If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
OE Is Deleting My NG Headers
Ron
I have not tested but can accept that compacting one identity will not compact another. It is logical that switching an identity is eqivalent to closing an identity. When I have a moment I will test on this machine. -- Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ron Sommer wrote: Gerry, Doing a manual compaction of all folders and closing OE or switching Identities will have the result of the compact check count count for that Identity being 1. Saying yes to run the automatic compaction will have the result of the compact check count count for that Identity being 1. So, the 100th close of an Identity after a compaction close would bring up the compaction message. Neither manual or automatic compaction changes the compact check count for other Identities. Switching Identities increases the compact check count. If an Identity's compact check count is 100, switching Identities will bring up the compaction message for that Identity. Click yes and the compaction occurs, then the selected Identity opens. Conclusion, closing an Identity 100 times will bring up the compaction message for that Identity. "Gerry" wrote in message ... Ron The earlier system of compacting messages in the background was more correctly described as automatic compaction. The introduction of the ability to defer makes it not automatic, although the prompt is automatic.You can have the same debate with the operating system automatic update process. The process is commonly referred to as automatic compaction so that is what we need to call it, otherwise it confuses those less aware of the finer points. The prompt comes after shutting down 100 times and when the users attempts 101. You disgreed earlier with my saying "On closing Outlook Express 100 times." What I said was correct as the prompt comes before Outlook Express closes 101 times. This is, however, us both being pedantic. This statement by you is incorrect "Each OE Identity has its' own compact check count, so in actuality, the compact message will appear after the 101st close of each OE Identity. " There is a separate count for each identity. -- Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ron Sommer wrote: I do not consider the compaction as automatic when the user has to allow the compaction to occur, however I will yield to the accepted understanding and say that OE has automatic compaction. I played with the Compact Check Count and discovered that the count is increased on shutdown. What I did reconfirm is that the compact message is on the 101st shutdown of OE. The count is 100 from the previous shutdown. If no is selected or the message box cancelled, the compact check count increments to 101 and continues to increment with each no or close of the box. It is easy to change the compact check count to 99, then open and close OE. The count will now be 100 with no compact message. Each OE Identity has its' own compact check count, so in actuality, the compact message will appear after the 101st close of each OE Identity. The compaction only applies to one Identity. "Gerry" wrote in message ... Ron "I see that you are not using a version of OE that has automatic compaction. Earlier versions did have automatic compaction" The generally accepted understanding of automatic compaction is that the user is prompted to compact after closing Outlook Express 100 times. My version of Outlook Express does this if I allow the count to reach 100. It is rare for me to allow this to happen as I manually compact before the count reachs 100. Manual compaction of all folders resets the count to zero. Manual compaction of some folders does not reset the count. Please explain the basis of your assertion that I am not using a version that has automatic compaction? Are you confusing automatic compaction with compacting messages in the background? The former replaced the latter several years ago! They are not the same. Automatic compaction incorporates the placement of a backup copy in the recycle bin before each dbx files is compacted. This feature was not present within compacting messages in the background! Similarly the optional delete function, which could be used with compacting messages in the background, is no longer available for use with automatic compaction. The user has the option with automatic compaction to defer the process. Whilst deferral can be on every closure it is only a deferral as the invitation to compact will occur on every closure until the invitation is accepted. There was no invitation to compact feature with compacting messages in the background. You either configured Outlook Express to use compacting messages in the background or you chose not to use the feature. "The compaction message will not appear until the 101st close of OE." I was disagreeing with this statement! You now seem to be qualifying the statement without admitting that this is what you are doing! -- Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ snipped |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
