Re[2]: proper english or not?

2001-03-01 Thread John Phillips
Hello Thursday, March 01, 2001, 8:03:24 AM, someone claiming to be [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Not according to the Oxford English dictionary here in "good old > blighty". 'ise' is allowable but 'ize' is correct. Down here in Oz we use "ise" instead of "ize" in most cases, AFAIK. Ain't the wo

New version

2001-03-01 Thread John Phillips
Saw a reference somewhere in the mailing list to a version 1.51. When can the mere mortals share the spoils, so to spaek? -- Regards, John Phillips Sydney, Australia [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hamster 1.3.22.1 Bat! 1.49 Windows 98 4.10 Build ASony Vaio Notebook PCG-505TS Pentium 300

Re: New version

2001-03-01 Thread Jody Watts
On Thursday, March 01, 2001 at 2:49 AM John Phillips tickled the keyboard keys on the subject of: "New version". My response follows: JP> Saw a reference somewhere in the mailing list to a version 1.51. When JP> can the mere mortals share the spoils, so to spaek? Right now !! http://www.

Re[2]: New version

2001-03-01 Thread John Phillips
Hello "Jody Watts" wrote On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, at 02:55:49 [GMT -0600] (19:55 Australian Eastern Time,Thursday): > http://www.ritlabs.com/the_bat/beta.html Cannot find server or DNS Error -- Regards John Phillips Sydney, Australia Hamster 1.3.22.1 Bat! 1.49 Windows 98 4.10 Build

Re[3]: New version

2001-03-01 Thread André Engelhardt
Hello John, Thursday, March 01, 2001, 10:29:23 AM, you wrote: >> http://www.ritlabs.com/the_bat/beta.html JP> Cannot find server or DNS Error same here. server obviously down for some reason. -- Best regards, André +++ Eternal Tedium Sound & Media Design ht

Re[4]: New version

2001-03-01 Thread Jody Watts
On Thursday, March 01, 2001 at 3:37 AM André Engelhardt tickled the keyboard keys on the subject of: "New version". My response follows: AE> Hello John, AE> Thursday, March 01, 2001, 10:29:23 AM, you wrote: >>> http://www.ritlabs.com/the_bat/beta.html JP>> Cannot find server or DNS Error

Re[5]: New version

2001-03-01 Thread John Phillips
Hello "Jody Watts" wrote On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, at 03:44:51 [GMT -0600] (20:44 Australian Eastern Time,Thursday): > "New version". > My response follows: AE>> Hello John, AE>> Thursday, March 01, 2001, 10:29:23 AM, you wrote: http://www.ritlabs.com/the_bat/beta.html What I meant to

Re[5]: New version

2001-03-01 Thread André Engelhardt
Hello Jody, Thursday, March 01, 2001, 10:44:51 AM, you wrote: JW> The FTP server is working ... the web server must be down ... JW> -- JW> Jody JW> The ULTIMATE security fix/patch for LookOut! and LookOut! Express ... JW> The Bat! 1.51 Beta/1 ... Running on Windows NT 5.0 Service Pack 1 JW>

Re[6]: 1.49f (was:New version)

2001-03-01 Thread Deniz Baygan
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Dear John, Thursday, March 01, 2001, 12:08:31 PM, you wrote: > What I meant to say ( why didn't you tell me I meant to say this?) > was, after seeing 1.49 out of beta, then 1.49e and 1.51 in beta, where > is a "non beta" 1.50 for the masses? And wh

Re: New version

2001-03-01 Thread Dierk Haasis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Jody! On Thursday, March 01, 2001 at 10:44:51 AM you wrote: > The FTP server is working ... the web server must be down ... About half an hour ago (some minutes more) the http server was up and going - very fast. Since then I am on BETA ...

Re[7]: 1.49f (was:New version)

2001-03-01 Thread Marek Mikus
Hello all, Thursday, March 01, 2001, Deniz Baygan wrote: > And where's 1.49f ? > I couldn't find it. > Via web, 1.49 can be downloaded. > Via FTP, there are 1.49c and 1.49e > But I can't find 1.49f 1.49f version was for translators only. -- Bye Marek Mikus Using the best The Bat! 1.51 Beta

Re[7]: 1.49f (was:New version)

2001-03-01 Thread John Phillips
Hello "Deniz Baygan" wrote On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, at 12:05:33 [GMT +0200] (21:05 Australian Eastern Time,Thursday): > I'm just collecting EVERY single version of TheBat! and even > pre-versions are important. > Any comments ? Strange hobby! Do you want to buy a bridge, by any chance (just k

Re[2]: New version

2001-03-01 Thread Viboon Chaojirapant
> From: Dierk Haasis [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > About half an hour ago (some minutes more) the http server was up and > going - very fast. Since then I am on BETA ... Hard to believe isn't it that even TBUDL can /. a site :). -- Cheers, Viboon -- _

Re[6]: New version

2001-03-01 Thread Wolfgang Kynast
Hi John, JP> What I meant to say ( why didn't you tell me I meant to say this?) JP> was, after seeing 1.49 out of beta, then 1.49e and 1.51 in beta, where JP> is a "non beta" 1.50 for the masses? It's at the same place where you find Netscape 5 ;-) -- Regards, Wolfgang Co-moderator TBUDL / TB

AB irritation

2001-03-01 Thread Dierk Haasis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello TBUDL Members! Since I am in the process of building a new marketing scheme for myself, I need multiple "personalities" and address books. These have to contain partly the same addressees, who need different templates for different acco

Re: 1.49f (was:New version)

2001-03-01 Thread Jannik Lindquist
Hello Deniz, On Thu, 1 Mar 2001 12:05:33 +0200 you wrote (on the subject of "1.49f (was:New version)"): DB> And where's 1.49f ? http://www.batmail.de DB> I'm just collecting EVERY single version of TheBat! and even DB> pre-versions are important. Here's a link to a collection of every version

per account Address Books?

