Re: putting identical subject line in multiple e-mails
Regarding my earlier question as to whether the "-" at the end of a string was part of the code or just intended to setoff the code from the rest of the posting, Roelof Otten said that it removed a blank line. I couldn't see that in his e-mails, even in his last example, because I couldn't directly compare the two examples, scrolling from one to the other, I didn't actually see the shortened space between the greeting and body text. However, when I tried this at home, and created two templates, one with and without the "-" and could toggle back and forth between them, the difference was obvious. So, once again, thanks, Roelof, for the advice. The e-mails have been sent. Now, the next step is to do that upgrade... All the best, -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago using The Bat ver. 1.62r on MS OS XP Prof. Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: putting identical subject line in multiple e-mails
I had previously written the following: S> In other words, absent the second "%" sign and hyphen, would the S> subsequent text in the template just be ignored? To which Roelof replied: >No, it would be preceded by an empty line. >Hello %- >Everybody, >will give you >Hello Everybody, >When don't you place the %- macro at the end of the line, it will be ignored: >My name is %-Roelof >results in: >My name is Roelof Sorry, Roelof, but I am still confused. (Maybe it's because it's late, I'm tired, etc. etc.) In your first example I don't see an empty line. Your example suggests that Hello %- Everybody and Hello %-Everybody will both yield: Hello Everybody Bottom line, my question is, "To insure that subject text goes into the subject line and that message text goes into the message body, how do I craft the template?" If "e-mail address change. (again )" is the subject and "Hi. We are changing" is the message body, is the following correct? %Subject="E-mail address change. (again )"%- Hi. We are changing our e-mail address from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] effective immediately. Or, do I need to do something differently? -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago using The Bat ver. 1.62r on MS XP OS Prof. Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: putting identical subject line in multiple e-mails
Roelof Otten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 08/25/2005 at 06:01 PM wrote: >You don't really need to place %- at the end of the macro. But: >%Subject="I'm changing my e-mail address. (again )" >will insert this line in the subject header: >I'm changing my e-mail address. (again ) >But as it doesn't insert anything in the message body, it'll leave an >empty line. And that empty line is negated by the %- macro. >In so far you could call it a style mark. ;-) I was asking if the "-" was a style mark for *your* note, and I surmise you are telling me that it is a style mark for the template. This is beginning to sound like an Abbot and Costello routine. OK. Let's say I want to send a note that says, "Hi. We are changing are e-mail address from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] effective immediately." To insure that that text is put into the template, along with a subject line, would the entire text that goes into the template be the following? %Subject="E-mail address change. (again )"%- Hi. We are changing our e-mail address from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] effective immediately. In other words, absent the second "%" sign and hyphen, would the subsequent text in the template just be ignored? -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago using The Bat ver. 1.62r on MS XP Prof. Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: putting identical subject line in multiple e-mails
To recap, I had inquired: S> I am about to notify all those in my address book of an e-mail address S> change. I dutifully followed instructions to create a template message S> and have put all of the messages in the outbox, ready to go. However, I S> didn't see anywhere in the template box an option to insert a subject S> line... To which, Roelof Otten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 08/25/2005 at 05:17 PM responded: >Insert something like this in your template. >%Subject="I'm changing my e-mail address. (again )"%- >Your free to deviate from my text, of course. Thanks Roelof. It was actually your instructions from Feb. 2003 that I followed. (There are indeed advantages to not deleting e-mail!) Not to put to fine a line on it, but just to be certain, do I need to insert a hyphen after the % sign in the template as your message shows, or did you insert the hyphen merely as a style mark? -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago using The Bat ver. 1.62r on MS XP Prof. Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: putting identical subject line in multiple e-mails
Robert C Wittig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 08/25/2005 at 04:02 PM asks in response to my Q about how to insert an identical subject line in multiple e-mails: >Why not just send a single email to everyone, with their addresses in >the Bcc: field, and your email address in the To: field? The last time I tried to do that, my ISP (ATT, which has since been acquired by Comcast, which is still my ISP) had a limit on the number of recipients that could receive any one e-mail. One customer service representatives claimed that limit to be anywhere from 25, another didn't know what the limit was but they all agreed that once the limit was reached, I would have to wait a half hour before I could send out the same message again to more recipients. They claimed the purpose was to prevent their customers from e-mailing spam. By sending out multiple messages to individual recipients, when I previously notified friends, family, and associates of an e-mail address change, I was able to get around the "multiple recipient" rule. -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago using the Bat ver. 1.62r on MS OS XP Prof. Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
putting identical subject line in multiple e-mails
Is there a way to insert an identical subject line in 140 e-mails, without having to do so individually? I am about to notify all those in my address book of an e-mail address change. I dutifully followed instructions to create a template message and have put all of the messages in the outbox, ready to go. However, I didn't see anywhere in the template box an option to insert a subject line. I don't want to send these announcements with a blank subject line. So, is there a way to put an identical subject line in each of these messages without having to do so individually? I am still using version 1.62r, as I haven't yet had the time to upgrade to the current version. (I have time to do the upgrade, I don't have time to deal with any unforeseen problems that might arise in the process.) [Besides, if I wait long enough, perhaps they will be up to ver. 4.0. :-) ] -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago Using The Bat ver. 1.62r on MS OS XP Professional Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: using The Bat on multiple computers
