OE Is Deleting My NG Headers
in [Outlook Express]
|
Prev: Error code 0x800CCC0E & 0X8000CCC78
Next: errore
From: Gerry on 1 Feb 2009 13:46 Bear They will always be trolls if you do not encourage them to moderate their behaviour. My answer could well be of interest to others reading this thread. It does not give the troll ammunition or invite a flame war. He asked a reasonable question so I responded with a reasonable answer. -- Regards. Gerry ~~~~ FCA Stourport, England Enquire, plan and execute ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PA Bear [MS MVP] wrote: > Please don't feed the troll, Gerry...especially /that/ troll. > > Gerry wrote: >> 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 >> >> >> 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 1 Feb 2009 16:02 Neil wrote: >>> But you really are playing devil's advocate here, aren't you? This >>> discussion's becoming a waste of time. >> >> No, you're growing bored in not getting the answers that you want. OE >> isn't going to change. You're the one beating the dead horse expecting >> its behavior to change. > > My word, you just won't stop, will you? Do you have some psychotic > compulsion to be right? Sheesh. > > Where did I say I expected OE's behavior to change? Is that just what you > want to believe so you can keep going on and on about how it's not going to > change? Pathetic. > >> OE was designed to be a "personal" e-mail and newsreader client. It was >> not designed to be a newgroup server, an archiver, or any functions >> other than what it does have. > > Really? So the fact that OE used to keep downloaded messages, and then later > changed to not do so anymore (see posts from others in this thread, if you > don't believe me), doesn't factor into your nonsense that OE has "always > been this way," and it was "designed this way." I wouldn't want to step on > your ideological toes; but you're wrong. It did have functions other than > what it does have. You just can't accept that because it would shatter your > belief in what a reader's "supposed to do." All you have offered, so far, is your *guess* that OE has somehow changed recently (despite the fact that no new functionality has been added since 2002) because you see a change in behavior. The product hasn't changed. Its settings or server's retention have changed. It's even possible you have a corrupted .dbx file. Since you didn't even bother to go through the process of resetting the newsgroup (and disabling the "get N messages" option so all posts would get re-retrieved) to see if all those old posts would show up then it is just as likely that you won't bother to unsubscribe from the newsgroup, delete the .dbx file for that newsgroup, if it exists, and resubscribe to see if the old posts show up. > No, but you keep repeating yourself over and over again, thinking somehow > that if you say enough times that OE was originally designed the way it > currently works, and that it should not work any differently, that I'll > accept your false statements. Your repeating the same thing over and over is > a waste of time. I heard you the first few times. Now just move on. 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. > If it wasn't designed to have "any functions other than what it does have," > then why did it, indeed, have those other functions (of retaining downloaded > messages) prior to OE5? Again, this discussion's a waste of time. Again, you're guessing that a behavior change somehow was manifested in a code change to OE. Nope. You've been told by others that OE is a stagnant, dead, and unchanging product. Nothing got downloaded from Microsoft, like a Windows Update, that changed code in OE. It's still the same OE is has been for over a decade.