2001-03-01 Thread SyP
Hello TB folks, On the Hungarian TB list someone brought up the question of independent Address Books per accouts. That is, if a number of users share the computer, already having password-protected accounts etc., they shouldn't be able to use each others' address books (not to mention TO: histo

Re: 1.49f (was:New version)

2001-03-01 Thread Dierk Haasis
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello John! On Thursday, March 01, 2001 at 11:34:15 AM you wrote: > Strange hobby! Do you want to buy a bridge, by any chance (just > kidding!) Got one too many? - -- Dierk Haasis PGP keys available: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=SendMyPGPke

Re: per account Address Books?

2001-03-01 Thread Nick Andriash
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On March 1, 2001, at 3:10:53 AM, SyP Wrote: S> Am I missing something really obvious (can be, since I'm the only user S> of my machine), or TB really lacks in this functionality? Like you, I am the only user on my Computer. I have two Accounts setup

Re[2]: per account Address Books?

2001-03-01 Thread Chema Berian
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: MD5 Hello Listers, On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, at 09:31:13 [GMT -0800] (which was 18:31 where I live) Nick wrote: S>> or TB really lacks in this functionality? NA> Like you, I am the only user on my Computer. I have two Accounts setup NA> in TB! and did notic

Re[2]: 1.49f (was:New version)

2001-03-01 Thread John Phillips
Hello "Dierk Haasis" wrote On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, at 12:24:23 [GMT +0100] (22:24 Australian Eastern Time,Thursday): >> Strange hobby! Do you want to buy a bridge, by any chance (just >> kidding!) > Got one too many? New version 1.51 now up at http://www.ritlabs.com/the_bat/download.html -

Re[3]: TB! v1.49 - using EN international keyboard

2001-03-01 Thread SyP
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hello Lija, You wrote on 3/1/2001, 8:57 AM: Lija> We just have to wait for "perfect Windows that fully support Lija> Unicode" and use UTF-8 encoding, but, as I said, neither Lija> Win9x/ME nor TB! fully support this... unfortunately! :( AFAIK Win2K

Re: Problems with restore

2001-03-01 Thread George M. Menegakis
Wednesday, February 28, 2001, 9:25:07 AM, SyP wrote: > Maxim Masiutin wrote on TBBETA, 2/28/2001, 1:52 PM: Maxim>> [-] Messages with attachments were not backed up if attachments Maxim>> were forced into message bodies > At least I think that could be the problem in your case. No, that's not t

Message encryption & attachments

2001-03-01 Thread daveiw
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi all, Just another query re- using PGP encryption. I notice that when I encrypt a message that only the text is encrypted and not any attachment. Is there any way of simultaneously encrypting the attachment too? I realise that I

Re: Message encryption & attachments

2001-03-01 Thread Nick Andriash
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On March 1, 2001, at 9:12:44 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Wrote: dcn> Just another query re- using PGP encryption. I notice that when I dcn> encrypt a message that only the text is encrypted and not any dcn> attachment. Is there any way of simultaneously en

Re[3]: 1.49f (was:New version)

2001-03-01 Thread Dave Wilson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi John, Thursday, March 01, 2001, 6:22:43 PM, you wrote: JP> New version 1.51 now up at http://www.ritlabs.com/the_bat/download.html Is this a Beta or final? - -- Best regards, Davemailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -BEGIN

Re[4]: 1.49f (was:New version)

2001-03-01 Thread Chema Berian
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: MD5 Hello Listers, On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, at 19:45:14 [GMT +] (which was 20:45 where I live) Dave wrote: JP>> New version 1.51 now up at http://www.ritlabs.com/the_bat/download.html DW> Is this a Beta or final? Beta - -- Using The Bat! v1.51 Bet

Re[4]: 1.49f (was:New version)

2001-03-01 Thread John Phillips
Hello "Dave Wilson" wrote On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, at 19:45:14 [GMT +] (06:45 Australian Eastern Time,Friday): > Is this a Beta or final? FWIR, only finals are put on this page. -- Regards John Phillips Sydney, Australia Hamster 1.3.22.1 Bat! 1.51 Windows 98 4.10 Build ASon

Re: 1.49f (was:New version)

2001-03-01 Thread Nick Andriash
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On March 1, 2001, at 11:45:14 AM, Dave Wilson Wrote: DW> Is this a Beta or final? Dave, RITLabs have just released TB! 1.51 Final, but there is also a Beta/1 released, which you can find on the Beta Page. Nick -=N.J. Andriash | Vancouver, B.C.

Re[4]: TB! v1.49 - using EN international keyboard

2001-03-01 Thread Lija
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi SyP, On Thu, 1 Mar 2001, at 19:22:30 [GMT +0100, your local time] (1.3.2001. at 19:22 was my local time), you wrote: Lija>> We just have to wait for "perfect Windows that fully support Lija>> Unicode" and use UTF-8 encoding, but, as I said, neith