"-=Curtis=-" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 08/03/2005 at 01:29 PM wrote, in response to Rich Gregory: >> Sounds like a perfect solution for what Avi wanted. No learning curve, >> no addt'l licenses, etc. > >This would work only if the client machines are always on the same >network as the server. >In Avi's case, it's not. >He wants to access his mail when completely away from his other machine, >his primary machine. In terms of priority of need, access to mail while on the road has a 10-20% consideration factor. Accessing mail on the laptop while on the network has a weight of about 80%-90%. I understand that for accessing mail while on the road, and without using a virtual private network, I would need IMAP. However, using my pc as a "server" while on the network would satisfy most of my need, for the time being, and that is not an insignificant consideration. -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Re[2]: using The Bat on multiple computers
Stuart Cuddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 08/03/2005 at 12:58 PM wrote: >My only regret >about IMAP at the moment is that I would have to set up an IMAP server >on my machine as my provider does not allow me access to IMAP. Can you elaborate on this? I thought IMAP was a function of how the e-mail client worked. Must mail be set up differently on the servers (i.e., gmail, comcast, 1and1) that host the e-mail accounts in order for IMAP to work? How is that done? [For those who use IMAP all the time, I recognize that these questions are quite elementary; but for those of us who know very little about it, we gotta start somewhere!] And, how do I determine if a provider such as gmail, Comcast, and/or 1and1 allows access to IMAP? -- Avi Avram Sacks (still using ver. 1.62r-but not for long-- on MS XP prof.) Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: using The Bat on multiple computers
Mary Bull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 08/03/2005 at 11:05 AM wrote: Following a number of posts about the relative merits of using IMAP in place of POP for accessing mail on multiple computers: >The discussion was originally about the needs of Avi (sacksa), and so >he can take from it whatever he finds helpful. :) There are several issues here: 1. learning curves moving from 1.62 to 3.51 as well as from POP to IMAP 2. IMAP risks. 3. space limitations Space limitations: I am not all that familiar with IMAP; however, AIUI, with IMAP mail is left on the server. With POP, it is downloaded. The advantage of IMAP with multiple computers is obvious. However, I get a LOT of mail: at least a dozen list servs plus personal mail. I easily get 250-350 messages/day. I get mail from four servers. With two I have 1gb space limitations. I will have to check and see how quickly those bytes are being used up, but space may be an issue. OTOH, I have lots of space on the computers at home. IMAP risks: Mary's comments about people losing their mail and that Ritlabs is still working on perfecting IMAP make me wary about using it, just yet, for that reason alone. Although it may have been designed for those with multiple computers in mind, until there is greater reliability across the board, why risk losing mail? Then there is the security issue. I don't object to keeping list serv mail on someone else's computer, but personal and business mail is another issue. Just how secure is that mail when it is stored on someone else's pc? Learning curves: I have used four different e-mail clients and my office is about to migrate me from one client to another in the next week. So the learning curve issue--and I may be underestimating the differences between 1.62r and 3.51-- doesn't bother me. The security issue as well as the occasional problems we hear from those who use IMAP are what will keep me from using IMAP for now. David Embrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 08/03/2005 at 06:21 AM wrote: >We simply have >one copy of the Bat on one of the machines, which is designated the >server (where we save all files and which is backed up regularly). We >then access the Bat .exe on the server from any of the machines on the >network (using a desktop short cut) from which we want to use the Bat. >The Bat opens on all of the machines without any fuss, and we can >create accounts for any of the users using this master copy This is a very simple solution that I like. For now I may just have to forego accessing e-mail while I am on the road. (Well, I can still access the servers directly, I just won't be able to use The Bat and have access to all of my prior mail.) However, if The Bat is on the pc and I use the laptop, at home, to access the bat.exe file on the "server," when e-mail is either downloaded or sent from the laptop while on the network, is the laptop essentially doing these operations on the file that resides on the pc (server) and so I don't need to then be concerned about synchronization? -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Re[2]: using The Bat on multiple computers
rich gregory <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 08/02/2005 05:13 PM wrote: >Assuming you have an IMAP server! *I* don't have a server. However, I currently download mail from four different servers: Gmail, RCN, Comcast and 1and1. That will soon change to three. >I imagine to do what you want (travel with the laptop and sync to the >"MAIN COMPUTER" at home) this would work... >I will begin with the assumption that you have TB! installed on both >PCs and on both in identical directory structures. (Both set to delete >mail from the server? OK, Maybe just the one at home should do the >deletions?) TB is not installed on both, yet. Just the pc. However, I will be upgrading soon to the current version of TB and will install on both the PC and laptop, at that time, assuming it is feasible. However, would I have to recreate the directory structure on the laptop, or is there something I could copy this from? The pc and laptop are networked. >Before setting out copy your MAIL sub folder (in it's entirety) to the >laptop. Now do NOT use the BIG PC for mail again until you get back! >Exclusively use the laptop to get your mail until you get home. >Do not use the laptop for mail again until your next trip. This won't work. A major reason for setting up TB on both the laptop as well as well as the PC is to allow us to use the laptop to check mail while in other parts of our house, without having to go to the basement (dungeon) office. *** -- Avi Avram Sacks Using The Bat ver. 1.62r (soon to be upgraded) on MS XP Professional Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
