Outlook Express and antivirus checking

"Lindsay Graham" wrote in message
...
Thanks for all the replies, which certainly confirmed what has been said
before.

I've suggested that the correspondent on the AVG Forum refer to this
exchange of posts and reconsider his/her earlier advice. If anyone wants
to look at the relevant messages on the Forum, see
http://forum.grisoft.cz/freeforum/list.php?3,page=1. I'll post the result
here in due course.

Pardon my ignorance, but I had no idea who Rube Goldberg was. But with
the help of Wikipaedia, I now know who he was and what a Rube Goldberg
contraption was. What a great feller he must have been!

Lindsay Graham
Canberra, Australia


"N. Miller" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 7 Mar 2007 14:14:04 +1100, Lindsay Graham wrote:

I'd be grateful for some comments from MVPs on this AVG reply. If the
original MVP advice still stands, why? And what issues gave rise to
this
advice?

I am not an MVP, nor do I wish to be one. I have some comments of my own
to
add. The guy who says, "I would rather catch a
malware before it got to my email client than to rely on the on access
scanner of an antivirus program.", clearly does not understand what he is
saying. An AV scanner acts as a proxy, accessing the email account, and
writing the email to a local temporary file, then running the scan. So
you
are downloading the email from the server anyway. But what happens if
something goes awry while the message is in this limbo? And it is the
same
scanning engine, the same definitions, that will be in play whether you
scan, or don't scan.

As the MVPs keep pointing out, client side anti virus scanning is
redundant.
What they haven't pointed out is that it violates the "KISS" principle.
By
creating a Rube Goldberg contraption, AV email scanning is anything but
"Keep It Simple, Stupid".

--
Norman
~Shine, bright morning light,
~now in the air the spring is coming.
~Sweet, blowing wind,
~singing down the hills and valleys.

In an attempt at stopping the Cross-Posting, please see my reply in the other NG (links are clickable):

From: "Michel Merlin"
Newsgroup: news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...xpress.general
Message: news://msnews.microsoft.com/%23Vf8Ys...TNGP03.phx.gbl
Sent: Wed 16 May 2007 15:07:00 +0200 (13:07:00 GMT)
Subject: Outlook Express and AntiSPAM checking?

(Ending the X-posting)
.................

Versailles, Wed 16 May 2007 15:35:40 +0200

Crossposting is preferred over multiposting such as this.

Multiposting vs Crossposting:
http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm
--
Bruce Hagen
MS-MVP Outlook Express
~IB-CA~

"Michel Merlin" wrote in message
...
In an attempt at stopping the Cross-Posting, please see my reply in the
other NG (links are clickable):

From: "Michel Merlin"
Newsgroup:
news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...xpress.general
Message:
news://msnews.microsoft.com/%23Vf8Ys...TNGP03.phx.gbl
Sent: Wed 16 May 2007 15:07:00 +0200 (13:07:00 GMT)
Subject: Outlook Express and AntiSPAM checking?

(Ending the X-posting)
.................

Versailles, Wed 16 May 2007 15:35:40 +0200

In an attempt at stopping the Cross-Posting, please see my reply in the other NG (links are clickable):

From: "Michel Merlin"
Newsgroup: news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...xpress.general
Message: news://msnews.microsoft.com/%23Vf8Ys...TNGP03.phx.gbl
Sent: Wed 16 May 2007 15:07:00 +0200 (13:07:00 GMT)
Subject: Outlook Express and AntiSPAM checking?

(Ending the X-posting)
.................

Versailles, Wed 16 May 2007 16:19:30 +0200


----- Parent Message (links are clickable) -----
From: "Bruce Hagen"
Newsgroup: news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...xpress.general
Message: news://msnews.microsoft.com/ef0BhfGY...TNGP06.phx.gbl
Sent: Tue 6 Mar 2007 19:22:50 -0800 (Wed 7 Mar 2007 03:22:50 GMT)
Subject: Outlook Express and antivirus checking

E-mail scanning is a redundant option that wreaks havoc with OE...
....................

Sorry I misposted. I just corrected by posting completed and in the right place, see parent AND "RELATED" messages below.

Versailles, Wed 16 May 2007 17:29:45 +0200


----- Parent Message (links are clickable) -----
From: "Michel Merlin"
Newsgroup: news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...tlooke xpress
Message:
Sent: Wed 16 May 2007 15:35:40 +0200 (13:35:40 GMT)
Subject: Outlook Express and AntiSPAM checking? (Ending the X-posting)

In an attempt at stopping the Cross-Posting, please see my reply in the other NG...
.............

