritation. I have to
agree with a previous mail that it is a culture-shocker - I've used a
number of other email programs over the years and they all followed
similar principles for typing in text but The Bat seems to have a mind
of its own.

Taking a while to learn the editor functions is all very well if you
need them, but for someone like myself who only needs the most basic
of editing functions, it seems unnecessarily complicated. If it wasn't
for its account handling, server interrogation, sorting/filtering and
html handling (no pulling back of html content) I would be looking
elsewhere. What have the Romans ever done for us :) Then again, you
can't please everybody - perhaps the answer would be a configuration
switch to use the Bat editor or for it to operate in the style of,
say, Agent.

John Rainer

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Message list columns - time, but no date

[John Rainer]

MDP> Hi John,

MDP> On 24 July 2000 at 21:47:58 GMT +0100 (which was 21:47 where I
MDP> live) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote and made these points on the subject
MDP> of "Message list columns - time, but no date":

JR>> This probably has a simple answer

MDP> .. it does :-)

JR>> I have in my message list columns the received and created time column
JR>> headings. Many of these show the time only, e.g. 11.09, but no date,

MDP> These are messages which have today's date.

JR>> How  do  I get the columns to display the date as well as the time
JR>> for all messages?

MDP> Wait  until tomorrow :-). This is a non-configurable setting of TB and
MDP> has its' own advantages ISFA you can easily pick out today's mail from
MDP> a folder containing many messages.

Hello Marck,

Thanks for the information (and all the others who replied). It all
seems so obvious now but then I suppose it would with hindsight. I'm
not sure that I like this as a 'feature', though.

In my defence, I've just got home after a minor operation, so it must
have been the anaesthetic clouding my mind. That, or the total lack of
sleep :)

John Rainer



-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Message list columns - time, but no date

[John Rainer]

This probably has a simple answer but I have spent the last hour
buried in the menus and help file without success.

I have in my message list columns the received and created time column
headings. Many of these show the time only, e.g. 11.09, but no date,
even when fully expanded. Others have the full date, followed by the
time. Checking the message headers for the 'time only' ones shows that
the created date is there for these messages. How do I get the columns to
display the date as well as the time for all messages?

Thanks

John Rainer



-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Re[2]: Word wrapping

[John Rainer]

AM> On Tue, 21 Mar 2000 20:38:11 +0000, John Rainer wrote:

>> I've been using The Bat now for several weeks and been generally
>> very pleased with it. The only feature that I find a bit frustrating
>> compared to other mail clients that I've used is word wrapping.
>> Apart from pasted material not wrapping 

AM> Using the auto-format feature activated through the 'editor
AM> preferences' will reformat text as you type. It's however a bit
AM> quirky and if it does unorthodox things while you're typing, don't
AM> worry, it's not you. Use the alt-backspace combo. It will undo any
AM> unwelcome sudden things that happen to your text. :)) You'll see
AM> what I mean.

Thanks for the replies, Tom and Allie. Alt-l seems to solve most of my
problems.

AM> TB!'s editor is a WYSIWYG editor in the true sense of the
AM> word. It does NOT wrap text on sending. It sends it just as you see it
AM> before sending. Most recipient e-mail apps including TB! will wrap
AM> long lines in the message viewer.

There I had made a dangerous assumption without testing it,
particularly as the line length and autowrap settings are completely
separate. Other programs I've used wrap on send to the specified line
length irrespective of what appears in the composition window, so I
will have to be careful here.

>>  Do things improve in v2 or have I just missed a setting somewhere?

AM> Try what I outlined above and you will be able to have FULL
AM> control over the formatting of the text you send. The editor takes
AM> some getting used to but it indeed provides a level of control not
AM> seen in other e-mail editors.

Granted, but I rarely, if ever, need, that level of control - perhaps
a setting to turn a 'full' autowrap on and off as opposed to, or in
addtion to, the one that exists at the moment would cope with both
needs. Anyway, still a great program.

John

-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org

Word wrapping

[John Rainer]

I've been using The Bat now for several weeks and been generally very
pleased with it. The only feature that I find a bit frustrating
compared to other mail clients that I've used is word wrapping. Apart
from pasted material not wrapping (which is not unusual in other
programs, admittedly) the main problem I have is in editing what I've
already typed - unless I enter considerably more text than the
wrapping length to an edited line, it doesn't wrap in composition
and I end up having to repeatedly hit the return key to shuffle lines
about as the effects of extra text cascades down the screen.

If I turn wrapping off, rather than wrap to the window, everything
appears as one long line of text. I know it wraps on sending but
it all seems a bit primitive on composition. Do things improve in v2
or have I just missed a setting somewhere?

John Rainer

P.S. Could we have a single toolbar button for checking all accounts
rather than the pull-down menu off the current one/alt-f2?



-- 
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--

You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org