using The Bat on multiple computers
Now that we have it settled that an upgrade from ver. 1.62r to ver. 3.5+ is necessary in order for me to be able to set up a virtual "super inbox" folder (and thanks, again, for all of your advice and help), as long as I will be upgrading I have questions about using The Bat on multiple computers. I have a pc and a laptop. I want to be able to download and view e-mail on either machine and would like to be able to do this whether the two computers are hooked up in network or not. (I suspect that this latter item may not be easily possible.) And, I would like both machines to somehow automatically synchronize to each other's e-mail contents when they are hooked up in network. Is any or all of this possible. Finally, in order to do this, do I need to purchase two licenses; or, do I upgrade one and purchase outright a second license? And, do I need to upgrade to the professional or home version of The Bat? I recognize the inherent problems with trying to have current mail on both machines. If I delete mail from the server once the mail is downloaded, the second machine will never be able to download that mail. On the other hand, if I leave mail on the server after a download for the second machine, the mailbox size limitation may be reached before I get around to downloading the mail on the second machine. Also, if the 1st machine downloads mail again and previously downloaded mail is still on the server, will the 1st machine blindly download all mail on the server and not just the new mail; effectively taking up hard drive space by putting multiple copies of the same e-mail into one of my mail folders? And, when my pc and laptop are in network with one another, what is the best way for me to get e-mail to synchronize on both machines? -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago Using The Bat ver 1.62r (but not for long!) on MS XP Professional Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: setting up a "super" inbox
Regarding filters, again, Roelof wrote "Actually the filters are [*]being[*] converted to the new system (Mary was a tad pessimistic there), but the user assigned shortcuts get lost forever." Just to be clear, when you used the word "being" does this mean that, currently, filters are not transferred to the upgraded version, but that programmers are working on this, i.e, the new system is being fixed in such a way that *in the future* it will accept old filters; in other words, the filters are "being" converted to the new system, or, are you saying that actually, right now, with an upgrade, the old filters will automatically transfer to the upgraded version? -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago, IL Using The Bat ver. 1.62r on MS XP prof. Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Re[2]: setting up a "super" inbox
David Huber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> at 07/29/2005 02:16 PM wrote regarding my question about setting up a "super inbox" >To do all this, I suggest that you instead create a new virtual common >folder, and set it to watch the five inboxes you want to watch. Then >you don't need to worry about filters, either, and whatever you do in >the virtual folder will be done also in the folder that is being >watched (so if you delete an email in the virtual folder, you are >really deleting it from the real folder). This way, when you reply to >an email, it will reply from whatever account that email resides in. and Stuart Cuddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 07/29/2005 02:18 PM also suggested setting up a virtual inbox. Thanks to both of you. It sounds like the virtual inbox is the way to go. How do I set up a virtual common folder? And where is it set up? And, since it is a virutal common folder, does it also take up disk space? That is, if the volume of mail in the five inboxes is "X", is the volume of mail in te super inbox also "x" such that the total volume on the drive is now "2x"? -- Avi Avram Sacks using The Bat ver. 1.62r on MS XP professional (sp2) Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: setting up a "super" inbox
In response to my query about setting up a "super" inbox, David Huber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> at 07/29/2005 01:20 PM, wrote: >It's quite easy - set up a folder to act as the "super inbox" and then >on each account set up a filter to filter on whatever you want (you >can filter on just "@" if you want EVERYTHING copied). The Actions tab >for each filter, close to the bottom, has an option to "create a copy >of message in another folder". Just check that box, tell it what >folder you are using as the super inbox, and voila - all done! That's great, David. Thanks. Now, is there a way that I can set up an automatic delete of mail in the Super inbox, say, after one day, one week or one month? Also, if I reply to mail that is copied to the super inbox, will the reply reflect as a return address, the account to which the original message was sent, or the account in which I have placed the "super" inbox? If the latter, I do I insure that my return address reflects the account to which the original message was sent? And, will my reply be properly deposited into the "sent" box of the original account? If not, how do I set things up to insure that that happens? (Of course, I could just go into the originating "inbox" and reply from there. But I was hoping for a more "elegant" solution.) -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago using The Bat ver. 1.62r on MS XP professional (sp2) Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
setting up a "super" inbox