Versailles, Wed 16 May 2007 15:35:40 +0200


----- RELATED Message (links are clickable) -----
From: "Michel Merlin"
Newsgroup: news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...tlooke xpress
Message: news://msnews.microsoft.com/OX0Y5U8l...TNGP03.phx.gbl
Sent: Wednesday 16 May 2007 16:19
Subject: Outlook Express and AntiSPAM checking? (Ending the X-posting)

In an attempt at stopping the Cross-Posting, please see my reply in the other NG (links are clickable):

From: "Michel Merlin"
Newsgroup: news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...xpress.general
Message: news://msnews.microsoft.com/%23Vf8Ys...TNGP03.phx.gbl
Sent: Wed 16 May 2007 15:07:00 +0200 (13:07:00 GMT)
Subject: Outlook Express and AntiSPAM checking?

(Ending the X-posting)
.................

Versailles, Wed 16 May 2007 16:19:30 +0200


----- Parent Message (links are clickable) -----
From: "Bruce Hagen"
Newsgroup: news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...xpress.general
Message: news://msnews.microsoft.com/ef0BhfGY...TNGP06.phx.gbl
Sent: Tue 6 Mar 2007 19:22:50 -0800 (Wed 7 Mar 2007 03:22:50 GMT)
Subject: Outlook Express and antivirus checking

E-mail scanning is a redundant option that wreaks havoc with OE...
....................

Please. You will learn some day that, the more educated, instructed and experienced you are, the more you discover others are too. Only when badly under-provided do you live in the illusion that others would be even lower than you. In my case I have been leading thousands people for decades (engineers, engineer pupils, ...), handling large public contracts and large public organizations; I also entirely wrote (1977-1994) large programs in domains like high speed layout (TGV, highways) and engineering (numerical analysis, structural analysis, ....), with a level of easiness, precision, domain extension, reliability, and resulting productivity, then unknown in big organizations (like Microsoft). Handling large amounts of critical information (like computing bridges or writing international contracts or defining public laws) leads to find back the basics; involved here are the information *unicity* (or more generally, *hierarchy*); you visibly are still far behind all this here (while you may be uneducated and uninstructed to the point of being completely unable to realize or admit it).

The article you link is only dealing with the low-level problem of *downloading and storing* the messages to your PC; it completely ignores all the higher level issues, like readers' bandwidth (i.e. the time you spend browsing newsgroups, reading different appearances of a same message before being sure it's thrice the same, replying properly, etc.).

Cross-posting obviously was implemented, and is applied, by people too fast-thinking and acting, who never seriously thought of all this. "Multiposting" (as meant in your link) is very little different (just aggravating on the downloading and storing).

A much more proper way would be to apply the basic principles (as usually done e.g. in DBs), i.e. posting the actual information ONLY ONCE, and then in the other places, to only REFER to it. You rarely copy, and when copying you never *duplicate*, you *replicate* (which implies a proper hierarchy).

This (referring) is what I tried. I mistook when executing it, and as frequent in such situation, I mistook a 2nd time when trying to correct in a hurry (well, *you* won't see it as mistaken since what I did wrong is your beloved cross-posting). A normally instructed and educated person would silently empathize, indulge and ignore the errors, focuse on the ground - while eventually patiently waiting for right correction. You instead just add a comment at the same time uselessly irritating, and uselessly increasing the mess, by its simple existence (one more message), and above all because full wrong and misleading for any other fast-reader: what I was attempting was REFERRING, i.e. the CONTRARY of "multiposting". No doubt that with people like you MS is fast approaching its obvious goal: sabotaging the once efficient MS public newsgroups.

{Sorry for this recall. Regular persons can't *always* remain silent when scorned by arrogant-ignorants}

Versailles, Wed 16 May 2007 17:30:15 +0200
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge -- Charles Darwin


----- Parent Message (links are clickable) -----
From: "Bruce Hagen"
Newsgroup: news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...tlooke xpress
Message: news://msnews.microsoft.com/%23885RQ...TNGP02.phx.gbl
Sent: Wed 16 May 2007 07:11:19 -0700 (14:11:19 GMT)
Subject: Outlook Express and AntiSPAM checking? (Ending the X-posting)

Crossposting is preferred over multiposting such as this.

Multiposting vs Crossposting:
http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm
--
Bruce Hagen
MS-MVP Outlook Express
~IB-CA~


----- Parent Message (links are clickable) -----
From: "Michel Merlin"
Newsgroup: news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...tlooke xpress
Message:
Sent: Wed 16 May 2007 15:35:40 +0200 (13:35:40 GMT)
Subject: Outlook Express and AntiSPAM checking? (Ending the X-posting)

In an attempt at stopping the Cross-Posting, please see my reply in the other NG (links are clickable):

................................

