Friday, April 14, 2000, 11:15:05 AM, Thomas wrote:
He overstated to make his point. However, I don't know of a single
customer in my non-computer-related business who would agree to your
line of reasoning. If the customer wants an attachment, he gets it.
It's incredible what customers want
Friday, April 14, 2000, 11:19:24 AM, Thomas wrote:
However, it is correct that clicking on a link like
ftp://ftp.somewhere.com/file.exe is something my mother could master. I only
don't know whether her mailer (AOL) highlights this like TB...
Which is why my link is a fully qualified URL
Friday, April 14, 2000, 11:24:04 AM, tracer wrote:
The problem is that the people reading have to be asumed lazy, stupid
etc etc and if you make it any way complicated, they go elswhere...
Bully for them. If we stuck to standards then they'd have nowhere to go
and they'd have to, OH MY
On Fri, 14 Apr 2000 11:32:11 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
No, it is not. The one constant of the software world is that
specialized programs will always function better in their assigned roll
than the same component of a generalized program. Too many programmers
forget that and as a result
On Fri, 14 Apr 2000 11:35:02 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
The problem is that the people reading have to be asumed lazy, stupid
etc etc and if you make it any way complicated, they go elswhere...
Bully for them. If we stuck to standards then they'd have nowhere to go
and they'd have to, OH
Hi there!
On 14 Apr 00, at 19:26, Patrick Erler wrote
about "Re[2]: strange feature request":
http://ftp.dresden-online.com/~perler/files/shot.gif
This link will never work;-) You link to ftp site via http protocol...
as we see you are not able to send a simple attachement,
Friday, April 14, 2000, 12:37:48 PM, Allie wrote:
Remember that your objective is to run a business and provide your customers
goods and/or services. If they can get their goods via a route which doesn't
make them have to learn something (I mean they're already forking over hard
cash), then
Friday, April 14, 2000, 12:49:35 PM, Alexander wrote:
http://ftp.dresden-online.com/~perler/files/shot.gif
This link will never work;-) You link to ftp site via http protocol...
Fallacy. Any machine can host any service. Do a dig on rpglink.com
sometime and see where ftp.rpglink.com,
Hi there!
On 14 Apr 00, at 13:18, Steve Lamb wrote
about "Re: strange feature request":
This ideal setup that you're speaking of imposes an increased
degree of complexity to the user. He buys an e-mail application and now
has to worry about getting an editor a
On Fri, 14 Apr 2000 13:18:50 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
..trim..
We have discussed this before and you know this is patently false.
Depends on if you choose to look at only one angle. :-) Though I'd
love to discuss this, it's getting off topic and I'll stop here in the
interest of the
Friday, April 14, 2000, 1:34:47 PM, Allie wrote:
Depends on if you choose to look at only one angle.
What other angle is there? Learn 30 different ways to do the same basic 6
things, none of which talk to each other. Learn 6 different ways to do 30
different things, all of which talk to
On Fri, 14 Apr 2000 13:41:18 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
Depends on if you choose to look at only one angle.
What other angle is there? Learn 30 different ways to do the same basic 6
things, none of which talk to each other. Learn 6 different ways to do 30
different things, all of which
On Fri, 14 Apr 2000 13:56:30 -0700, Steve Lamb wrote:
I read you, but as I said, I wish not to discuss this any
further on this list since it really has nothing to do with TB!. I'm
pretty sure the moderators will not jump in and encourage me to do
otherwise. :-) A personal reply
On Fri, 14 Apr 2000 16:48:03 -0500, Allie Martin wrote:
..trim..
Yes, these monolithic apps may not be for everyone, but the market is
certainly there for them and it's not l-stupidos that wish to buy these
apps. These are simply individuals who wish to use a computer with
minimal learning
Hello Allie Martin,
On Sun, 16 Jan 2000 21:12:14 -0500 GMT your local time,
which was Monday, January 17, 2000, 9:12:14 AM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Allie Martin wrote:
Allie On Sun, 16 Jan 2000 08:57:39 +0700, tracer wrote:
But, how often do you download files which are present or known to
Hello Marck D. Pearlstone,
On Sat, 15 Jan 2000 at 15:24:57 GMT + [Saturday, January 15, 2000
22:24 GMT +0700], you told to the list:
I can also recommend Reget ( I think its far superior to getright
if you download many files) and there is the free Firetalk,
amazingly good
Hello Syafril,
On Mon, 17 Jan 2000 at 03:14:36 [GMT +0700], you wrote:
SH Yes, my favourite is Jetcar (www.amazesoft.com), because it's
SH small (around 700K), and having "split download utility" (up to 10
SH split file), set maximum download speed (so I still have enough
SH bandwith for mail,
Hello Marck D. Pearlstone,
On Sat, 15 Jan 2000 15:24:57 + GMT your local time,
which was Saturday, January 15, 2000, 10:24:57 PM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Marck D. Pearlstone wrote:
Marck My fave is one called NetVampire (having used GoZilla and failed
Marck miserably with
Hello Allie Martin,
On Sat, 15 Jan 2000 07:57:02 -0500 GMT your local time,
which was Saturday, January 15, 2000, 7:57:02 PM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Allie Martin wrote:
Allie On Sat, 15 Jan 2000 14:36:23 +0700, tracer wrote:
Allie [..snip..]