Hi, everyone. Is it possible to copy mail from multiple inboxes into a "super" inbox so that the separate inboxes don't require individual checking? As part of my spam solution, I recently set up five e-mail accounts that I use regularly, plus two, provided by my ISP that receive mostly spam since I don't use those accounts for anything. [Of the five that I use, two are private domains, one for private correspondence and one for professional, work-related correspondence. Two others are g-mail accounts that I use only for e-mail lists and one is a g-mail account for online purchases, correspondence with vendors, or anyone who might be inclined to "share" my address with business partners.] Filters are set up on all five accounts to sort, based on subject. After about one month I have yet to receive ANY spam in any of these five accounts even though I have no spam filters set up. So what's the problem? The problem is having to check FIVE inboxes for personal, non-filtered correspondence! It's confusing for my wife and time-consuming for me. What I would like to have happen is this: when mail is downloaded, any mail that would otherwise go into an inbox for any of the five accounts that I use, would ALSO be *copied* to a super inbox. I would only have to check the "super" inbox and not the five individual ones for mail. Although I don't ordinarily delete mail, I would delete what goes into the super inbox, after checking it--say after a week or so, but since that mail was only *copied* from the other inboxes, it would remain in the other inboxes, even if deleted from the "super" inbox. Can anyone suggest to me how to set this up? Thanks!!! -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago using The Bat ver. 1.62r on MS XP professional (sp2) Current version is 3.51.10 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: multiple e-mail account with same name
Hi, everyone. On 16-Jun-2005 at 21:46 MFPA wrote: >> If you want to use both the new and the old account, you have to copy the >> existing filters to the new account. > Or perhaps use common filters? "Alexander S. Kunz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> then wrote: > Avi is using v1.62r, that version has neither common filters nor virtual > folders. :-} That is true. Does this make me a Luddite? ;-) So, it seems I could either set up duplicate folders during the period both accounts are active, and once I terminate the old account, I could just move all the mail in the folders (of which there are about 25-30) in the old account to the identical folders in the new accounts, or, upgrade and set up virtual folders. Are there any distinct advantages, for my purposes, in having the latest and greatest version of The Bat? -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago, IL using The Bat ver. 1.62r on Windows XP Professional Current version is 3.5.25 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: multiple e-mail account with same name
Thanks, everyone for your advice about setting up multiple accounts with the "same name." I now understand I can just use a name like [EMAIL PROTECTED] as a user name, and not just "achdut." Elementary to those who understand the ins and outs of the software--but it wasn't to me. However, others have raised some questions about the filtering. Alexander wrote: > If you want to use both the new and the old account, you have to copy the > existing filters to the new account. If you filter messages from the new > account to the folders of the old account, you have to be careful with the > identity you're using (in other words, the FROM: address). And, indeed, I want to keep the same filters, but don't want two folders for say, "The Bat" mail. There should be only one TBUDL folder with mail from both the old and new accounts that is TBUDL mail going into one and the same folder during the period of overlapping accounts. However, MFPA suggests that if I filter mail coming in to the new account into the old folders, replies to mail that comes in through the new account server will appear to come from the old account. MFPA says, > 1. set up new account with filers and folders that mirror those in > the existing account. > > 2. create a set of virtual folders that mirrors the folder system > in the accounts. That is, "virtual folder 1" watches "folder 1" in > each of the two accounts. > > 3. read the incoming messages using the virtual folders, replies > are automatically from the correct identity. Unfortunately, I don't understand steps two and three. How does one set up a "virtual folder" and how will it look on the folder tree? -- Avi Avram Sacks using The Bat ver. 1.62r on XP professional (but not when I'm writing from the office, where Lotus Notes reign) Current version is 3.5.25 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: file extension on attached files in received mail
Bob Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>on 05/26/2005 05:05 AM wrote in response to my query about file attachments having a ".aq" extension added to the file name: >Are you by any chance using Outpost Firewall. My Outpost Pro adds"aq" >(for attachment quarantine) to any e-mail attachments received which >match its preset list of file types. You can easily change the >nominated account types that are quarantined if this is what is >causing your problem, or totally disable e-mail checking (probably not >a good idea). Ahhh, the firewall. YES! I am using Outpost Pro. It didn't even occur to me that the firewall could be the culprit. When I get home I will take a closer look. However, this must be it. That I can easily change this depends upon one's pont of view. For some reason, Outpost has never been that easy for me to deal with. If I have problems I may contact you offline. Thanks, Bob, for your kind help. -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago, IL -who is still using The Bat ver. 1.62r with MS XP Pro. (except now, when he is using Lotus Notes from the office!) Current version is 3.5.0.17 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Moving to version 3
Mary Bull <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 10/13/2004 at 02:16 PM wrote: >Look in The Bat! directory, and under each account, re-name the .sbr >files. NOT--repeat--NOT the .sbx files. >This has helped some people carry their filters across more easily. Thanks, Mary! Please elaborate re the file re-naming. What is a .sbr file? What does it hold or do? Do I rename the file extension, the main part of the name, or both? Do the files then get renamed back to what they were after installation? -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago Still using The Bat ver. 1.62r. Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Moving to version 3