OE Is Deleting My NG Headers
That came with SP2 on August 25, 2004. That had no effect on how newsgroup
posts were handled, of course. Back in '04, MSNews was only retaining messages for 30 days. -- Bruce Hagen MS-MVP Outlook Express Imperial Beach, CA "Gerry" wrote in message ... VanguardLH The changes to Compacting messages in the background were made much later than 2002! I think sometime between August 2004 and 2006. -- Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ VanguardLH wrote: Everyone but you knows that there has been no new code added to OE since 2002. You see a change in behavior and without any programmer expertise go claiming there must've been a code change. Despite your claims that OE has been changed recently, it hasn't changed since 2002. |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
OE Is Deleting My NG Headers
Sorry. My fingers typed other than my intentions. Google does not
publish an Operating System; which is the core business of Microsoft. Microsoft's core businesses are Windows and Office. Losing Office would be a very big deal to them. So important is Office that years ago they invested in Apple Computer, their chief OS rival, to ensure that Apple didn't go under, most likely because of all of the Apple Office users. As I said, I use OpenOffice. Microsoft already faces competition in that field, and has for a long time. Most businesses are not going to switch to OpenOffice. Business consumers are their main source of revenue. A Google product, solidly built, could draw business customers away. I am not really interested in web-based OSes. Those would require an always on Internet connection. In the event that my Internet connection dies (and it happens about once a month, whether I like it, or not), my web-based OS would be useless; my computer nothing more than an expensive doorstop. I'll stick to a disk-based OS, thank you. You're completely mistaken here. First, Chrome (or IE, or Firefox) is not "web-based." You can't have a web-based browser that's used for browsing the web! The browser is itself your window to the web. All browsers (including Chrome) are PC-based, and are installed on the hard drive. Which requires an Operating System to run. Missing the point. You said you weren't interested in a web-based OS, but would stick to a disk-based OS. I said that if Chrome became an OS, it would be disk-based. All web-browsers are disk-based to being with, not web-based; so if Chrome became an OS, it would be disk-based. If Chrome became an OS, it would not "require an Operating System to run"; it would BE an operating system. A machine would boot directly into it, just like machines now book into Windows or other OS's. The rest of your post refers to government intrusion and the preference for offline tools. So I'll leave that in the realm of opinion without a counterpoint. Neil |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
OE Is Deleting My NG Headers
"Neil" admits defeat, folds up his tent, meekly departs the thread and says
he will no longer listen to or discuss these issues with his interlocutors. Excellent! D. Spencer Hines Lux et Veritas et Libertas Vires et Honor Veni, Vidi, Calcitravi Asinum "Neil" wrote in message ... toshsnip |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
OE Is Deleting My NG Headers
Bruce
My comment to Vanguard was directed at this statement "Everyone but you knows that there has been no new code added to OE since 2002." Quote from one of my posts 28 June 2000. Messages deleted from the server are automatically deleted from your newsgroup folder when you next connect and download. The Microsoft server holds messages for 90 days but other servers hold for lesser periods. If you wish to retain messages you need to move them to a mail folder where the process will not affect them. -- Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Bruce Hagen wrote: That came with SP2 on August 25, 2004. That had no effect on how newsgroup posts were handled, of course. Back in '04, MSNews was only retaining messages for 30 days. "Gerry" wrote in message ... VanguardLH The changes to Compacting messages in the background were made much later than 2002! I think sometime between August 2004 and 2006. -- Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ VanguardLH wrote: Everyone but you knows that there has been no new code added to OE since 2002. You see a change in behavior and without any programmer expertise go claiming there must've been a code change. Despite your claims that OE has been changed recently, it hasn't changed since 2002. |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
OE Is Deleting My NG Headers
Perhaps MS did this in trying to deal with the data file corruption