Well said, Bruce. Trust you won't lose any sleep over this harangue.

Andy I.


"Bruce Hagen" wrote in message
...
: Crossposting is preferred over multiposting such as this.
:
: Multiposting vs Crossposting:
: http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm
: --
: Bruce Hagen
: MS-MVP Outlook Express
: ~IB-CA~
:

You just woke me up. w
--
~Bruce

"Andy" [email protected] wrote in message
...
Well said, Bruce. Trust you won't lose any sleep over this harangue.

Andy I.


"Bruce Hagen" wrote in message
...
: Crossposting is preferred over multiposting such as this.
:
: Multiposting vs Crossposting:
: http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm
: --
: Bruce Hagen
: MS-MVP Outlook Express
: ~IB-CA~
:

Wow, some egoes(SP?) sure are big! An entire irrelevant resume of unrelated
experience and no point to make. Maybe it's at the end somewhere but any
"knowing" person would know to present it properly. I read what was on the
screen and, well, ... poof!

Pop`



Michel Merlin wrote:
Please. You will learn some day that, the more educated, instructed
and experienced you are, the more you discover others are too. Only
when badly under-provided do you live in the illusion that others
would be even lower than you. In my case I have been leading
thousands people for decades (engineers, engineer pupils, ...),
handling large public contracts and large public organizations; I
also entirely wrote (1977-1994) large programs in domains like high
speed layout (TGV, highways) and engineering (numerical analysis,
structural analysis, ...), with a level of easiness, precision,
domain extension, reliability, and resulting productivity, then
unknown in big organizations (like Microsoft). Handling large amounts
of critical information (like computing bridges or writing
international contracts or defining public laws) leads to find back
the basics; involved here are the information *unicity* (or more
generally, *hierarchy*); you visibly are still far behind all this
here (while you may be uneducated and uninstructed to the point of
being completely unable to realize or admit it).

The article you link is only dealing with the low-level problem of
*downloading and storing* the messages to your PC; it completely
ignores all the higher level issues, like readers' bandwidth (i.e.
the time you spend browsing newsgroups, reading different appearances
of a same message before being sure it's thrice the same, replying
properly, etc.).

Cross-posting obviously was implemented, and is applied, by people
too fast-thinking and acting, who never seriously thought of all
this. "Multiposting" (as meant in your link) is very little different
(just aggravating on the downloading and storing).

A much more proper way would be to apply the basic principles (as
usually done e.g. in DBs), i.e. posting the actual information ONLY
ONCE, and then in the other places, to only REFER to it. You rarely
copy, and when copying you never *duplicate*, you *replicate* (which
implies a proper hierarchy).

This (referring) is what I tried. I mistook when executing it, and as
frequent in such situation, I mistook a 2nd time when trying to
correct in a hurry (well, *you* won't see it as mistaken since what I
did wrong is your beloved cross-posting). A normally instructed and
educated person would silently empathize, indulge and ignore the
errors, focuse on the ground - while eventually patiently waiting for
right correction. You instead just add a comment at the same time
uselessly irritating, and uselessly increasing the mess, by its
simple existence (one more message), and above all because full wrong
and misleading for any other fast-reader: what I was attempting was
REFERRING, i.e. the CONTRARY of "multiposting". No doubt that with
people like you MS is fast approaching its obvious goal: sabotaging
the once efficient MS public newsgroups.

{Sorry for this recall. Regular persons can't *always* remain silent
when scorned by arrogant-ignorants}

Versailles, Wed 16 May 2007 17:30:15 +0200
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge --
Charles Darwin


----- Parent Message (links are clickable) -----
From: "Bruce Hagen"
Newsgroup:
news://msnews.microsoft.com/microsof...tlooke xpress
Message:
news://msnews.microsoft.com/%23885RQ...TNGP02.phx.gbl
Sent: Wed 16 May 2007 07:11:19 -0700 (14:11:19 GMT)
Subject: Outlook Express and AntiSPAM checking? (Ending the
X-posting)

Crossposting is preferred over multiposting such as this.

Multiposting vs Crossposting:
http://www.blakjak.demon.co.uk/mul_crss.htm

"Poprivet" wrote in message
...
Wow, some egoes(SP?) sure are big! An entire irrelevant resume of
unrelated experience and no point to make. Maybe it's at the end
somewhere but any "knowing" person would know to present it properly. I
read what was on the screen and, well, ... poof!


I plonked Michel long ago. I wish people wouldn't answer him.

--
Frank Saunders, MS-MVP OE/WM
Do not send mail.