Don't you also want to turn off any firewalls and AV applications before installing the upgrade? If so, how does one turn off the firewall that comes with SP2? -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago, IL [Using The Bat ver. 1.62r, on Windows XP Pro, SP2 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 10/13/2004 01:13 PM Please respond to tbudl To: Eric <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: Subject:Re: Moving to version 3 > Dear TBUDL members, > In the light of recent comments on this list, I've decided > to risk buying and moving to version 3, home edition. > In the flood of messages, I suspect there has been some > advice on how to upgrade - and what things will need > changing (such as filters?). > I assume I should do a tools|backup, standard with all options > chosen, then close The Bat!, and double click on the Windows > Installer Package downloaded as thebat_home.msi. > Anything else I need to know/do? Please do state what > ought to be the obvious! Well some people seemed to have problems with filters transferring - but I have a number of what I think are complicated filters that send auto-replies, re-format emails and re-send etc - and I had no problems whatsoever. I just did a full backup. Closed TB. Double-clicked the .msi file and there I was - all working. -- Marten Gallagher Annery Kiln Web Design www.annerykiln.co.uk Using The Bat! 3.0.1.33 with POPFile 0.21.1 on Windows XP 5.1 Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html Current version is 3.0.1.33 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
upgrading
There is an old adage: "if it ain't broke, don't fix it!" I have used The Bat ver. 1.62R since it came out. I didn't upgrade to ver. 2, nor to the most recent release. I have been perfectly happy with The Bat. It does what I want it to do. I have never had a virus infection (my E-Trust EZ antivirus has adequately detected any virus laden e-mail) and I never felt the need to use PGP, bayesit(sp?)--whatever it is, IMAP--whatever it is, or templates. I do like that the Bat can manage my multiple accounts and multiple folders extremely well and let me know the size of each. So, since it "ain't" broke, why fix it, or, in this case, upgrade? I am no Luddite (otherwise, I wouldn't even be using this computer), but I also have no desire or time to spend hours learning how to use features for which I have no apparent use. 1. For me, what would I gain by upgrading to ver. 3.0? 2. For similar reasons I have not yet installed Microsoft's SP2. (I once installed SP1, only to uninstall it after it slowed my pc down to a crawl.) However, is SP2 compatible with The Bat ver. 1.62r or, should I upgrade to ver. 3.0 if I intend to install SP2? -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago running (at home only) The Bat ver 1.62r, with XP Professional Current version is 3.00.00 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
use of The Bat with Mac/Apple computers
I have used The Bat very happily for a few years on our PC-type computers. Now that we are in the market for a Mac/Apple computer, is The Bat compatible with Mac/Apple computers? If not, are there any plans to make it compatible? Otherwise, what do Mac/Apple users use for e-mail? -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago, IL using ver 1.62r with Win XP Pro. Current version is 2.11.02 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Downloading e-mail on to second computer
Martin Webster wrote in response to my query re problems copying The Bat to a laptop from my desktop: >This sounds like a networking problem. I presume you posted your >original message from your desktop PC on your home network; i.e. Windows >XP? Yes. I originally posted from the desktop PC. Both the desktop and the laptop use XP Pro. >Please explain briefly how the network is set up as this will help. Cable from outside feeds into modem, which, in turn, feeds into Linksys 4 port, wireless router. Desktop is connected via CAT5 cable to router. Laptop can be connected to router either via CAT5 cable or Dell Truemobile wireless card. I almost always use the wireless card. >Also, where is thebat.exe located; i.e the installer? Thebat.exe is located in The Bat subdirectoy of the program directory. (I think!) I will try your suggestions, but, unfortunately, it will have to wait as the desktop is fully dismantled due to a flood in our basement office and it (the desktop) does not have wireless capability. I expect the desktop to be back up and running in about two weeks. In the meantime, I can access TBUDL through other channels. -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago running The Bat 1.62r on Win XPpro Current version is 2.11.02 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Downloading e-mail on to second computer
I posted this earlier this week, but since there hasn't been any response, I thought I would try again. Way back in August 2003 I inquired about how to set up The Bat on a laptop, download e-mail from the server, and, eventually, transfer all of the downloaded e-mail to the pre-exising Bat file on my desktop. Alie's response clued me in to synchronization. Well, after 10 months, I am just getting around to setting up The Bat on the laptop, and I am running into a problem in just trying to copy the_bat_o.exe file to the laptop. When I run the setup file, I get the following error message when I attempt to install The Bat to the c:\program directory: "cannot access directory \\DESKTOP\THE BAT!\MAI" In place of the word "desktop" is the name that I assigned to the desktop computer on our in-home network. Why would it try to access the desktop? And, even though a Bat subdirectory was created within the program directory, when I attempt to click on the bat.exe file, I get the same error message. Why? Is this a network problem or is it a problem with the way in which I configured The Bat? -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago, IL [EMAIL PROTECTED] Also, please copy any response to [EMAIL PROTECTED], as well. running The Bat 1.62r using Win XP Pro. Current version is 2.11.02 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Re[2]: Virus warning upon execution of mail download
I would like to thank Thomas Fernandez and everyone else who wrote in regarding the virus warning I received upon downloading mail. (For those who are keeping track, I posted the problem from my other e-mail address ([EMAIL PROTECTED]).) Because my eTrust AV program works so well, it caught the virus on an incoming e-mail and didn't allow the virus laden e-mail into my in-box. It remained, however, in the Temp folder and on the server. Deleting the e-mail from the Temp file was only half the job. By going out to the server (I chose to use webmail to get a direct look at what was on the server) I was able to spot the offending message and delete it. The fixed the problem. Again, thanks for the help. [Now, could someone PLEASE help with the other problem I posted to the list the other day regarding copying the prgram to my laptop?] -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago, IL [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] using The Bat ver. 1.62r with WinXP Professional. Current version is 2.11.02 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: The Bat! Internal PGP System