issue?... Trying to minimize the bloat. DSH Lux et Veritas et Libertas Vires et Honor "Gerry" wrote in message ... Bruce My comment to Vanguard was directed at this statement "Everyone but you knows that there has been no new code added to OE since 2002." Quote from one of my posts 28 June 2000. Messages deleted from the server are automatically deleted from your newsgroup folder when you next connect and download. The Microsoft server holds messages for 90 days but other servers hold for lesser periods. If you wish to retain messages you need to move them to a mail folder where the process will not affect them. -- Gerry |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
OE Is Deleting My NG Headers
On Mon, 2 Feb 2009 12:14:15 -0600, Neil wrote:
Sorry. My fingers typed other than my intentions. Google does not publish an Operating System; which is the core business of Microsoft. Microsoft's core businesses are Windows and Office. Losing Office would be a very big deal to them. So important is Office that years ago they invested in Apple Computer, their chief OS rival, to ensure that Apple didn't go under, most likely because of all of the Apple Office users. As I said, I use OpenOffice. Microsoft already faces competition in that field, and has for a long time. Most businesses are not going to switch to OpenOffice. Business consumers are their main source of revenue. A Google product, solidly built, could draw business customers away. Most end users are not in business. I am not really interested in web-based OSes. Those would require an always on Internet connection. In the event that my Internet connection dies (and it happens about once a month, whether I like it, or not), my web-based OS would be useless; my computer nothing more than an expensive doorstop. I'll stick to a disk-based OS, thank you. You're completely mistaken here. First, Chrome (or IE, or Firefox) is not "web-based." You can't have a web-based browser that's used for browsing the web! The browser is itself your window to the web. All browsers (including Chrome) are PC-based, and are installed on the hard drive. Which requires an Operating System to run. Missing the point. You said you weren't interested in a web-based OS, but would stick to a disk-based OS. I said that if Chrome became an OS, it would be disk-based. All web-browsers are disk-based to being with, not web-based; so if Chrome became an OS, it would be disk-based. I'd still stick with Linux, a venerable operating system which has been available for years. -- Norman ~Oh Lord, why have you come ~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
OE Is Deleting My NG Headers
Hilarious!
DSH Lux et Veritas et Libertas Vires et Honor On Mon, 2 Feb 2009 12:14:15 -0600, Neil wrote: Sorry. My fingers typed other than my intentions. |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
OE Is Deleting My NG Headers
DSH
Go away! Your contribution are not welcome! -- Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ D. Spencer Hines wrote: Perhaps MS did this in trying to deal with the data file corruption issue?... Trying to minimize the bloat. DSH Lux et Veritas et Libertas Vires et Honor "Gerry" wrote in message ... Bruce My comment to Vanguard was directed at this statement "Everyone but you knows that there has been no new code added to OE since 2002." Quote from one of my posts 28 June 2000. Messages deleted from the server are automatically deleted from your newsgroup folder when you next connect and download. The Microsoft server holds messages for 90 days but other servers hold for lesser periods. If you wish to retain messages you need to move them to a mail folder where the process will not affect them. -- Gerry |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
OE Is Deleting My NG Headers
?????????????????????????????.??????
"Steve Cochran" ???????/???????? ? ???????? ?????????: ... OE never retained NG messages once they expired off the server. Not even in OE4. steve "Neil" wrote in message ... "Ron Sommer" wrote in message ... "Neil" wrote in message ... OE is doing what a newsreader is supposed to do, keep the messages on your computer synched with the newsgroup server. Again, that was not the way OE used to work. It used to retain all msgs that were downloaded. I don't know of any newsreaders that do not sync with the server. You have not mentioned what news server that you are using. Why is that germane to the discussion? The Microsoft server has a 90 day retention period. -- Ronald Sommer It is very germane. You are incorrectly basing your idea of the operation of OE on a news server that had a long retention period. I have news servers that have a long retention period. Because you insist on saying that OE used to keep all posts without saying what news server that you were using, you haven't proved that your version of OE works the way that you say. Well, since OE functionality changed while using the same newsserver, I assume the issue is with OE. Furthermore, I don't believe retention period is the issue since, when OE did retain messages, it would retain them indefinitely, easily at least a year or two. I don't think any newsserver kept messages that long. So if OE always syncronized with the NS, then they would have disappeared then, as well. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|