From: VanguardLH on 1 Feb 2009 16:04 Neil wrote: > Path: news.motzarella.org!motzarella.org!newshub.sdsu.edu!flph200.ffdc.sbc.com!prodigy.net!flph199.ffdc.sbc.com!prodigy.com!flpi107.ffdc.sbc.com!flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com.POSTED!ccba0328!not-for-mail > From: "Neil" <nrgins(a)gmail.com> > Newsgroups: microsoft.public.windows.inetexplorer.ie6_outlookexpress > References: <cVwgl.19924$ZP4.7479(a)nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com> <euBBCOqgJHA.1292(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl> <glu9j6$ph5$1(a)news.motzarella.org> <mEAgl.16535$c45.7806(a)nlpi065.nbdc.sbc.com> <glvepv$8ju$1(a)news.motzarella.org> <6TKgl.19992$ZP4.18041(a)nlpi067.nbdc.sbc.com> <gm0dcu$bc8$1(a)news.motzarella.org> <Oh%gl.3454$%54.144(a)nlpi070.nbdc.sbc.com> <gm32t2$srv$1(a)news.motzarella.org> > Subject: Re: OE Is Deleting My NG Headers > Lines: 23 > X-Priority: 3 > X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512 > X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 > X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original > Message-ID: <lMehl.11587$W06.10146(a)flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com> > NNTP-Posting-Host: 76.197.30.166 > X-Complaints-To: abuse(a)prodigy.net > X-Trace: flpi148.ffdc.sbc.com 1233483921 ST000 76.197.30.166 (Sun, 01 Feb 2009 05:25:21 EST) > NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 05:25:21 EST > Organization: at&t http://my.att.net/ > X-UserInfo1: SCSYQN_(a)OPU]RRPX]BCBNWX(a)RJ_XPDLMN@GZ_GYO^BVNDQUBLNTC(a)AWZWDXZXQ[K\FFSKCVM(a)F_N_DOBWVWG__LG@VVOIPLIGX\\BU_B@\P\PFX\B[APHTWAHDCKJF^NHD[YJAZMCY_CWG[SX\Y]^KC\HSZRWSWKGAY_PC[BQ[BXAS\F\\@DMTLFZFUE@\VL > Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 04:24:36 -0600 > Xref: news.motzarella.org microsoft.public.windows.inetexplorer.ie6_outlookexpress:398375 > > "VanguardLH" <V(a)nguard.LH> wrote in message > news:gm32t2$srv$1(a)news.motzarella.org... >> Neil wrote: >> >>> >>> The messages are still there. Just many of them are gone. >> >> They are there. >> They are gone. >> Oh really. ;-))) > > What a pathetic bunch of children I'm dealing with here. What, are you going > to go "nani nani boo boo" next? > > I was saying that I'm not missing ALL the messages. The messages (in > general) are still there. Just many (but not all) of them are gone. > > Make sense now? > > Sheesh. Have you yet even tried to contact SBC to find out if they are having problems with their NNTP service? But then that would come back to OE synchronizing its articles list with those on the server.
From: VanguardLH on 1 Feb 2009 16:15 Ken wrote: > "Neil" wrote ... >> >> I'm using OE6 as my newsgroup reader. I keep losing my already-downloaded >> headings from newsgroups. Very frustrating. I want to keep them. >> >> Under Options, Maintenance, I have every box UNCHECKED, and all my >> subscribed newsgroups are set to Don't Synchronize. What am I doing wrong? >> How can I keep OE from periodically deleting my downloaded headers? > > How can I keep OE from periodically deleting my downloaded headers? > > I think it has something to do with the news server you are using. > > If I look at microsoft.public.works.win news group via microsoft news server > there is only four hundred eighteen (418) messages, where as, looking at the > same news group via my ISP (dragonbbs.com) news server there are twenty > seven thousand six hundred forty one (27641) messages available to select. > > On dragonbbs server the messages date from today back as far as June 2003. Per Neil's remarks, he claims OE has somehow changed despite everyone telling him that support died over 6 years ago. For some reason, he keep refusing to believe that OE's articles list stays in sync with the server's article list. He sees a change in behavior and attributes it to OE rather than to the server expiring old articles and OE staying in sync. He doesn't want to go through the manual process of saving posts to a different folder to keep them locally archived but he wants OE to do something different than how it was coded over a decade ago. He isn't going to believe anyone that differs than his opinion on how OE works. He saw a behavior change and attributes it to a functionality change in OE rather than retention change at the server. It's a lost cause with Neil. Time to unwatch this thread. He doesn't really want help. He wants to rant about how defunct and unsupported OE isn't behaving how *he* wants it to behave.
From: Ron Sommer on 1 Feb 2009 18:16
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. -- Ronald Sommer "Gerry" <gerry(a)nospam.com> wrote in message news:##g2EPIhJHA.1292(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... > 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 > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > Ron Sommer wrote: >> 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. >> >> "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 >>>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>>>> snipped |