"Allie Martin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 03/24/2004 05:13 PM wrote: >There are two 'internal' things about TB! and PGP. There's built in >support for PGP v5,6,7,8 if you have any of those versions otherwise >installed on your system. Enabling this support will make TB! >integrate with with those PGP version and that works very nicely. I >currently use this support with PGP v8 and things are working just >fine with all PGP related macros and menu items functional. > >There's also a fully functional PGP implementation in TB!. It's based >on PGP v2 which is an older version of TB!PGP v2 supports only RSA type >keys which also require the IDEA encryption algorithm, an algorithm >that's still patented and therefore not used by quite a few GnuPG >users. Hi, Allie. I understand that PGP is some sort of encryption. Can you or someone else explain to someone who knows almost nothing about PGP how it works? For example, if mail is encrypted, how then, can someone at the receiving end without an "unlock" key read the e-mail? What is the advantage of using PGP? Why should I want to use it (or any encryption program)? Unless one sends financial or other sensitive data via e-mail, is there any other reason to use PGP? Are there any negatives, such as conflicts with firewalls or anti-virus programs? How does one install and/or enable the latest version of PGP? Is this separate software that one must buy or does it come with The Bat? Finally, what is "GnuPG"? Thanks. -- Avi Avram Sacks using TB ver. 1.61. (when I'm not using Lotus Notes R5) with Win XP Pro. Current version is 2.04.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
The Bat thinks it needs registration
When upgrading from XP Home to XP Pro, Windows did not properly install. To get around this, a consultant performed what effectively amounted to a clean install of XP Pro from the upgrade CD. Although the old windows folder and software are still on the hard disk, we created a new windows folder from which the pc is directed to boot up, requiring me to reinstall all of the old software. Copying the old The Bat directory to the new Windows program directory from the old directory, allows me to use e-Mail, but I have to add each of the three accounts that I had, manually, AND, more importantly, (as with my AV and firewall) the Bat thinks I am using a trial version and wants me to register or buy within 30 days (now 28). Of course, I registered and paid for The Bat a little over two years ago. 1. Should I just re-register using the product key that was e-mailed to me, or is there a more elegant (and preferable) way to do this? 2. I am currently using version 1.61. Because it worked fine for me, I never bothered to upgrade to 2.0. However, how do I know what release of 1.61 I am using (is it "i" , "k", "r" etc.)? I last upgraded to "i" or "k", but how do I know that the .exe file for The Bat's application that I clicked on to install it, is actually running the most recent version of 1.61 that I upgraded to? The "about" feature under "help" does not clarify which release is being used, other than to say "1.61." Thanks. -- Avram Sacks Chicago using The Bat ver. 1.61 on XP Pro Current version is 2.04.7 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: download slowdown
Peter Meyns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/29/2004 02:46 PM: scc>> "Why do we have infrequent slowdowns of e-mail downloading, that scc>> can be solved with nothing more than a cold reboot?" pm>>When did you compress the message base the last time? scc> Hi, Peter. I have never compressed the message base. pm>The Bat! needs compression too. Especially for high frequence folders pm>like Inboxes. TB! keeps all deleted or moved messages where they were, pm>only marks them as deleted, so they don't show up in the list. The pm>disk space will only be set free when the respective folder is pm>compressed. [snip] pm>I can't say if your problems may have other causes. But I know that pm>regular purging and compressing helps a lot to keep The Bat! working pm>properly. ... pm>You can set TB! to purge and compress on exit in your folder pm>properties. Thanks, Peter. I am eager to see how much of a difference compression is going to make. //Avi Current version is 2.02.3 CE | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Was: MyDoom and The Bat Now: download slowdown
Peter Meyns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 1/29/2004 01:24 PM: scc> "Why do we have infrequent slowdowns of e-mail downloading, that scc> can be solved with nothing more than a cold reboot?" pm>When did you compress the message base the last time? Hi, Peter. I have never compressed the message base. I never thought about it. (Here at the office, compression is done autormatically every night with Lotus Notes.) However, does defragmentation accomplish the same thing?Even if compression is a good thing to do on a regular basis (and how would I schedule that?), would that really solve the occasional slowdown problem given that a cold reboot doesn't compress messages, but it did solve my problem. At least for a while. -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago Current version is 2.02.3 CE | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Was: MyDoom and The Bat Now: download slowdown
Marck D Pearlstone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent by: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 01/29/2004 08:43 AM: >TB doesn't auto-run any attachments, ever. Even >then, TB usually warns you that you're opening an attachment you >don't know about and that it can be dangerous. And, this is one of the primary reasons why I like The Bat so much. I am surprised that more people aren't aware of and use The Bat. Now, on to my question: "Why do we have infrequent slowdowns of e-mail downloading, that can be solved with nothing more than a cold reboot?" Details: Because we are on a number of e-mail lists, we download approximately 150-350 messages a day. Normally the download takes 1-3 minutes. Every once in a very long while it will take up to 10-15-20 minutes, even though the aggregate size is not unusually larger. What causes this? It happened yesterday to my wife. Fearing our pc had been hijacked by the latest designer virus making the news I had her shut it down until I could look at it. Upon reboot, the download proceded at normal speed (1-3 minutes). Typically a cold reboot, with nothing more solves the problem. Does anyone have any idea why the slowdown occurs and why a cold reboot solves the problem? Later, after removing about 20,000 mail messages from various directories, I did defragment the hard drive, but the problem had been solved with just the cold reboot and nothing more. Currently we have about 115,000 messages in our various mail folders (the largest being "The Bat"! with about 30,000 messages); and, 67 GB are free on our 80 GB hard drive. I also have several home made filters in place to get rid of recurring spam. -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago OS: WinXP(home); Pentium 4, 1.7Ghz, 80 GB hard drive, 512MB RAM Using The Bat ver. 1.61h. Firewall: Agnitum Outpost AV: Computer Assocs' My eTrust (no plugin) Current version is 2.02.3 CE | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Notebook Synchronizing
