OE Is Deleting My NG Headers
in [Outlook Express]
|
Prev: Error code 0x800CCC0E & 0X8000CCC78
Next: errore
From: Gerry on 31 Jan 2009 21:33 I do not know. Leading lights who tried to persuade the Team to go in the right direction were Tom Koch and Steve Cochran amongst others. Tom Koch http://www.insideoe.com/resources/communities.htm Steve Cochran http://www.oehelp.com/Default.aspx -- Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ D. Spencer Hines wrote: > Who were the people on the Outlook Express Development Team? > >>> As stated many times in this newsgroup, the OE development team has >>> been disbanded, so their will be no new adjustments/fixes/upgrades >>> to this application, except for the occasional security update.
From: VanguardLH on 31 Jan 2009 21:55 Neil wrote: > > The messages are still there. Just many of them are gone. They are there. They are gone. Oh really. ;-)))
From: Gerry on 31 Jan 2009 22:26 Ron You're splitting hairs and wrong in the cases that Bruce has picked up on. -- Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Ron Sommer wrote: > When OE opens, it checks the count. If the count is 100, the > compaction message will appear when you close OE. > There is no automatic compaction, because the user has to ok the > compaction. The count changes on the opening of OE. > The compaction message will not appear until the 101st close of OE. > > "Gerry" <gerry(a)nospam.com> wrote in message > news:OT0GPkAhJHA.5408(a)TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >> Neil >> >> On closing Outlook Express 100 times. On some systems something >> changes the counter in the Registry when it is not intended so >> automatic compacting can be triggered quite a bit earlier. The >> counter is meant to increment by one on closure but something else >> cause the counter to increment at other times. Bruce Hagen writes >> about this regularly. It doesn't happen here. >> >> -- >> >> >> >> Gerry >> ~~~~ >> FCA >> Stourport, England >> Enquire, plan and execute >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> Neil wrote: >>> "Gerry" <gerry(a)nospam.com> wrote in message >>> news:OOOV3e4gJHA.2384(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>> Robert >>>> >>>>>> Also, what's the point of having a "Delete news messages X days >>>>>> after being downloaded" if OE is just going to delete them >>>>>> anyway, regardless of the setting. Again, doesn't make sense. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Makes perfect sense if someone only wants to keep a weeks worth >>>>> of posts in his cache instead of a much larger number that the >>>>> server might support. >>>> >>>> Your comment is correct . It was logical. It was also part of one >>>> of the most disastrous and problematic features of Outlook Express. >>>> Compacting. Checking this feature was blamed for countless losses >>>> of messages. Automatic compacting was abandoned by users in favour >>>> of manual compacting Offline. The changes made to automatic >>>> compacting not so long ago improved the situation but did not >>>> totally resolve the problem. Manual compacting before automatic >>>> compacting is triggered remains the safest option. The option to >>>> "Delete news messages X days after being downloaded" should have >>>> been removed when the other changes were made. >>> >>> >>> When does automatic compacting take place?