I can also recommend Reget ( I think its far
Hello Thomas Fernandez,
On Sat, 15 Jan 2000 20:15:22 +0800 GMT your local time,
which was Saturday, January 15, 2000, 7:15:22 PM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Thomas Fernandez wrote:
Thomas Hallo Oleg,
Thomas On Sat, 15 Jan 2000 15:43:40 +0400 GMT (15.01.2000, 19:43 +0800 GMT),
Thomas Oleg Zalyalov
Hello Allie Martin,
On Sat, 15 Jan 2000 11:19:56 -0500 GMT your local time,
which was Saturday, January 15, 2000, 11:19:56 PM (GMT+0700) my local time,
Allie Martin wrote:
My fave is one called NetVampire (having used GoZilla and failed
miserably with GetRight). Reasons: NV works
On Sun, 16 Jan 2000 08:57:39 +0700, tracer wrote:
Allie Getright has this new feature where it will download large files by
Allie downloading in a user-defined number of parts from a user-defined number
Allie of servers ... at the same time! It finds the servers and does all the
Allie
Hi Oleg,
on Tuesday, October 05, 1999, 3:35:31 PM, Oleg Zalyalov wrote:
AVK Once again: I *don't* see any *.att inline attachments here, and
AVK I cannot even guess where these can come from:-)
OZ Yes, it strange. There is no any attachment at attached message, but
OZ TB! shows
Hello, the Bat! list recipients,
Tuesday, October 05, 1999, Thomas Fernandez wrote about
Example of strange attachment:
TF No, it's not a Bat bug. I got the attachment, but it's on my other
TF computer, at home. If nobody else has sent only this attachment by
TF evening, I will resend
Hello George,
Monday, October 04, 1999, 8:27:05 AM, you wrote:
GMM Monday, October 04, 1999, 6:07:10 AM, Syafril Hermansyah wrote:
Yupe, I got it if read/rcv msg from someone who use ELM [version 2.4
PL22] in plain-text format. But noticed, if later version of ELM
[version 2.4
Hello George M. Menegakis,
On Monday, October 04, 1999, 1:27:05 PM you told us:
SH Yupe, I got it if read/rcv msg from someone who use ELM [version
SH 2.4 PL22] in plain-text format. But noticed, if later version of
SH ELM [version 2.4 PL23] or PL24 Alpha have no problem, either MIME
SH or
Hi there!
On 4 Oct 99, at 9:27, George M. Menegakis wrote
about "Re: Strange inline attachments":
I usually get them from listserv (the daemon) and also from varius daemons that
send mails. Either case there is a bug , after all only The Bat shows that
there are inline a
NetWorker Registration: (critical) License enabler #878409-4b6bcc-5f478f (Data Backup
Utility) will expire in 1 day(s).
--
/\/\
|| George M. Menegakis - System Administrator ||
|| Centre of Communications and Networking||
|| Iraklion Campus -
Hi there!
On 4 Oct 99, at 18:49, George M. Menegakis wrote
about "Example of strange attachment":
I didn't see the effect you've described:-)) It's been all right
(IMO). Do you see the same problem with the the message
you've sent to the TBUDL??? I opened it with Bet
Monday, October 04, 1999, 8:06:15 PM, Alexander V. Kiselev wrote:
Hi there!
On 4 Oct 99, at 18:49, George M. Menegakis wrote
about "Example of strange attachment":
I didn't see the effect you've described:-)) It's been all right
(IMO). Do you see the sa
Hello, the Bat! list recipients,
Monday, October 04, 1999, Alexander V. Kiselev wrote about
Example of strange attachment:
AVK Once again: I *don't* see any *.att inline attachments here, and
AVK I cannot even guess where these can come from:-)
Yes, it strange. There is no any attachment
Hello George M. Menegakis,
On Sunday, October 03, 1999, 1:28:21 AM you told us:
GMM Every now and then I receive files with inline attachments with .att extension
GMM (usually named message.att)
GMM The point is that these messages don't do contain attachments.
GMM Only TheBat! shows that
Monday, October 04, 1999, 6:07:10 AM, Syafril Hermansyah wrote:
Yupe, I got it if read/rcv msg from someone who use ELM [version 2.4
PL22] in plain-text format. But noticed, if later version of ELM
[version 2.4 PL23] or PL24 Alpha have no problem, either MIME or
plain-text.
I
Hello people.
Every now and then I receive files with inline attachments with .att extension
(usually named message.att)
The point is that these messages don't do contain attachments. Only TheBat!
shows that there are attachments. There must be some problem.
--
501 - 534 of 534 matches
Mail list logo