Kevin Coates <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 01/22/2004 02:46 PM wrote: >I just purchased a laptop and would like to install The Bat! on it. I >normally use my desktop machine, but would like to have the capability >to read and answer my mail from either system. My ISP does not offer >IMAP. Can anyone provide some strategies for synchronizing the two? I also have a laptop that I have been wanting to put on a home network with the pc and allow it to read and answer Bat mail. So, I would also appreciate input for strategies. FWIW, the pc has XP home and the laptop has XP pro. -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago, ILUSA using TB ver. 1.61h (it works just fine for me, so why bother upgrading?) on Win XP (w/out SP1, which slowed me down to a crawl) Current version is 2.02.3 CE | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Off-Topic: PGP Questions
"Michael S. Greenbaum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pm 10/29/03 at 12:30 p.m. wrote: >I realize this forum is for TB questions, but I see so much on here >about PGP, I thought I might ask a few questions about PGP. Since >these questions are not really germane to the list, if you'd prefer to >answer off-list, that would be fine. Please respond on the list. Others, like myself, have the same questions that Michael has. With so many of the postings devoted to PGP and with the apparent integration of this functionality into The Bat, it seems to me that this is quite germane, particulary if ver. 2.0 of The Bat is supposed to improve this functionality. Understanding more about how PGP works can inform a decision about the advisability of an upgrade. Thanks. -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago [EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 2.01.3 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Version 2.01 is out
Simon Fincham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on 10/14/2003 04:01 PM wrote: >Version 2.01 is out >* * * >Check the download page... >http://www.ritlabs.com/en/products/thebat/download.php I currently use ver. 1.61h. It works fine and does what I want (although I haven't yet used it to download from multiple e-mail accounts or across a home-office based network, as I expect to do during the coming year.) So, what compelling reasons are there for me to upgrade to version 2.00, other than the 50% discount offer, which expires in another 17 days? Are there reasons NOT to upgrade at this time? -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago Current version is 2.01 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Downloading e-mail on to second computer
Circumstances require me to be away from my primary pc for a number of weeks. Mail is backing up on the server and will soon exceed the 10 MB limit. My laptop, which I am currently using does not have The Bat loaded on to it.I would like to install The Bat on to the laptop, download e-mail from the server, and, eventually, transfer all of the downloaded e-mail to the pc with The Bat, when I return. Is this possible? If so, how do I do this? In order to install The Bat on to my laptop, do I need a second license? If so, how can I determine if I didn't purchase one at the time that I originally purchased The Bat? Unfortunately, I do not have access to my purchase information.If it makes any difference, I also have a highly complex directory structure on the home pc, that I could not possibly recreate from memory. For the time that I am away, can I create a structure on the laptop, but when I load all of the laptop e-mail to the home pc, can I have the home pc refilter everything that is on the laptop into the "correct" folders. -- Avi Avram Sacks using (on my home pc) The Bat ver. 1.63h (I think); P4 XP pro. Current version is 1.62r | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: sending e-mail to address book list
Mark Wieder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote >The ATTBI tech support person's reply sounds a bit fishy. I've had >problems with multiple recipients before with similar symptoms, but >the solution was a bit different - it may be that your address book is >just a bit out of date. > >If *any* one of your email recipients gets rejected for any reason >(typos, etc) then your entire attempt to send mail will be rejected >byt the ISP's server. Check out your TB log for the exact error >message. My guess is that you'll find one (or more) email addresses >that have problems. Remove them from your CC list and try it again. Hmmm. I wondered about that. Indeed, with the first group that got past the server and mailed, my initial attempt was stopped because of a typo in ONE of the addresses; however, old addresses that have no box to go didn't thwart the mailing--three addresses came back as undeliveable AFTER the rest of the group mailed. I won't be able to check TB until late tonight, but would that log reflect the exact error or would it just reproduce the non-specific pop-up error message that I received on the screen? -- Avi Avram Sacks using The Bat ver. 1.61 Current version is 1.62 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: sending e-mail to address book list
On Monday, February 10, 2003, 20:15, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Now, I have already sent a notice to about 2/5 of the address book. >> What do I do if I only want to send this message to the other 3/5 of >> the address book? Then Marcus Ohlström <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Make an address book group and place the reminding recipients in this >group. Then select the group instead of the root of the address book. Thanks, Marcus. However, and I know this is probably elementary for most people on this list, but how do I make an address book group? -- Avi Avram Sacks Current version is 1.62 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: sending e-mail to address book list
