***^\ ._)~~
~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Tue, 8 Mar 2005,
@ @ at 21:59:56 +0100, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote:
Hello Mica Mijatovic everyone else,
on 08-Mrz-2005 at 13:17 you (Mica Mijatovic) wrote:
That's why an *RTF* editor in a mail program is indescribably
***^\ ._)~~
~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Tue, 8 Mar 2005,
@ @ at 13:09:39 -0700, when Leif Gregory wrote:
Hello Thomas,
Tuesday, March 8, 2005, 10:37:27 AM, you wrote:
T Because that's how it's done in business these days. I receive .doc
T and .xls files all the
Hello MAU,
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 18:59:33 +0100 GMT (09/03/2005, 00:59 +0700 GMT),
MAU wrote:
Because that's how it's done in business these days. I receive .doc
and .xls files all the time.
M And because many people don't even know RTF files exist ;-)
That's true. But I receive mails from all
Hello Leif,
On Tue, 8 Mar 2005 13:09:39 -0700 GMT (09/03/2005, 03:09 +0700 GMT),
Leif Gregory wrote:
T Because that's how it's done in business these days. I receive .doc
T and .xls files all the time.
LG Yeah... another one of those because everybody else is doing it
LG kinda situations! :gdr:
***^\ ._)~~
~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Mon, 7 Mar 2005,
@ @ at 23:29:00 +, when MFPA wrote:
I can never understand why people insist on attaching .doc files
to emails instead of using .rtf.
Because they think it is DEMANDED so. (-;
Indeed, usually the text
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hi
On Tuesday 8 March 2005 at 7:16:01 AM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], rich gregory wrote:
I too worked in a place where POLICY, dictated by an ignorant
committee, standardized on Microsoft Word documents as their
standard.
Even so, I would expect the
Hello MFPA everyone else,
on 08-Mrz-2005 at 02:55 you (MFPA) wrote:
Oddly, it works here if I open a reply to my message
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] received via the list. The one
before best regards has an extra dashspace added to the front by
PGP, so will only work after you have verified the
Hello MFPA,
On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 23:29:00 + GMT (08/03/2005, 06:29 +0700 GMT),
MFPA wrote:
M I can never understand why people insist on attaching .doc files
M to emails instead of using .rtf.
Because that's how it's done in business these days. I receive .doc
and .xls files all the time.
--
Hello Thomas,
M I can never understand why people insist on attaching .doc files
M to emails instead of using .rtf.
Because that's how it's done in business these days. I receive .doc
and .xls files all the time.
And because many people don't even know RTF files exist ;-)
--
Best regards,
Hello Thomas,
Tuesday, March 8, 2005, 10:37:27 AM, you wrote:
T Because that's how it's done in business these days. I receive .doc
T and .xls files all the time.
Yeah... another one of those because everybody else is doing it
kinda situations! :gdr:
--
__
Hello Mica Mijatovic everyone else,
on 08-Mrz-2005 at 13:17 you (Mica Mijatovic) wrote:
That's why an *RTF* editor in a mail program is indescribably more
precious than an HTML one.
HTML is plain text, the RTF is not. Maybe thats why HTML was used in mail
instead of RT, originally.
--
Best
Hi
On Tuesday 8 March 2005 at 4:17:35 PM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Alexander S. Kunz wrote:
Hello MFPA everyone else,
on 08-Mrz-2005 at 02:55 you (MFPA) wrote:
Oddly, it works here if I open a reply to my message
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] received via the list. The one
before best regards
ON Wednesday, March 2, 2005, 2:04:51 AM, you wrote:
JR Can someone explain the splitting message option, default is 100kb.
Hi Jan,
It is a bit of a relic. It used to be done because there was a maximum size to
an e-mail you could send. By setting the split option your msg would be split is
Hello Gerard everyone else,
on 07-Mrz-2005 at 15:33 you (Gerard) wrote:
It is a bit of a relic. It used to be done because there was a maximum size to
an e-mail you could send. By setting the split option your msg would be split
is
smaller chuncks.
I believe it is still used on Usenet,
Hello Alexander,
On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 17:39:35 +0100 GMT (07/03/2005, 23:39 +0700 GMT),
Alexander S. Kunz wrote:
ASK Some freemail providers still have a limit for messages sent thru their
ASK servers. I think GMX has a limit of 5MB.
5MB for a *mail*? I think that should be enough...
--
Hello Thomas Fernandez everyone else,
on 07-Mrz-2005 at 18:00 you (Thomas Fernandez) wrote:
ASK Some freemail providers still have a limit for messages sent thru their
ASK servers. I think GMX has a limit of 5MB.
5MB for a *mail*? I think that should be enough...
I believe there's enough
***^\ ._)~~
~( __ _o Was another beautiful day, Mon, 7 Mar 2005,
@ @ at 21:33:43 +0100, when Alexander S. Kunz wrote:
ASK Some freemail providers still have a limit for messages sent thru
ASK their servers. I think GMX has a limit of 5MB.
5MB for a *mail*? I think that
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hi
On Monday 7 March 2005 at 9:50:51 PM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Mica Mijatovic wrote:
Then the DOC files...g...
I can never understand why people insist on attaching .doc files
to emails instead of using .rtf.
Indeed, usually the text could just be
At 23:29 [GMT+] on Monday March 7 (actual time - 7:29am on Tuesday in Perth,
Western Australia), you wrote:
Then the DOC files...g...
MFPA I can never understand why people insist on attaching .doc files
MFPA to emails instead of using .rtf.
Because work DEMANDS that stuff be filed as
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hi
On Tuesday 8 March 2005 at 1:05:57 AM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Mic Cullen
wrote:
MFPA I can never understand why people insist on attaching .doc files
MFPA to emails instead of using .rtf.
Because work DEMANDS that stuff be filed as Word doc
At 01:55 [GMT+] on Tuesday March 8 (actual time - 9:55am on Tuesday in
Perth, Western Australia), you wrote:
Because work DEMANDS that stuff be filed as Word doc attachments.
MFPA Why? What can .doc do that .rtf can't (apart from harbour viruses,
MFPA etc?)
'Why' isn't a relevant question.
Hello Jan Rifkinson everyone else,
on 02-Mrz-2005 at 02:04 you (Jan Rifkinson) wrote:
So let's say I'm sending out a msg with 4 small photos within the msg
as photo inserts in an html photo.
In my case TB! split this msg into 4 msgs. How does TB! split up the
msg, between photos or what?
Hi
On Wednesday 2 March 2005 at 6:40:02 PM, in
mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED], Alexander S. Kunz
wrote:
I've disabled message splitting
It must be disabled by default because I didn't even know it was
there and it is off for all my accounts. (What does it have to do
with Files directories? I would
Battyfolk,
Can someone explain the splitting message option, default is 100kb.
So let's say I'm sending out a msg with 4 small photos within the msg
as photo inserts in an html photo.
In my case TB! split this msg into 4 msgs. How does TB! split up the
msg, between photos or what?
What
24 matches
Mail list logo
