Hi,
Leif Gregory wrote:
Please trim replies to context.
Oops, sorry, accidentally forgot to trim it this time...
Antje
Using The Bat! v2.00.6 on Windows 98 4.10 Build A
--
| Antje Lehmann
| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Current version
On Wednesday, September 17, 2003, Roelof Otten wrote in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
RO First of all, I didn't test this. ;-) Create an incoming filter
RO for your Daily Dilbert Mail that extracts the attached file to
RO disk and let the same filter start an external program, in this
RO case your
Hi Miguel,
As I say, maybe I didn't understand a word of what this thread is all
about. But if I did... My goodness! All is needed is a double click!
I know, I know... but I'm a lazy person, you know ;-))) And I simply
thought there might be a way for me to not have to open the browser
every
Hi,
Roelof Otten wrote:
Hallo Joseph,
On Wed, 17 Sep 2003 10:40:59 -0500GMT (17-9-03, 17:40 +0200, where I
live), you wrote:
JN I didn't test your idea either, but it seems like a brilliant
JN approach.
I think that's a bit too much, but thanks anyhow. ;-)
JN If it were packaged in a way
Hi Roelof,
First of all, I didn't test this. ;-)
Create an incoming filter for your Daily Dilbert Mail that extracts
the attached file to disk and let the same filter start an external
program, in this case your browser with a parameter that makes it open
your attachment.
Since 'extract
Hello Simon,
Tuesday, December 3, 2002, 1:59:47 PM, you wrote:
S it would be completely foolish IMO to even begin to consider
S dumping TB! simply because of the inclusion of an option that you
S don't wish to make use of yourself.
I'd like to know what other mailer those who say they would
Tuesday, December 3, 2002, 2:55:07 PM, you wrote:
I am very glad you didn't write this one here:
http://ccug.apcug.org/newsApr02.htm ;-)
:-) ... yeah... Imagine the flames it would set up here...rushing for
fireproof clothing.
Please continue to ask. I encourage you to write one on The
Tuesday, December 3, 2002, 3:54:30 AM, you wrote:
Hi TBUDL,
On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, at 02:46:32 [GMT +0530] you wrote:
MD Does the Bat! have any features to compose HTML mail like one would do
MD in Outlooklike have inline pictures or background
MD images...background sounds I know might be
Tuesday, December 3, 2002, 5:53:41 AM, you wrote:
Hello Mean,
On Tue, 3 Dec 2002 04:04:47 +0530 GMT (03/12/02, 05:34 +0700 GMT),
Mean Drake wrote:
MD Does the Bat! have any features to compose HTML mail like one would do
MD in Outlooklike have inline pictures or background
MD
Saturday, December 01, 2001, 11:23:43 AM, Peter Smitt wrote:
I agree wholeheartedly. My experience is that 99% of the people who
use html in their mails even don't know that they do so. They are just
the victims of the default options of Outlook. Spammers use html
deliberately, but I don't
Hi Alastair,
On samedi 1 décembre 2001 at 13:39:37, you wrote :
AS (I'm currently using Becky!; although it has vices, most notably a poor
AS editor, plugin support is one area in which it is better than TB!
AS Particularly good is a plugin which supports reading and posting of
AS news; the
Peter,
On Friday, November 30, 2001, 3:51:41 PM, you wrote:
PM I don't think so, Nick. There are too many Outlook (Express) users around.
PM I do like to be able to see their style, though I despise HTML in mails
PM generally.
One of the reasons I switched to The Bat! from Pegasus was
because
On 11/30/2001, Peter Meyns wrote:
I don't think so, Nick. There are too many Outlook (Express) users
around. I do like to be able to see their style, though I despise
HTML in mails generally. I agree with you in so far as TB! shouldn't
implement creating HTML mails. This should never be
At 12:47 AM 01/12/01, Don Zeigler wrote:
The Bat *needs* to be able to compose in html format. As far as
viewing html mails, we should have the option of using the Bat's
built-in limited viewer (which is enought for my own needs, anyhow) or
selecting Microsoft's viewer if we want to see the mail
--
On Tuesday, January 09, 2001, 11:12:08 PM, Andrey G. Sergeev (AKA Andris) wrote:
AGSAA Personally I don't think you're going against the rules of this ML when
AGSAA you're trying to discuss some topics like one you were raised. However
AGSAA this particular
Hello Austin,
Monday, January 08, 2001, 6:28:05 PM, you wrote:
AD Hi
What do you mean by saying that? Do you _really_ want that all that
.html .ra .qt .scr .swf attachments will
render/play/saving-your-screen/etc. upon the message view?
I would just like a HTML message to display all of
Hi Kent
I would just like a HTML message to display all of the images :
Me too. :)
Austin
--
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
15/09/2000, Steve Lamb:
Aside from templates what does TB! really do better?
Hi all.
I'm pretty new to TB, used Pegasus Mail and Eudora for years, and the
main reason why I gave up with PM is that you can't have any copy of
actually sent messages, but only [multiple] copies of queued ones
Hello Marck and all,
Thursday, September 14, 2000, 5:54:55 PM, you wrote:
While you can (with a great deal of effort), it is not part of the TB
remit to cover HTML mail creation. There are a number of other
products which do this. There are also a large majority of dedicated
TB
Hello Steve,
Thursday, September 14, 2000, 1:29:02 PM, you wrote:
SL On Fri, Sep 15, 2000 at 01:22:21AM +0800, Thomas Fernandez wrote:
My main argument is always the waste of bandwidth (and that I find
emails with different fonts and colours offensive or just plain ugly,
but that's certainly
On Thursday, September 14, 2000, 10:10:51 AM, you wrote:
SL has better sorting
What is better?
ztrader
--
--
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
On Thursday, September 14, 2000, 3:30:04 PM, you wrote:
SL On Thu, Sep 14, 2000 at 03:26:33PM -0700, ztrader wrote:
On Thursday, September 14, 2000, 10:10:51 AM, you wrote:
SL has better sorting
What is better?
SL That is not enough context to go by.
For example, can it do numeric
On Thursday, September 14, 2000, 4:02:43 PM, you wrote:
SL PMMail has nicer filtering,
Oops - there's that word again :-). I'm very interested in good
filtering. What does PMM do better re filtering?
ztrader
--
--
View the TBUDL
On Thursday, September 14, 2000, 4:14:06 PM, you wrote:
SL With TB! the
SL configuration of filters is quite cryptic.
I'd have to agree there, although good help files and examples could
have answered many of the questions I had.
SL limited scripting capabilities in advanced
SL mode.
Hey -
24 matches
Mail list logo