I had previously asked: scc> The problem (short version): What do people do when they need to scc> inform people in their address book that their e-mail address is scc> changing, but their ISP bars e-mails with large numbers of scc> recipients? >Roelof Otten <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> then wrote: >They send separate messages to all intended recipients. ;-) >That sounds more difficult than it is: > >Create a new Quick template: Roelof, thanks!. It sounds so simple. (I just hope that ATTBI's mass mailing limit doesn't also restrict single mailings totaling more than 25--we'll find out tonight.) Now, I have already sent a notice to about 2/5 of the address book. What do I do if I only want to send this message to the other 3/5 of the address book? -- Avi Avram Sacks Current version is 1.62 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
sending e-mail to address book list
The problem (short version): What do people do when they need to inform people in their address book that their e-mail address is changing, but their ISP bars e-mails with large numbers of recipients? I am having trouble sending e-mail from my home office pc to a large (20-120) recipient list. The ATTBI (AT&T Broadband Internet) server rejects the mailing with an error message that essentially says that the server rejected the post. The first tech support person said that ATTBI limits recipients to 25 per message, and that one must wait a half hour between posts if there are "many" multiple recipients. This made no sense since I had initially been able to send a post with 45 recipients, and a second with 21 recipients. However, a third message with 19 recipients generates the error message. A second tech support person with whom I spoke said that he had never heard of the half-hour rule and didn't know what the recipient limit was, but he knew there was one. However, since I wasn't at the pc that has the ATTBI account, he couldn't help me further. He did say that some e-mailers do prevent large recipient lists. Is The Bat one of them? The problem (detailed version): Prior to becoming part of the cable revolution I had a local dial-up ISP. When we went cable I continued to maintain the subscription to the local dial-up account as a back-up. This also allowed me to avoid the bother of changing our e-mail address since I merely accessed the dial-up account's pop server using the broadband connection and downloaded the e-mail directly off of the server. Outgoing mail was sent from the ATTBI mail server but reflected the "old" address of the dial-up account. Unfortunately, the local ISP was gobbled up by RCN which is now discontinuing support for the local dial-up's server and is requiring us all to migrate our accounts to a new e-mail server by the 17th.Thus, all of our e-mail addresses will change form @ to @rcn.com. RCN does say, however, that they will indefinitely continue to automatically forward mail sent to the local ISP to the rcn.com address. Since I have e-mail addresses (not yet used) with ATTBI, I would have just notified everyone that our new address was the ATTBI address, except.ATT sold ATTBI to Comcast in November and a small notice at the ATTBI website mentions that from February through April, ATTBI addresses will be changed to Comcast addresses! The notice also says that users will receive 30-days notice and that mail sent to the old address will be forwarded for only 60 days!!! It seemed to me that since I had to move from the local ISP within the next week and since RCN would indefinitely support the forwarding of mail sent to the old address, and since I don't yet know when the Comcast address would take effect in our area, I decided to notify friends, family, and associates, that our new e-mail address would be the one we would have with RCN. However, after tediously compiling an address book, I attempted to notify everyone by sending a message to myself and bcc'ing everyone in the address book. The outgoing mail server (ATTBI) rejected that message. I resent it with about 45 or so recipients and it was accepted. However the next group of 45 was rejected, but a smaller group of 22 was accepted. However even smaller groups are now being rejected. One way to get around this would be to use the dial-up line to send the message and avoid ATTBI altogether, since RCN and the local dial-up say they do not have limits on the numbers of recipients per message. But that line is s slow. Is there a more elegant way for me to use The Bat to send out multiple notifications to get around ATTBI's purported message-limit rule without having to do this piecemeal? Thanks and please accept my apologies for the long post, but I didn't know how I could make this any shorter. -- Avi Avram Sacks using The Bat ver. 1.61 at home [but not with this message] Current version is 1.62 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
culling e-mail addresses from in-box for group mailing to friends
Hi. I will soon be changing e-mail addresses. Although I will necessarily handle notification of e-mail lists individually, I would like to be able to send a group notice to most of my personal correspondents. Since all of that mail is not filtered and remains in my in-box, is there an efficient way that I can cull all of the e-mail addresses from the mail in my In-box without having to individually cut and paste each individual e-mail address into the "bcc" field of a new e-mail? [Doing that and then deleting the ones who will not be receiving the notice would be far easier than copying individual addresses that I select.] [I also presume that putting all names in the bcc field and then sending the message to myself is the easiest way to avoid having everyone on the list see everyone else's address? Correct?] I have not used The Bat's address book Would I want to first place these addresses into the address book and then copy the address book into the e-mail message? What is the best way to proceed? Thanks, in advance, for your help. -- Avram Sacks Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Downloading from multiple accounts
Hi, everyone. Is it possible to set up The Bat to download from multiple accounts into existing folders as I transition from a local dial-up ISP to a cable connection? Specifically, I filter e-mail into approximately 20 different folders, based on content and sender. I also have hundreds of rules for filtering trash, since each spam that comes from a new sender, has a filter set up for it. The cable company will allow me to have up to 6 mailboxes. I have set up 3. I would like to be able to do two things: 1. as mail is downloaded from each account (the one dial up + 3 cable accounts) I would like it to filter into the existing folders and not into new folders inside each separate account. 2. I would like to download mail from all accounts at once and not have to go into each account and download the mail separately.(Eventually, the dial-up account will probably be dropped.) Is this possible? If so, how do I set it up? Thanks for any help. -- Avi Avram Sacks Chicago, IL Current version is 1.61 | "Using TBUDL" information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