From: NormanM on 31 Jan 2009 22:53 On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 15:47:43 -0600, Neil wrote: > "NormanM" <spammers.are(a)immoral.invalid> wrote in message > news:r0l4rxj1a062$.dlg(a)on-line.service.invalid... >> On Fri, 30 Jan 2009 09:09:56 -0600, Neil wrote: >>> "Steve Cochran" <scochran(a)oehelp.com> wrote in message >>> news:2ED77F93-0FFA-4FE0-8F34-27EC8C06B294(a)microsoft.com... >>>> It never made sense and its been a problem since OE4. It won't be >>>> fixed, so if you wish to keep NG messages, you have to copy them to >>>> local folders. That is the only way. People complained about this >>>> for many years and MS just ignored them. >>> And MS wonders why they're sinking faster than the titanic while Google >>> acquires their empire (apologies for the mixed metaphor; but maybe in >>> this case a mixed metaphor is fitting, given the absolutely absurd state >>> of the software). >> Very mixed up. Google does not publish software. Microsoft is only losing >> on the web search front. > Really? What year are you living in? Google has Google Docs to compete with > Word, Google Spreadsheet to compete with Excel, Google Calendar to compete > with Outlook, and Gmail to compete with Outlook, and they are providing > functionality to use all of those OFFLINE. Sorry. My fingers typed other than my intentions. Google does not publish an Operating System; which is the core business of Microsoft. I do not use Word, Excel, or Outlook. I use OpenOffice and Pegasus Mail; neither Google, nor Microsoft. > Furthermore, Google came out with their own browser, Chrome, which not only > competes with Internet Explorer ... I don't use Chrome. I use Opera, which is neither Google, nor Microsoft. > ... but is designed from the ground up specifically for running web apps (i.e., > once it matures it will probably be a full-fledged operating system, replacing > Windows, just as Windows once supplemented but then eventually replaced DOS). Until Chrome installs directly on the HDD, and interacts with the hardware drivers, so you won't need Windows, Chrome will just remain an application which runs under Windows. > All of these are in their infancy, and their maturity is many years away. > But Microsoft sees the writing on the wall. It's not about Internet search; > it's about a paradigm shift away from desktop apps to web-based apps. And > Google is far ahead of Microsoft in the battle. > > The year is 2009. Keep up with what's going on. 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. -- Norman ~Oh Lord, why have you come ~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum
From: Ron Sommer on 1 Feb 2009 00:11
I see that you are not using a version of OE that has automatic compaction. Earlier versions did have automatic compaction and the message store could become corrupted when the computer was shutdown when OE was compacting. The compaction message was added so that the compaction would not occur unless the user clicks OK. I do not see anywhere in my post that says that OE is the only program that increases the Compact Check Count. I just commented on the way that OE used the Compact Check Count. Yes, some people have received the Compact message without even using OE or opening OE >100 times. This still causes the compaction message that must be clicked for the compaction to occur and does not cause an automatic compaction. -- Ronald Sommer "Gerry" <gerry(a)nospam.com> wrote in message news:uJ155zBhJHA.3708(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... > Ron > > You're splitting hairs and wrong in the cases that Bruce has picked up on. > > > -- > > > > Gerry > ~~~~ > FCA > Stourport, England > Enquire, plan and execute > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Ron Sommer wrote: >> When OE opens, it checks the count. If the count is 100, the >> compaction message will appear when you close OE. >> There is no automatic compaction, because the user has to ok the >> compaction. The count changes on the opening of OE. >> The compaction message will not appear until the 101st close of OE. >> >> "Gerry" <gerry(a)nospam.com> wrote in message >> news:OT0GPkAhJHA.5408(a)TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl... >>> Neil >>> >>> On closing Outlook Express 100 times. On some systems something >>> changes the counter in the Registry when it is not intended so >>> automatic compacting can be triggered quite a bit earlier. The >>> counter is meant to increment by one on closure but something else >>> cause the counter to increment at other times. Bruce Hagen writes >>> about this regularly. It doesn't happen here. >>> >>> -- >>> >>> >>> >>> Gerry >>> ~~~~ >>> FCA >>> Stourport, England >>> Enquire, plan and execute >>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> >>> Neil wrote: >>>> "Gerry" <gerry(a)nospam.com> wrote in message >>>> news:OOOV3e4gJHA.2384(a)TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl... >>>>> Robert >>>>> >>>>>>> Also, what's the point of having a "Delete news messages X days >>>>>>> after being downloaded" if OE is just going to delete them >>>>>>> anyway, regardless of the setting. Again, doesn't make sense. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Makes perfect sense if someone only wants to keep a weeks worth >>>>>> of posts in his cache instead of a much larger number that the >>>>>> server might support. >>>>> >>>>> Your comment is correct . It was logical. It was also part of one >>>>> of the most disastrous and problematic features of Outlook Express. >>>>> Compacting. Checking this feature was blamed for countless losses >>>>> of messages. Automatic compacting was abandoned by users in favour >>>>> of manual compacting Offline. The changes made to automatic >>>>> compacting not so long ago improved the situation but did not >>>>> totally resolve the problem. Manual compacting before automatic >>>>> compacting is triggered remains the safest option. The option to >>>>> "Delete news messages X days after being downloaded" should have >>>>> been removed when the other changes were made. >>>> >>>> >>>> When does automatic compacting take place? > > |